City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone.

Good evening, everyone. The formal meeting of the Richmond City Council will now come to order. Madam Clerk, if you would invite the Spanish interpretation announcement.

Spanish interpretation is available in the council chamber. Please see a representative at the rear of the room to receive the appropriate equipment. Spanish interpretation is also available through Microsoft Teams for virtual attendees in need of this service.

La interpretación en español está disponible en la Cámara del Consejo. Por favor, acude a un representante en la parte trasera de la cámara para recibir el equipo adecuado. La interpretación en español también está disponible a través de Microsoft Teams para los asistentes virtuales que necesiten dichos servicios.

Thank you. This evening, we have Reverend Tyrone Nelson, pastor of Sixth Mount Zion Baptist Church, and also a member of the Henrico Board of Supervisors, who will provide our invocation, and that will be followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Welcome, Pastor.

more good evening madam president and uh colleagues and friends on the richmond city council join me for a word of prayer most gracious god thank you for allowing us to gather here today we thank you god for these people who you have set apart to lead our great city now god as we go about the business of the night help us to keep you first and everything that we say and do Bless us, God, as we move forward and trying to lead with wisdom and knowledge and understanding so that we may make this a prosperous city. Most of all, God, bind us together in the spirit of love which surpasses all things. It is in your omnipotent name we pray. Amen.

Amen. Thank you, Pastor. 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. Mr. Clark, if you would provide us with the emergency evacuation and public speaker guidelines at this time.

Upon activation of the emergency alarm signal, all persons should immediately exit the building. Please use the exits to the left or right front of the council chamber or the north or south stairwells outside the rear doors of the chamber. Do not use elevators or escalators. After exiting the building, security will direct everyone down 9th Street to the fenced area located between Clay and Lee Streets. Able persons should assist visually and hearing impaired visitors with exiting the building. Individuals speaking during public hearings and the public comment period are generally allowed three minutes to speak. Persons appearing before council are not allowed to campaign for public office, promote private business ventures, use language of a personal nature which insults or demeans any person, including comments directed at public officials or staff members that are not related to their official duties, or address or question staff members directly. All questions are to be directed to the president of council. Failure to adhere to the guidelines may result in speakers forfeiting any remaining time and further disciplinary action as necessary, which could include barring from attendance at future meetings of City Council for a period of six months.

And Madam President, all members of council are in attendance this evening. Also, if there are individuals standing in the rear of the chamber that are not authorized, they are asked to be seated where seats are available. Also, applause is not permitted at any time during tonight's meeting. Thank you for adhering to those guidelines.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. Let's proceed with appointments and or reappointments for this evening.

Members, you were provided with board appointment and reappointment recommendations from your governmental operations and public safety standing committees. Is there a motion to approve the appointments as read?

So moved. Second.

Thank you. Council is now voting on the appointments as presented. Mr. Breton. Aye. Ms. Gibson. Yes. Ms. Jones. Aye. Ms. Robertson. Aye. Ms. Lynch. Aye. Ms. Trammell. Aye. Ms. Abu-Bakr. Aye. Vice President Jordan. Aye. And President Newbill. Aye. Those appointments have been approved. Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Let's proceed with our public comment period speakers.

The only public comment period speaker for this evening is Martin Garry.

welcome mr gary my name is uh martin gary and i'm here on behalf of the chaco arts culture corporation good evening uh madam president and council members mr gary can you pull the mic down a little bit so we can hear you a bit better thank you Thank you for the opportunity to speak today and for Dr. Newbill and the mayor's office in establishing the Chaco Bottom Task Force. This effort reflects a meaningful commitment to preserving and shaping one of Richmond's most historic and culturally significant districts. Over the past several months, Chaco Records has been actively convening conversations with neighborhood artists, building owners, media creators, and key partners, including Representative from the city's Department of Economic Development, Parks and Recreation, the Metropolitan Business League. Together, we've been building alignment around a shared vision to establish Chaco as a recognized arts and culture district. This designation is not simply symbolic, it's strategic. It represents an opportunity to unify existing creative energy, track new investment, and responsibly guide development in a way that honors Chaco's deep historical roots while supporting its future. Our purpose is clear. The Chaco Arts and Culture Corporation exists to enhance the history and development of the Chaco District through economic development, marketing, promotion, and curated events. We are in the process of applying for a 501c3 status. We believe that arts and culture are not just amenities. They are engines of economic growth, tools for storytelling, and catalysts for community connection. By investing in this vision, we can empower independent artists, musicians, media creators, many of whom already call this area home. These individuals are not only producing culture, they are fostering community development, creating educational opportunities, and contributing to a vibrant local economy. Chaco has always been a place of powerful stories, stories of resilience, creativity, and transformation. With thoughtful planning and collaboration, we have the opportunity to ensure that its next chapter is just as impactful. We respectfully ask for your support as we pursue official arts and culture district designation. With your partnership, we can elevate Chaco as a destination that reflects Richmond's unique identity while creating inclusive opportunities for those who shape its cultural landscape. Thank you again for your time, your leadership and continued commitment to the future of the Chaco district.

Thank you, Mr. Gary, and thank you for your participation in the Chaco Public Safety Task Force meetings. As you know, this item is one that's on the list of items for consideration by that group. So more to come. Thank you. Madam or Mr. Clark, if you would proceed with the amendments for tonight's agenda.

The amendments to tonight's agenda are as follows. Item 5, Ordinance 2026093 will be continued to the Monday, July 27th council meeting. Item 6, Ordinance 202602 and Item 13, Ordinance 2022120 will both be continued to the Monday, June 22nd council meeting. Item 15, Ordinance 2026-122, Item 16, Ordinance 2026-123, and Item 17, Ordinance 2026-124 will all be moved from this evening's consent agenda to the regular agenda. Item 19, Ordinance 2025-231, and Item 22, Ordinance 2026-090 will both be amended later this evening and then continue to the Monday, June 22nd council meeting. Item 23, Ordinance 2026092, and Item 24, Ordinance 2026096 will both be continued to the Monday, June 22nd council meeting. Madam President, those are all the amendments to tonight's agenda.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Mind, I have a motion to accept the agenda as amended.

So moved. Second.

Council is voting on this evening's agenda amendments as read. Mr. Bratton? Aye. Ms. Gibson? Yes. Ms. Jones? Aye. Ms. Robertson?

Aye.

Ms. Lynch? Aye. Ms. Trammell?

Aye.

Ms. Alba Walker?

Aye.

Vice President Jordan? Aye. And President Newbell. Aye. The amended agenda is now before you. And this evening's consent agenda consists of the following items. Item one, ordinance 2026076. Item two, ordinance 2026087. Item three, ordinance 2026089. Item four, ordinance 2026091. Item seven, ordinance 2026013. Item eight, ordinance 2026106. item nine ordinance 2026 116 item 10 ordinance 2026 117 item 11 ordinance 2026 118 item 12 ordinance 2026 119 item 14 ordinance 2026 1 2 1 and item 18 resolution 2026 r023 those are all the items on tonight's consent agenda

Thank you, Mr. Clark. At this time, we'll proceed with a public hearing on the consent agenda items. Are there persons present, desirous of speaking in opposition to any item on the consent agenda, if you would come forward.

Welcome, Ms. Olinga.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission, Mark Olinger, resident of Oakwood Avenue here to talk about agenda item number eight, Mosby South. I'll be brief, I apologize. There were technical difficulties.

I could make not my comments at the last planning commission meeting.

My comments on the plan as presented for you tonight are based on three elements. Number one, too many. Number two, too little. Number three, vague promises. There are, the plan as it presented shows up to 500 units of housing on a 12.7 acre site, shows up to 500 plus parking stalls on a 12.7 acre site and up to 25,000 square feet on that site. I first found out about this project on December 15th for a public meeting on December, excuse me, October 15th for a meeting on October 16th. I drafted and sent around a quick email to members of my neighborhood associations email list, which includes people outside. There are a few of us that were in attendance. I have had a keen interest in the redevelopment of Creighton Court, excuse me, of Mosby since I moved here in 2011 and was really anticipating something that would carry the momentum started at Armstrong Renaissance, Creighton Court, Highland Grove, where we were creating real communities of value for the people. What we have here and in the applicant report, the applicant states that they want to make it a great place for formal and informal gathering and open spaces and opportunities for people to mix. None of that shows up on the illustrative master plan you're looking at tonight. And in fact, at the meeting in October, there were discussions about community gardens and hiking trails and a number of other things that would be great things to have at this project. They don't show up on the illustrative plan. So we either have on this plan something that i would call kind of a test fit which is how many units can we fit on this site and provide a little bit of green space provide a lot of parking and provide some other uses versus everything that they said in the applicants report which i thought sounded pretty well pretty good too little in the way of i think community outreach 30 seconds too much and too little in the community outreach too little in the way of tree preservation and landscape Too little in the way of thinking about the site in a much broader context. Lastly, so all of those things matter. And lastly, what is the affordable housing component of the project? I've seen 120 project-based voucher units mentioned, so that's about 25% of the project site as presented. What about the folks at 40%, 50%, 60%, or 80% of county median? How is this project going to be?

Thank you, Mr. Olinger. That's your time.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Are there persons present desirous of speaking in favor of any of the items on the consent agenda if you would come forward now? Welcome, Mr. Nesmith and Ms. Hampton.

Good evening, Madam President and Vice President and August members of this City Council. Given the brief time we have, I want to just say a few things. I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Hampton. One is that we believe this project is consistent with the Richmond 300 plan as voted by the City Council. We want to thank the Mayor's team for supporting us on this. We want to thank You, President Newbill, for working very closely ensuring a couple of things. One, that the Resident Tenant Association and the Resident Council of Mosby all voted unanimously on what? In ensuring that there is a provision called the Tenant Bill of Rights, which says that every resident who is there will have the right to come back. So I want to thank you for working with us on that. As to some of the specifics that were just commented on, I'll leave it to Ms. Shirell to talk about those. Ms. Shirell.

Cheryl Hampton, Senior Vice President for Real Estate and Community Development, RRHA. Madam President and to the August members of council, we ask and respectfully ask your approval tonight. As it's mentioned in your ordinance before you, this is a preliminary plan. It is not 500 units, it's a little less, 478. We must come back. each time and bring it to PDR for their review. I also want to address, so keep in mind, it is preliminary. The boundaries are there. Mosby Court, 106 units currently. will be redeveloped into approximately 478 units. As we heard the amendments that were proposed at the planning commission, the team has already, design team has already started work to increase green space. to look at how we can add those things which we already had in mind as the opposition speaker also said. Since 2023, there has been approximately 10 or 12 community meetings. One was a very large charrette. And as you've heard Mr. Nesmith speak to our CEO, there have been five meetings where the tenant bill of rights was created. The October meeting was not coordinated by RRHA. It was done by the historic preservation department, formerly Ms. Kim Chin. And I understand there was a problem with mailing, but we did have neighborhood residents come out from the broader community. We will continue that ongoing tenant engagement as well as community engagement with the broader community. Every 90 days until redevelopment begins, we will have a meeting with the tenants and always invite the residents. from the broader community to attend. So we again ask that you review this and respectfully approve the project and it's the preliminary CUP plan. Thank you.

That is correct. And my concluding comments suggest that that again, we will also be doing much more robust. These meetings started in 2023, quite frankly, but we'll be doing much more robust outreach to the stakeholders in the community you and I have talked about.

Thank you, Mr. Nesmith and Ms. Hampton. Are there other person's present desires of speaking in favor of this paper? I'm sorry the item this is the item on the well any item on the consent agenda. I'm sorry I was going to this particular paper when you stood before I thought it was this one.

Good evening, my name is Thomas Courtney.

I live in the first district near the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts and the Grove Avenue corridor. I'm speaking in support of I believe item 3 ordinance 2026-089 the proposed update to the city sidewalk snow and ice removal ordinance. I support this ordinance both as a resident and as a landlord. I have previously operated short-term rentals in the city of Richmond. When the city changed its laws to regulate that activity, I complied. I also understand that owning or managing property carries basic public facing responsibilities. When it snows or ices, I remove or treat sidewalks at my property, not only for my tenants, but also for neighbors, pedestrians, delivery workers, students, older residents, and anyone else using the public sidewalk. That is why I was discouraged by what I observed during the January storm. In the blocks surrounding the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, certain sidewalks associated with the Commonwealth and VMFA facilities, including near the studio school, were cleared or treated. But other sidewalks associated with VMFA Foundation properties, including properties along Grove Avenue, North Boulevard, North Colonial Avenue, were not cleared or treated sufficiently until I reported them through RVA 311. I raised this issue respectfully. The VMFA Foundation and related entities are not ordinary individual homeowners. They own or control residential property, short-term rental property, long-term rental property, and institutional property around the museum area. When an extremely wealthy institutional actor can support major capital projects, including a multimillion dollar warehouse, it should also be able to meet the basic neighborly duty of clearing and treating sidewalks that affect public safety. This ordinance is reasonable and necessary clarification. It recognizes that ice is a sidewalk hazard, clarifies responsibility and moves enforcement towards a civil process rather than a criminal one. I would also encourage council and the administration to actively engage large institutional landowners, including VMFA and its nonprofit property owning entities, so that compliance is proactive rather than dependent on neighbors filing reports during dangerous weather. The goal should be clear responsibility, safer sidewalks and equal expectations for residents, landlords, nonprofits and institutions alike. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other person's desires to speaking in favor of any item on the consent agenda if you would come forward now? Welcome.

Good evening, Madam President, city council members. My name is Al Hutchinson and I'm here today to ask for your support for ordinance 2026 slash 087 to rename the 2300 block of Rosewood Avenue for James Jimmy Lee Bracey. I was one of the track runners of thousands of folks who came through Mr. Bracey's toolage. Mr. Bracey was looking down upon us at night, probably laughing because I was the worst track runner he ever coached. But I'm in front of you because this is a feel-good moment for Richmond and a feel-good moment for the council. Mr. Bracey helped a lot of folks become doctors, lawyers, teachers, other coaches, community leaders. And he was one who poured into us. Did not make one dime to do this. He did it for his love of the young people like me at the time who came through the West End of Richmond, all over Richmond, quite frankly. But he did it for the love. And I will ask you tonight to really support this effort because Mr. Bracey, in my opinion, was a father figure to many. He was a competent to many. He was a teacher to many. But most importantly, he loved us, regardless of our last name, regardless of how much money we made, regardless of we came from a single parent household. He loved all of us. And so he represents the best of Richmond. So I would ask you tonight as the council to honor him, uplift him. And also I want to use this moment as a thanks for Councilwoman Lynch for her support, Councilwoman Robertson for her support. and really the West End committee of the James Jimmy Lee Bracey folks who are here tonight to honor this. Thank them for their vision and their leadership. And most importantly, I want to thank his daughter, Adrienne Bracey. And last but not least, the lady who was a mother to all of us who's here tonight, and that's Ms. Teresa Bracey. These folks not only love Bracey, but they love Richmond. So... Council, a lot of times you don't have an opportunity to do a feel-good story. And that's what tonight's about. And I just want to say thank you.

Thank you. And I would invite those who are here in support of the paper and related, if you could just stand so we could see you and welcome you and thank you for your support. Thank you so much for coming. And thank you for certainly all of your support of Mr. Bracey and all of his efforts with all of the young people as clearly reflected here. Thank you. I think that there was someone else who desires to speaking in favor. If everyone else who desires to speaking in favor of any item on the consent agenda, if you would line up, please. Thank you.

Good evening, Council, Madam President. My name is Charlene Hinton. I too am here in support of Ordinance 2026087, designating the 2300 block of Roosevelt Avenue in honor of James Bracey. Thank you for making my job really, really easy. I don't need to say anything else. I'm going to get on everything that was just said, but I am representing the Western Richmond Striders, which was established by Bracey in 1967. We are still going strong. I too ran for him as a middle school athlete and with his guidance, it took me all the way through collegiate athletics and beyond. So I am appreciative of you all bringing this forward and ask that you would please support it. Thank you. Thank you.

Next speaker.

Hey, good evening, Madam President, council members, fellow citizens. My name is Warren Goldsboro and I had the privilege of serving as assistant track coach of the Western Striders throughout the 1990s and early 2000s. During those years, James Lee Bracey was far more than a coach to me. He was a mentor, a role model, and a friend whose influence extended far beyond track. I am honored to speak in strong support of dedicating a streak for Coach Bracey. When people think of successful athletic programs, they often measure success in championships, records, and trophies. Coach Bracey certainly helped young athletes achieve those accomplishments, but that was not his primary goal. His greatest achievement was building young people of character. For more than 50 years, Coach Bracey established a foundation rooted in values that remain just as important today as they were when he first began coaching. He taught sportsmanship, showing young athletes how to win and how to handle victory with humility and defeat in dignity. He taught that team success was more important than individual recognition. And perhaps more importantly, he taught that education mattered more than any trophy, medal, or record. The true measure of his legacy is not found in record books. It's found in the generations of students, athletes, educators, business leaders, parents, and community members whose lives were shaped by his example. Many of us who stood here tonight or better people because of the time he spent under his guidance. Street dedication is more than a sign. It's a permanent reminder of a man who devoted his life to serving others and investing in the future of our community. It ensures that future generations will ask, who was James Lee Bracey? And learn about a man who impacted REACH FAR BEYOND ATHLETICS. I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND HONOR COACH BRACEY WITH THIS STREET DEDICATION AND RECOGNIZING THE LEGACY OF FAITH, SPORTSMANSHIP, EDUCATION AND SERVICE THAT CONTINUES TO INSPIRE THE COMMUNITY TODAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

Good evening Madam President, Vice President. My name is Diane Cotman, and I'm a resident of Heroico County. I bring you greetings from the West End Committee. There are people who come into our lives and leave a lasting impact. And for me, one of those people was my childhood track coach, Mr. Jane Bracey. When I was 11 years old, I was sitting on the front porch in the neighborhood with my friends. Out of nowhere, a tall, dark, handsome man with a commanding voice walked up to us and asked a simple question. Would you like to run track for the Western Striders? At that time, I had never ran on a track in a day in my life. The only running I had ever done was around my neighborhood. Mr. Bracer took us to the park and allowed us to run around the park to see who was the fastest. Before then, then he talked to my parents and asked my parents if I could run track. Looking back now, I realize that simple moment changed my entire life forever because of mr bracy mr bracer took an interest in me and gave me the opportunity to discover my abilities i never knew i had His encouragement, guidance, and belief in me helped shape me into the successful athlete throughout middle school, high school, and even in college, where I earned a full scholarship to Hampton University. None of that would have happened if Mr. Bracid had not walked up to the group of kids on the porch and asked them a changing question, do you want to run track? I will forever be grateful to his love, support, and willingness to invest in a young person. He saw something in me that I didn't see in myself. His belief gave me confidence, purpose, and an opportunity to change my future forever. Mr. Bracer touched the lives of countless people, both big ways and small ways. he was more than a coach he was a mentor a role model 30 seconds and a source of inspiration his impact reached far beyond track he taught young people to believe in themselves work hard and strive to become the very best you could be to me mr brayson meant the world he influenced helped shape the person and i want to I want his legacy to live on forever. So I ask you all to support us in doing this. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Welcome.

Good evening to the city of Richmond. Council, and to the West End community on behalf of Mr. James Bracey. My name is Mary Richardson, better known as Mary Terry. I live in Henrico, Virginia. Thank you for this opportunity to come and just share a few words of Mr. James Bracey. In the Bible, it says in the New Testament that Jesus gave two new commandments. Love the Lord thy God with all your heart, your mind, your soul, and your body. And the second is likened unto that. It says, love your neighbor as you love yourself. The word neighbor is defined as the person that is nearby neighbor. Mr. James Bracey, Ms. Bracey, Teresa Bracey, and Adrian Bracey. This is what they lived by, these two commandments. Mr. Bracey was a person of great love, great influence, and I stand here today before you. I didn't see myself going to college. I saw myself going to the Army. Mr. Bracey asked, he said, you played at basketball pretty good. I said, somewhat. He said, have you ever thought about college? No, not really, because my parents couldn't afford it. It was six of us. So I said, no. Mr. Bracey said, let's give it a try. I said, well, I haven't had any scouts come looking at me. And he said, don't worry about that. I got connection. Sure. As the time went on, I'm in my senior year. Mr. Bracey, being the person that he is out of L.O.V.E. love, he tells me, Mary Terry, I got a recruiter that's come to see you. Sure. Right. No. The man from St. Augustine's College basketball team, women's basketball team is coming to see you. I said, OK. He said, take this two dollars, go buy a Coke, a Pepsi and have some ice water. That's the type of person you wait. So when you offer him something to drink, ask him, do you want Coke or Pepsi? Of course, he being a man from North Carolina, he asked for Coke. So Mr. Bracey was on point with that. But I said all this to say that because of Mr. Bracey's act of love, I was the first in my family to go to St. Augustine's College on a full basketball scholarship to graduate. And I would say to you, the committee, on behalf of the West End community, I ask that you all please make the street after Mr. Bracey. Thank you.

Thank you. The public hearing now is closed. Bring it back to the body. Councilwoman Lynch, I see you lit up over there.

I just wanted to thank all of the members of the Jimmy Lee Bracey Honorary Street Renaming Committee, the West End Striders, and all the family members who came today. It is truly an honor to get to do this for you all, and I know all my colleagues appreciate feel similarly and it is it's one of the bright shining moments um that that we get to celebrate um some someone um and someone's legacy um who who left such an impact on everybody and you can tell i mean we don't we don't get um this i think this is one of the largest crowds we ever had for in support of a street naming so that's very telling it tells you who he was i appreciate all my colleagues support and appreciate you all for the work that you put in to get us here

Thank you. Councilwoman Robertson, you were on this. Didn't know if you had any quick comment before I went.

I want to thank Ms. Lynch. I want to thank the community. Thanks for sharing your stories. What a wonderful experience to realize the investment that has been made and the change in your lives and the change that you're making in other people's lives as well. So the legacy continued to live. I just want to thank all of you. It's really, as Ms. Lynch said, it's an honor and a privilege to be able to do something small just to remember the great contribution that just keeps right on giving and giving. Some of my best friends lived in your neighborhood, and they too have shared their experiences with me. So I'm honored to be on this paper. Thank you so much.

Thank you. I would like to thank everyone who came out. I didn't have the pleasure of knowing Mr. Bracey, but I feel like I have some sense of this person, an extraordinary soul that he was. And thank you for your stories. I would be honored to add my name to this paper to honor Mr. Bracey. Vice President Jordan.

Yes, I would like to add my name as well. And thank you to everyone who came out to share their stories. And I hope all the coaches out in the community somehow heard this because their work is important. It does have impact. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilwoman Trammell.

Madam President, I'd like to add my name to it too. And also thank all of you that came here because you all had some very, very inspiring stories that you told about Mr. Bracey. And I think if we had more of him, maybe our city would be better off. Because it looked like he loved our city and he loved all of you. And he's a role model for so many. So again, I want to add my name. And then after that, I'd like to ask a question about Ordinance 2026-089.

Okay, thank you.

With that, we'll have now any conversation about other papers on the consent agenda. Yes, Councilwoman Trammell.

I'm kind of upset that the mayor would put this forward when we had a horrible, horrible ice storm. And I know that it wasn't just my district. It was probably the whole city of Richmond was affected by the ice. And I know that there was, I guess, a city of emergency that was declared. And you're going to expect my seniors, people with disabilities, and not just my seniors, all over the city. Some people think you're 50 years old, you're a senior. Some people think that 65, you're a senior. or people with disabilities, and you're expecting them to go out there and shovel the ice? You're expecting them to shovel the snow? I know that, by the grace of God, I did have somebody I've met on Facebook that said that he would give a discount to seniors in my district and other districts so that they could have their sidewalks shoveled. And this person came out there and we paid him to do mine and some others, because I felt so sorry for them. And they were calling me crime because they couldn't even get in their car to go to dialysis or go to doctor's appointments. And I know that many, many streets, not just in my eighth district, the mayor didn't go out there and send any trucks out there to even have salt, sand, or, I mean, to me, this is, I mean, how could you have a heart or soul or conscience to say this, then you're going to find them. Do you understand how much our utilities are going up next month and how they've already went up? Do you understand how much their tax rate is, $1.20 per 100, the highest than the surrounding counties? And now you're going to put another burden on people with disabilities, people that are elderly, seniors, So this is not fair. I just I just wish we would have had more of a discussion with this president. You know, everything else was going on during the formal. And I I'm not I'm not going to vote for this. I don't care. One hundred dollars. Some people that's one hundred dollars. Go buy the damn medicine. But anyway, I'm not.

Thank you. I'm going to ask Vice President Jordan to speak to this paper as she's one of the or one of the key patrons.

Okay. That's okay. Thank you, President Newbell. Appreciate you always looking out for constituents. Just to clarify the origin of this paper, we had constituents who were not able to get out of their building who did have mobility and other issues because their landlords refused to clear the sidewalks. So that sort of got us looking into this because as it is written now, first of all, it's a criminal penalty if you do not clear your sidewalk with an up to $250 fine. And the onus is 100% on the resident. So what we worked with administration to try and understand, one, is that necessary? So some of the changes we're making is it's not going to be a criminal penalty. it's going to be a civil penalty. Instead of $250, it could be $100. None of that will matter if it's an emergency, the state of emergency has been declared as it was in the ice storm. And I think, as you know, we're really a complaint-driven city. So this would be for situations where someone is really struggling to get out of out of their home or down their sidewalk. This would give administration and our DPW team better tools to encourage the sidewalks being cleared. And there is leeway for the CAO to have leniency depending on what's happening. But we thought it was important that people understood ice is just as even trickier to navigate as snow So I'm happy to talk to you more about it. I'm sorry if this came as a surprise, but I think it wasn't just the mayor's office. I worked on this based on feedback we got from constituents. And there is flexibility. We're not trying to go after anybody.

Can I just ask you one question? Yes. We said the landlords that own like the apartment buildings and things like that were supposed to were not able to get to those apartments because I know that I had some landlords call me in reference to it because they could not get out there. to fix the elevator not in my district but another one because it was the ice was horrible yeah and then it was ice after ice after ice so they and and i mean our city trucks could even go down to go down our streets and handle it so does that it's going to go by like case by case per se yeah this has built in flexibility and again we're in a state of emergency where no one can get out we're not going to be

finding people and DPW is not going to be going around looking for who's doing this. This is like a complaint driven thing and if it's reasonable that the tenant or the landowner or the property owner are not taking care of the situation, then we can apply this civil penalty. And there are carve outs for seniors in those with disabilities. And if Director Vincent is here, I welcome him at anything that maybe I missed. But those are the high points I wanted to clarify.

And you said the penalty went from 250 to 100? Yes, ma'am. All right, thank you.

Thank you. Councilwoman Gibson?

Thank you, Madam President. I wanted to make a comment and a question regarding ordinance 2026-106, which is regarding the Mosby Court South redevelopment preliminary community unit plan. AND I APPRECIATE THAT THIS HAS COME TO THE BODY AND I APPRECIATED THE COMMENTS FROM MR. OELINGER WHO SPOKE ON THIS FROM THE PUBLIC. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, IN OUR DISTRICT WE'RE THINKING IN THE THIRD A LOT ABOUT PUBLIC HOUSING AS THERE HAVE BEEN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT GILPIN COURT. in reviewing the master plan that was submitted for Gilpin court, um, we identified, um, a number of discrepancies between the, um, the housing authorities, uh, preliminary plan and the, uh, the Jackson more community plan as it stands today. Um, and, and many of the, um, deviations were similar to what Mr. Ollinger brought up in his comment, including public green space and those types of things. And so I was wondering if, I have two questions. One is, given that this is a preliminary question, but it is an ordinance. So I'm wondering, will this come to the body again as it's finalized for final vote? What does authorizing at this preliminary stage What does that allow the housing authority to be able to proceed? And has the administration confirmed that this redevelopment preliminary plan aligns with the city's adopted master plan?

so i'm going to go yes and yes but i'm going to ask because and mr bunk or ms ebert whichever of you would like to speak to this many of the items that were raised this is not a final plan And as you know, as working through with Jackson Ward, we have many more phases and discussions to go through with the tenants, with residents in general and with stakeholders. But I'm going to talk to Mr. Funk in terms of response.

Sure. Thank you, Kevin J. Vaughn, director of Planning and Development Review. So to answer Councilmember Gibson's questions, In terms of process, this is a community unit plan. This is a preliminary plan, which goes through a process of staff review. And when I say staff, it's not just PDR, but it's other agencies, public works, utilities, fire, just everyone looks at it in terms of, does it comply with the master plan? And in the master plan, we amended the viewers code to add priority neighborhoods. So in the master plan, pages 70, 71, talks about Mosby Court. And so we don't have a more detailed plan like Jackson Ward, and so we refer to the master plan to ensure compliance in terms of goals, objectives that are in there to make our recommendations. This preliminary plan, again, staff makes a recommendation to planning commission. Planning commission then makes a recommendation to this body, city council. City council approves the preliminary plan. The preliminary plan is a framework for final plans. And I say plans because it could all come at one, or as I believe, as RHA has proposed, it will likely come in phases. Those final plans go to planning commission for approval. And what you're doing by the preliminary plan is, when I say framework, it's setting out the infrastructure, the streets, the layout, and it sets the bar in terms of how many units could possibly be there in terms of density. So the applicant could come back in with something lower, but they can't come back in with something higher. They can't propose more units, they can't propose taller buildings if they wanted to do that they would have to amend this preliminary plan to re-establish the framework and a preliminary plan amendment would come back to this body and so what you're approving today again sets that framework for future final plans that would come through a process of again staff reviewing and making a recommendation but those approvals would be done by our planning commission based on what you're adopting today thank you

Yes, Councilwoman.

Yes, so regarding the points made regarding green space, does the planning department feel confident that what is being proposed aligns with the master plan?

I do, and I will be the first to admit it's probably over-parked. With that, I think what we worked hard on, and again, I understand in terms of putting a package together, While the city doesn't have any minimum parking requirements, a lot of financing agencies do. And so what we did is try and work and all right, like, let's put the parking in the best places possible so that we can one reestablish the historic street grid in the area and to not cut off future development opportunities. So that is where we're putting these structures can be at least arranged the parking areas in ways that in the future, those could potentially be either converted in development or converted into green space. I think as final plans come through, when we do that, we also, you know, check with what are the regulations on the books, you know, from our zoning ordinance and so when we also talk about things like in the future right we've talked about in the new code tree canopy requirements also as you know we work and plans get vetted by Public Works in terms of what are the street tree is going to look like so in terms of what could happen in the future. I do think we left ourselves room to have improved green space in that area. As those specific plans come through. It's maybe not all detailed here. But those again, get elaborated in future final plans.

And yes, I'm sorry, I just had one follow up. So you said it wasn't outlined here. But why would it not be?

Would it not be established here? Sure, it's something that if I would say the body feels is appropriate to establish certain stipulations or stipulations in terms of right, like a minimum tree canopy or other things, those could be conditions that are incorporated in part of the ordinance. As you work through this with Planning Commission, there were some amendments that needed to be made. An amendment that came forward that Planning Commission was the prohibition of vinyl as a material. The applicant agreed to that, and so that's part of the reason why it was amended. So, you know, it's up to this body, and I would ask the applicant how they feel about additional conditions, but that is something that this body could, if they felt appropriate, put in there.

Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Gibson and Mr. Vaughn. I just want to say I've certainly and Ms. Gibson been on meetings where the community has talked about additional green space. And so this is conditional use. This is not final. And so there will be discussions about additional green space, tree canopies, recreational spaces as a part of the initiative. So that's ongoing conversations and meetings that will occur. And I'm looking because they're more than, and as you know, same thing as with Gilpin, they're one and done is not it. And there are our community residents, our tenants, our partners have really valuable input. And these are some of the areas that have been raised. And so I know it will come forward. Certainly they're important items for me and working with and talking with Mr. Nesmith and Ms. Hampton. I mean, if they want to have any additional comment, but these are important components that have already been raised in terms of most of these cells. So not sure if you have anything additional, but this is not the final plan and more to come. And there'll be other changes as well based on feedback we get from the subsequent meetings that are being scheduled. Councilwoman Robertson.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And I want to thank Mr. Walpole for his summary of the plan that is before us. And this development is in the seventh district, across the street, I think Midway Street, we are 6th District and 7th District. And so I've been involved a lot in the meetings that have been had, the discussions and the communication with the residents and so forth. Redevelopment of our public housing communities takes extremely a long, long, long period of time. And we've spent lots of time, as Dr. Newbill has said, with community residents, surrounding stakeholders in the community, conversation with the uh mlk middle school this and preschool that's right across the street from this development um the level of housing opportunities at uh price points within the development has been taken into consideration tremendously and so it does provide opportunities for people to to grow in their economically grow and still be able to live within that same community, which I think is a real plus to this development. So if I'm at 30% area, medium income, and I move up to 50% area, medium income, I will still be able to rent an apartment right in my same community that, and, get what i'm going to get for that increased rent or apartment opportunity that is not a opportunity that provides itself in the current housing communities that we are living in right now and at some point i think that the labor you know three years three years in the making of coming to where we are today lots of investment of time money revisiting meetings, revisions and so forth to get us to the place that we are. The community is in support of this. There's no one from the community speaking in opposition to this. There's no one in the community that spoke in that housing community, okay? I'm not talking to the surrounding community. I respect the fact that we have a person who's speaking in opposition that does not live in public housing, has never lived in public housing. And at some point, I think that it's important that we recognize that this is not a last C, that we entrust the integrity of the staff as well as the community when they have not spoken in opposition that live there.

madam clerk i'd like to have my name added to the paper and i would encourage my colleagues to support moving this paper forward thank you thank you councilwoman robertson again i thank you council member gibson for raising the question you i mean i've looked at the mou and we will have the same as you have for gilpin and it will delineate clearly Well, you know, all the various components, that commitment is there. Certainly myself and certainly with the leadership of RRHA and the community resident, they're all in. And so I will ask for support of this paper. I'd like to be added Mr. Clerk or Madam Clerk. And like I said, much more to come. With that, any other items on the agenda that members would like to discuss at this time on the consent agenda?

Seeing none, Madam and or Mr.

Clerk, please call the question.

Council is now voting on the consent agenda as presented. Mr. Breton?

Aye.

Ms. Gibson?

Yes.

Ms. Jones? Aye. Ms. Robertson? Aye. Ms. Lynch?

Aye.

Ms. Trammell?

I'm going to vote aye on 2026-089 because my colleague did explain it better and I'm I'm quite sure she'll make sure that we follow these rules and also the president. So I'm going to vote aye on this agenda. Thank you.

Ms. Abu Bakr.

Aye.

Vice President Jordan.

Aye.

And President Newbill.

Aye.

Those papers have all been adopted.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Let's proceed now with the... We've completed, we'll proceed with the regular agenda for this evening, items 15 through 17.

The first three regular agenda items are as follows and will be taken together as a block. Item 15, ordinance number 2026-122 to accept a quick claim deed from the school board conveying a portion of 1461 Commerce Road and to authorize the CAO to act on behalf of the city in executing such deed. Item 16, Ordinance Number 2026-123, to declare surplus and direct the sale of a portion of the city-owned real estate at 1461 Commerce Road to City Central LLC or its affiliate for $4.7 million or such lesser amount as may be provided for herein for the purpose of facilitating the construction. of a mixed use development and finally item 17 ordinance number 2026-124 to declare surplus and direct the sale of a portion of the city-owned real estate at 1451 commerce road to city central llc or its affiliate for 2.6 million dollars or such lesser amount as may be provided for herein for the purpose of facilitating the construction of a mixed use development all three papers are before council

Thank you. At this time, I invite the patron and or their designee, and I think that is probably Ms. Rogers.

Welcome, Ms. Rogers.

Good evening. Angie Rogers, director for the Department of Economic Development. I have been on behalf of the city working with the school board and their facility staff, probably for the better part of about the past six months on this issue. I think as Council Member Robertson alluded to earlier, the proposed development that would take place on these parcels and the surrounding parcels uh have been contemplated for a number of years uh one of the more recent uh hurdles that we needed to get over uh was the the city-owned parcels uh have two uh existing uh uses on them one is a use by richmond public schools the other is a use by the police department the school situation presented a particular hurdle because the schools have according to the city attorney, what's referred to as beneficial title in state law. And so we needed to work with schools to have them surplus the parcel that's in use by them to the city before we could have the city council take up this matter. We work with them, as I said, over probably the better part of six months, working first with their facility staff. And then in February, I appeared before their facilities committee for the first time, really trying to get an understanding of how what it is that they needed in order to feel comfortable surplusing this property. They laid that out as really a desire to have papers on both ends, both their resolution and the city's resolution or the city's paper guarantee, that they would get a relocation option that was satisfactory to them in order to do their surplus resolution. And so we work with them over a number of months. I ended up going to their facilities committee, both in February and in March, Mr. Donnell presented before the entire, uh school board uh in april and then they officially took up the matter uh in may um so this is a little bit of a special uh situation because of the assurances that we needed to give the school board uh that they were indeed going to get to a relocation option that works for them uh the uh development that is going to take place in this area i think is one of the largest redevelopment efforts to happen on the south side of the city for a long time And so that was our particular interest in pushing this forward and working with the school board toward resolution. The ultimate development will have thousands of units, over 3,000 units of multifamily rental housing, almost 1,000 units of for sale multifamily housing. those including affordable units. It will have grocer and civic amenities. So this is a major redevelopment for the south side of the city. I will say to Councilmember Gibson's particular question earlier, um our understanding is based on existing code we are allowed to do a surplus and directed conveyance in the same paper i think some of the confusion maybe has come about is because the existing code allows more than one way to do this. And as most of you know, I think all of you know, because we've been having meetings and talking about a new inventory surplus and disposition process that will start to clean up some of that confusion that's caused by having more than one way to do this. And so we are obviously anticipating to come back before you all later this year with that. But our understanding is that the existing code does allow us to proceed in the way that we're proceeding with this. And because we have had this lengthy conversation with the school board to move this along, we are presenting it in this way and hope you'll look upon it favorably.

Thank you, Ms. Rogers. With that comment, we will now have a public hearing on the papers. And I would invite all of those present desires of speaking in opposition to the paper, if you would come forward. Seeing none all present desires of speaking in favor of the paper, if you would come forward. Seeing none, the public hearing is now closed. Bring it back to council for discussion. Councilwoman Gibson.

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Ms. Rogers for the comments. So I want to be clear about our existing city law that defines the rules for surplus. It's section 8.6 and says no offer bid or proposal for the purchase of city owned real estate shall be sought by solicitation, whether by invitation for bids or requests for proposals or auction, And until the council shall first have adopted a resolution declaring such real estate to be surplused. So I think that the city code is quite clear. And essentially what the body can do, which it has done on multiple occasion, is to say, we want to ignore this law right now. We're going to go ahead and do it this way this time. Um, and so as these items have come to the body, uh, during my tenure, I have, um, I've not voted in support of that because this law exists for a reason, which is to ensure that we are, uh, doing our due diligence to ensure that we are being competitive and how we sell, um, and sell public land now. It is a sensitive item having been on the school board for me because when land is owned by the schools, and I believe that the ownership is unique in this, so understanding that this is unique, But I think that we just have a history of proceeding with these types of deals in a way that I don't believe serves our students best, which is, again, why I believe we have that law in the first place. I remember in 2013, the West Hampton School was surplused, and that sale, again, should have gone back to the school district. Instead of gaining the money of a true sale, the city leased the property to Bon Secours for $5,000 a year for 60 years. And that type of agreement certainly didn't do a service to our students. recently the same thing happened with the real school property when it was sold to, uh, or to Planned Parenthood for $10, I believe. Um, During my tenure on the board, I learned that the Arthur Ashe building was being marketed for development. I learned about this in the paper. The city was asserting that despite the fact that the facility was owned and managed by the school district, that the city had full authority to transfer the property for the development without the agreement of the schools. So there was a majority on the board who pushed back on that. And our legal counsel at the time recused themselves, essentially. We had to find pro bono legal representation. And thankfully, the schools were able to ensure that the $5.3 million went back into the schools. it wasn't easy. And so there's a history of the schools getting a short end of the stick by default. And in this case, I just think that we have to be very careful with this repeated practice of surplusing property without having gone through to ensure that we're getting the best deal. And so I also want to ensure that for future properties that are outright owned by the schools, that we don't follow the same path of not giving, ensuring the schools get what they need by default. The school buildings are falling apart and they need those dollars. I plan to vote against this particular item. I appreciate the interest in development, don't get me wrong, but I also believe that we have a responsibility to upholding the laws that we have in place. Off topic, there had been questions about that media have brought up regarding the buyer on this. And without digging too deep into that, I do think we want to ensure that the city has done its complete due diligence in how the land is going to be used. But my hesitation here is in the repeated practice of ignoring or essentially suspending our laws regarding the procurement and sale of existing city property. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman Gibson. Any other discussion relative to the paper? Seeing none, Madam Clerk or Mr. Clerk, if you would call the question.

Council is now voting on all three ordinances. Ordinance number 2026-122, 2026-123, and 2026-124 as read. Mr. Breton? Aye. Ms. Gibson? No. Ms. Jones? Aye. Ms. Robertson? Aye. Ms. Lynch? Aye. Ms. Trammell? Aye. Ms. Abubakar? Aye. Vice President Jordan? Aye. And President Newbill? Aye. Those papers have been adopted.

Thank you. Let's proceed to item 20. And yes, if you would read that paper, please.

The next regular agenda item is item 20, ordinance number 2025-282 to amend city code by adding therein a new section concerning a deferral program for certain real estate taxes pursuant to and in accordance with code of Virginia section 58.1-3219. That paper is before council.

Thank you. I would invite the patron, if you would like to provide comment prior to our beginning public hearing, patron or patrons. I think a chief patron, Councilwoman Albuquerque.

Sure, I will keep it short and sweet because I think this probably could have been on the consent agenda. This is in response to what will be coming, which is a real estate tax assessment. unfreeze in two years and an absolute need and desire for us to be responsive to residents and taxpayers of the city. This has been about seven months in the making with some amendments, and I am pleased to see many of my colleagues join me in coming up with some sort of tool. I don't think this is the last tool in the toolkit. But it is certainly a piece of it. As we think about, you know, we're, we're claiming that this week is anti displacement week. And so I think it is important that we are creating anti displacement legislation that runs the full spectrum of the socio economic, economic spectrum in the city. So I am pleased that we are passing this.

Thank you, Council Member Oppenbacher. With that, we'll proceed with the public hearing. Do we have persons present, desirous of speaking in opposition to this paper, if you would come forward? Seeing none, do we have persons present, desirous of speaking in favor of the paper, if you would come forward? Seeing none, the public hearing is closed. Bring it back to the body. Madam Clerk or Mr. Clerk, I'd like to be added as a patron on this paper. And any other comment, discussion? Seeing none, we will call the question.

Council is now voting on ordinance number 2025-282 as presented. Mr. Breton? Aye. Ms. Gibson? Aye.

Yes.

Ms. Jones? Aye. Ms. Robertson? Aye. Ms. Lynch? Aye. Ms. Trammell? Aye. Ms. Abu Bakr? Aye. Vice President Jordan? Aye. And President Newbill?

Aye.

That paper has been adopted.

Thank you. We will proceed with item 21, if you would read that paper.

The last regular agenda item for this evening is item number 21, ordinance number 2026-059, to amend city code concerning the Department of Emergency Communications preparedness and response to require the department to route E911 calls for emergency medical services to the Richmond Ambulance Authority. That paper is before counsel.

Thank you, Madam Clark, and I'll defer to Lee Patron to start, but I will also invite the administration as well as other persons present. So I'll start with you, Ms. Trammell.

I don't know if you wanted them to go first, but I'll go first.

If your preference, let me know. You can let me know your preference.

I just think that we have been talking about this over a year and a half at our public safety meeting, back and forth. The CEO, Chip Decker of the Richmond Ambulance Authority, has been there over and over, laid out all the stuff. I have all the papers right here that back up what I'm saying. And to me, There, I mean, we have done the side by side comparison. We've done this, we've done that, everything that we've been asked for. And that's why I'm asking my colleagues, let's pass this paper tonight. And so we can move forward. I think it's, it is something that's definitely needed.

Thank you. Councilwoman Trammell. I see Mr. Donald moving forward.

with comment relative to this from administration. Welcome, Mr. Don.

Good evening, Council. Listen, I would just start with a quick thank you for you continuing to have robust conversation about this. I think I heard Councilmember Trammell mention that we've been talking about this for a while. I think that's important because I think you recognize the importance and the impact that it will have on residents if we don't get it right. I think we have looked at it. I think the council has pretty much signaled the position and the direction that you would like to go. And I think from our conversations earlier, just what I would add is just making sure we have an appropriate implementation plan so that we can get it correct. I think that's the only thing that I have to add. I think we are excited in your focus on good government and getting this correct, getting it right, and making sure that if we're going to make an adjustment, we do so in a way that makes sure that we do have that implementation period. I know that what I will close with is that we've also talked about what co-location looks like. I think the Robert Bob report said that those costs would save the city upwards of about $3 million. I think in reading what our partners at RAA provided, it was around a little under $2 million. So either way, some significant cost savings. And so as we go through implementation and we look at it generally, there's just opportunity to make sure we get it right. And so I know that you have all been committed to that and we wanna make sure to be as supportive as possible of those activities. So if you have any questions, I'll take them, but otherwise I think that would highlight our position.

Thank you, Mr. Donald. Um, you're going to be here just in case there are questions once we conclude the public hearing.

Oh, yes, ma'am. I can stand right in the back seats a little low for me. I can see you there.

Okay. Um, at this point we will proceed with the public hearing. Are there persons present desires of speaking in opposition to this paper? If you would come forward. Seeing none, are there persons present desirous of speaking in favor of this paper?

If you will come forward.

Good afternoon, evening members of council. My name is Chip Decker. I'm the CEO of Richmond Amherst Authority. Wanted to make a couple of points about this. paper i want to reiterate and make it clear that when i think when somebody dials 911 they're looking for the right resource in the right place in the right amount of time and there are national and international standards for determining if you're being successful at this or not And they're used by dispatch centers across the country, including the Richmond Ambulance Authority and the Department of Emergency Communications. So anything outside of those standards should be considered, you know, subjective, opinion-based. And the data that is accompanying this paper is an apples to apples comparison. It is not up for interpretation. Emergency medical dispatch was performed at a higher level under Richmond Amherst authority than it is today according to the accepted standards. That's not my opinion. It's just what the data shows. It's now been two years since the change was made and DEC stopped sending emergency medical callers to the ambulance authority. And I don't think it's worked as expected based on the data. So I believe that the paper provides for a reasonable transition period in order to implement the changeover back to the ambulance authority. And I think it can be achieved within that 30 day period that the paper says, and I look forward to working with the ECPR director will be in touch for in order to make this a smooth transition for the betterment of the system. So on behalf of the Richmond Amherst Authority Board of Directors, who has voted to be supportive of it returning to the ambulance authority. And even the paramedics and the EMTs that I've spoken to about this that have seen the change and would like to see it revert back.

i ask for your your support because it's the right thing to do for the community and it's the right thing to do for our patients thank you mr decker saying no others desires of speaking in favor of the paper the public hearing is now closed bring it back to the body for for discussion i can't tell who's I'm sorry, I'm looking at my numbers. Councilwoman Gibson and then Councilwoman Lynch.

Thank you, Madam President. I wanted to thank Councilmember Trammell for bringing this paper to the body. I have to be frank, when I saw the metrics, it was alarming to me. The number of calls, the percentage of calls that were not being answered within the required time period. People have an emergency and they need and expect the phone will be picked up. And the way that we measure whether that happens is not a number based on some rubric we've defined. It's defined by the authority that measures this. And according to that authority, the International Academies of Emergency Dispatch It's bad if it's not 10%. It's really bad if it's over 10%. Ours is at 29% of noncompliance, right? So we're essentially off the charts in noncompliance right now. Today, people are in an emergency and almost a third of them are not having the calls picked up within the required, the mandated timeframe. Our city today is out of compliance. So I would say we're talking about an implementation plan My question is, what was the implementation plan created two years ago or whenever that decision was made to change it? And what did that look like? Because based on these numbers, the implementation plan to change it in the first place did not work. It simply did not work. Because if it did, we would not be out of compliance at 29%. Full stop. From where I stand, this is really not a big discussion. We need to make sure that the phone gets answered. And we had a group that was able to do that where only 6% of the calls were not getting picked. I mean like 6% of the calls were non-compliant today, 29% of the calls are non-compliant. Like this is not, there's, this is, there's not room for a lot of discussion from where I stand. We need to make sure that our residents are heard in a timely manner. And I urge the board, I mean, this body council to move forward.

Thank you. Councilwoman Lynch.

Well said council member Gibson, ditto and amen. you know, I want to thank our public safety committee members for working on this and bringing it to light. You know, when we first, you know, kind of asked the question, is it working or is it not? It took us almost six months to get the apples to apples data that eventually led us to that conclusion. We knew that we were seeing an uptick in constituent concerns and complaints of lack of timely response, but we didn't know just how how bad it was until we really started cracking into that walnut. And we are, it is, we would be negligent not to make a change and not to push forward for something. I do want to see Odie's, Donald, sorry, Donald's point about implementation, thoughtful implementation for this move. Our committee members and our committee will be working on a thoughtful implementation kind of subsequent either resolution or ordinance to kind of give more guidance about co-location and what those options might look like um and look forward to to working with the administration um to continue to track that and and um and and see those numbers uh drastically improve and quickly thank you thank you councilman breton

I know that with all of our legislation, it is important that we are being thoughtful about implementation for success. And so I just wanted to ask the members of the Public Safety Committee if you all have considered whether for the specific change in this legislation, if the 30-day implementation time will be adequate in order for us to perform the change in this legislation.

i think there's a we believe in the language there's enough flexibility um to allow us it doesn't it doesn't require a full structural you know executed change in 30 days um so we can we have a little bit of flexibility in how that rolls out um to to satisfy the language of the bill thank you councilwoman jones

Thank you, Madam President. And thank you to the Public Safety Committee for your work on this. These questions aren't meant to formulate a debate. And while you have worked on it for a year, kudos, we don't I personally am not here to debate with you. I have a responsibility, just like every council member on this side is to ask questions. And so the questions that I'm asking are specific to not so much of an implementation plan, but a lot of unanswered questions. And so I don't need to be educated or over contextualized on what we've done. I have simple questions. My first question is what critical events have occurred that triggered separate and call centers as such an immediate need? So we say we have the data, but I would like to know what has happened that has caused us to say that we need to do this now in 30 days. I get the compliance, but what are we not saying? Because the narrative is that folks are unsafe. And if we are not going to talk about public safety, then we should not be penalized for wanting to know these questions before making a major decision. So it's not that no one supports, it's not that we're here to debate or challenge anything that anybody is saying, but these are questions that I'm being asked and I'm asking the questions. What critical events have occurred triggering separate call centers as such an immediate need? And my second question is, when there is a temporary outage in these call centers, who are handling these calls? These are legitimate questions that I would like to know before we move with these decisions.

Councilwoman Albuquerque.

Thank you, Madam President. First and foremost, to my colleagues' questions, I can speak to, there's a number of anecdotal stories of where there have been misdiagnoses on calls. We have heard from those directly in multiple public safety meetings and in our public safety, two public safety hearings on this particular topic. To be clear, again, the calls still go through DEC. That does not change. What changes is at the point where DEC brings in Richmond Ambulance Authority for medical calls. Really, this builds capacity for DEC because RAA is taking those medical calls off their plate sooner in the process. Again, to my colleague's point about the apples to apples data that we have from both October 1st, 2024 through March 31st, 2025, And prior to that, when RAA was the secondary, we have that data that shows that 29% noncompliance with DEC, 6% noncompliance with RAA. Again, and we can talk about this a lot more, but we've been going at this for a very long time. And so I just, I want to say that like, I'm grateful that we have an abundance of expertise in both DECPR and in RAA. And I do want to allow those people who are subject matter experts, both in medical and police and fire dispatch to be able to lead in their areas of expertise. And I think that this really does, in fact, reflect that.

Was there any additional comment?

Madam President, yes. Let me just say that I am on the board, and you and I can work together with these questions, and I can take it to the board. And also, the CAO, he's also on the board with me. And I know that every time I bring something to the board, they help me understand better, and they answer my questions. So if you want me to take some things back to the board, I'd be more than glad to do it. we can work together. Okay. Thank you.

Councilwoman Robertson.

Thank you, Dr. Newbill. Um,

The information that we are putting out right now as it relates to noncompliance and the percentage of noncompliance is very, very disturbing, extremely disturbing. And it suggests to me that if noncompliance is at that percent level, that it gives me a reason of discomfort as it relates to the total E911 emergency call system. This is not just about the ambulance authority if we are speaking to noncompliance to this level. And I would like, if you will, Madam President, Mr. Donald, to help us understand what are the real issues and is it just calls not being, the procedural process not being followed as it is currently existing to get calls for emergency ambulance services from the ambulance authority? Or do we have a larger problem that unfortunately I'm sad to be having this conversation in the public arena because tonight if I need a police or if I need a fire or I need an ambulance, I'm not feeling very good about a non-compliance rate at the rate that we are being told. This is very, very frightening. And I really need a little bit more assurance as to where we are, what is the magnitude of this problem, and what are we doing, and how do we move forward? Because I want to know that every person that pick up that phone and call can be confident that someone is answering and getting them the service that we have paid for to be in place. If NF is a lack of resources, I want to know that as well. This is really critical. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Mr. Donald, the question, great questions and comments again, by the council, and I think it illuminates why we want to make sure to get it right the first time. And well, I'll say the second time because I know you dealt with this a couple of years ago before the administration. And I would also encourage us, you know, not to forget the lessons that you did learn a couple of years ago when you made the change initially. I think you know we're talking about how we correct this issue and I think you want to just do so long term. A couple of years ago, I think you identified some similar challenges and you made the decision to bring it back in-house. I think it can work either way, but I think the key is you have two entities, one internal, one external, and that key to really have the most efficient level of service delivery is co-location. So we're talking about one part of that today, and I think I heard Council Member Albuquerque highlight some of the challenges and the need for us, even with the anecdotal information, for us to just be able to, I think, I don't want to misquote you, but unload and provide that medical cause a little bit quicker. There's one part of it, and I think that's what you're determining today. And I just think part two of that is co-location, where you clear up some of the resources so that you can make those additional investments. So I would encourage both and. You move forward, it sounds like you have the appetite and the political will to make sure that we get the cause transfer and you provide us enough time to be able to do that. And then that part two that we don't want to forget is the co-location that provides us cost savings. But what's most important than just saving money is actually ensuring we have resources to invest back in the system and resolve some of these problems and enhance it. So I actually think it sounds like you're kind of talking about we're talking about them both separately, but they're really one holistic improvement to the system and an investment in good governance. And again, the administration supports that. I think the only piece that we are highlighting is that we want to make sure that we have we have it done right and we have the appropriate time to transition appropriately. So I think, again, we're in lockstep with the council, which we're always trying to be, and I think this provides us that opportunity. So I will hold and answer any, I'm sorry, there's one piece I did want to answer, because you asked a great question is, if that phone rings, is somebody going to answer it in an emergency? and the answer is yes um could calls be done more quickly and more efficiently uh through this process for which you're proposing there's a possibility that that that be the case and so i think that's why we would support that again co-location though solves the whole process and we need again a both and so i would also say i don't remember the date but i went by and spent the full day with our uh call center and studied it from soup to nuts and what we saw is that i mean while i was there there was somebody that had an emergency occurred during that time and the response time was excellent so much so you didn't even hear about it on the news And it was a difficult situation, referred quickly, transferred appropriately. And within a matter of minutes, our first responders were on scene. So it worked exactly the way that it was supposed to do in crisis. And that's not just an observation. I was there sitting in and helping to take calls that day, as well as a member of the council's staff, Mr. Steve, I apologize, I don't remember his last. Yes, yes. So, you know, we we have seen the process work, and so I don't feel danger from that observation and multiple observations that day. I think we're in great position to receive calls and mitigate any issues. And I think what I'm hearing the council say is Good is great, but we want the best that we can provide. And I think our response to that is right on. We're here to support it. But we also believe the data says colocation is a big part of that. And so having both would be amazing.

Thank you, Mr. Donald. Vice President Jordan.

uh thank you president newbell i appreciate all the comments that we've already had and just to hone in a little bit more on what comes next um i would like to understand better how we got here and i know the public safety committee has had the benefit of over a year of discussion but for some of us we're we're trying to get caught up to speed here um What didn't we get right when we made this change that was based on consultants recommendation and it wasn't just about cost savings. So are we not supporting DEC to the extent that it needed to with training or with the number of staff that was required? because that's probably gonna be an ongoing issue regardless of what we do with this paper. And I just wanna make sure that everyone who is in that department knows that their work is vital and we appreciate it. It's a hugely stressful role with high burnout, high turnover. If we need to be putting more resources into that staffing, regardless of what we do with this paper, I think we're having this conversation and we need to understand what is happening in DEC. because it might not be a medical emergency might be something else and do they have the tools to respond quickly because if the data is saying that we're not at where we want to be how do we get there for those calls so i would appreciate any response from administration or from dec on that question thank you i'll start with one of the patrons but i'll certainly invite the administration for comment as well councilmember lynch

Not to, I don't want to speak for the administration or the stakeholders, but I mean, you bring up an excellent point. I think we're hoping to address that with the subsequent paper that comes forward. One suggestion might be to maybe have, because this is actually, I mean, trust us, we know it's a very complex issue. um just the the organ between the organizational structure um the the um accreditation requirements and then how dec operates today um stands all that right it's a it's a pretty it's a lengthy deep dive um if we bring a subsequent paper forward which we have um we're working on now to kind of help guide, again, to help guide kind of the co-location discussion and then the larger, broader discussion on DEC and how they interact, hence going forward. Would you all be amenable to us maybe bringing that back to an OD meeting so that the full body can ask all the questions, kind of get all those details? And maybe that's a better way to address it.

so thank you i saw mr donald i thought i saw you okay i thought i saw you waving or nodding in agreement so okay i guess i would just really would welcome some assurances that 30 days is an adequate amount of time for current dec staff to be trained about when that when they are now shifting over calls

Mr. Donald, are you coming forward? I'm seeing comment.

My understanding is once we vote tonight, it's 30 days. I mean, there's some flexibility, but that's a risk.

If I heard correctly, Ms. Lynch, you were talking about coming back with an implementation plan, correct, that delineates...

Correct. And there's enough flexibility in language. It's not a shall have it flipped over in 30 days.

I think there's a little flexibility. Okay. We fully agree with that because there seems to be understanding with the council that it does not have to happen within 30 days because of the language within the ordinance. And so we believe with additional time and of course, we have to bring that back. So the council members proposal for us to come back at a future meeting where we can clarify that aligns. as long as we're just making quadruple sure that of course, you know, we need more time. So being held to that 30 days would be unrealistic, but it does not say shall, I think it says may, if anything. So that gives you the flexibility and I would, defer to, I'm not a lawyer, I just act like one on the weekend. So, you know, if whatever timeframe is most appropriate, we would abide by that. But I think that's the key is if we have that flexibility, no problem at all, we're fully in alignment with the council.

Thank you. So I just would like to comment. I concur with my colleague who says that we would be negligent not to make a change based on the data that the committee has brought back to us. However, as someone who has had the experience of having to reach out to our public safety professionals and have had unfortunate loss of life as a part of that experience. This is not something that's perfunctory. So I would look to the Public Safety Committee working with the administration after this approval to make sure that we have a solid plan for implementation and that we are clear and able to convey to the public what that will look like and what the expectations are and what collocation and training, et cetera. And so I'm hearing that that would be the case from the administration as well as from committee members and so with that and no further discussion i don't see any other folks lit up i'll ask that the question gets called with that proviso that that will be the case i'm just looking because that seems to be between the full committee for a committee Madam Clerk.

Council is now voting on ordinance number 2026-059 as presented. Mr. Breton?

Aye.

Ms. Gibson? Yes. Ms. Jones? Aye. Ms. Robertson? Aye. Ms. Lynch? Aye. Ms. Trammell? Aye. Ms. Abubakar? Aye. Aye. Vice President Jordan. Aye. And President Newbill. Aye. That paper has been adopted.

Thank you. And I'd like to thank the committee. This is a serious matter in our city. I mean, this is, and you've treated it as such, and I appreciate your willingness. to work with the administration to really articulate a solid plan of implementation so that we all will know and the quarter million people in our community will know exactly how we will move forward. So thank you.

Madam President, I wanted to say that I know this is a very, very important committee. All of our committees are important, but I know public safety is definitely because it affects everybody in the city of Richmond, all of our city employees, all of that. And I know that my colleagues who I work very well with on public safety and my anyway but anyway if you have any questions or whatever all you got to do is bring it to us and i also said that i'm on the board with the richmond and lambs authority i can take those questions back to them and bring back the answers to you or to the full body thank you thank you all

thank you i appreciate that and i'm hopeful that maybe by july od there would be an opportunity for some preliminary report to come back if and i don't want to force it i want it to be something that is real that is up that we can actually implement so if that can be a day fine if not please inform me so we can get that on the calendar for what would be an appropriate date so with that madam clerk

i'm going to we have a couple of papers for amending so if we could proceed with those members before you is a motion to amend item 19 ordinance number 2025-231 which authorizes a special use of 3219 tuxedo boulevard for the purpose of up to five single family detached dwellings upon certain terms and conditions the proposed amendment would modify the number of dwellings and the plans Council Member Robertson, would you make the motion to amend and continue this ordinance to the June 22nd council meeting?

So moved, Madam Clerk.

Mr. Breton, will you second that?

Second.

Thank you. Council is now voting on the motion to amend and continue ordinance number 2025-231 to the Monday, June 22nd council meeting as stated. Mr. Breton?

Aye. Ms. Gibson?

Yes. Ms. Robertson? Aye. Ms. Lynch? Aye. Aye. Ms. Trammell. Aye. Ms. Oppenbacher. Aye. Vice President Jordan. Aye. And President Newbill. Aye. That motion has been approved. Thank you. Next before you is a motion to amend item number 22, ordinance number 2026-090, which amends city code concerning the city's rights and authority and concerning labor management dispute and impasse resolution to modify collective bargaining procedures and the proposed amendment would further modify collective bargaining procedures. Council Member Trammell, will you make the motion to amend and continue this ordinance to the June 22nd council meeting?

So moved, Madam Clerk.

And Council Member Gibson, will you second that motion, please? Second. Thank you. Council is voting on the motion to amend and continue ordinance number 2026-092 to the Monday, June 22nd council meeting as stated. Mr. Breton? Aye. Ms. Gibson? Yes. Ms. Robertson? Aye. Ms. Lynch?

Aye.

Ms. Trammell? Aye. Ms. Abubakar? Aye. Vice President Jordan? Aye. And President Newbill. Aye. That motion has been approved. Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Let's at this time proceed with the approval of the minutes.

The minutes to be approved are from the Monday, May 26th, 2026 informal and formal city council meetings at 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. If there are no corrections or amendments, then the minutes will be approved as presented. Those minutes have been approved.

Thank you. Let's proceed with the introduction of new legislation.

Members, new pieces of legislation items number three through 27 on the list before you are hereby introduced as presented. A copy of the list is available for public inspection at the rear of the room. An electronic copy and copies of the new legislation will be available on the city's website on Tuesday, June 9th.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. At this time, we'll proceed with reports and announcements. Councilwoman Dremel.

Thank you, Madam President. This Thursday on June 11th at 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m., we're going to have our 8th District meeting at the Satellite Restaurant and Lounge, 4000 Richmond Highway. Our guest speaker is going to be Scott Morse. He's going to talk about public utilities, and that's a good thing because a lot of people have been calling me because they've gotten their utility bills, and they said that they are just too high. and i know that um that scott has been going around well every time we call him he goes around he fixes all the meters because we do have in south side in our eighth district a lot of old meters that the you know the busted the water's running and we're just thankful that he always takes our calls and he has a crew that goes out there if not that night the next day to fix them also we're going to have um oh my gosh goodness there's a developer that's going to come there too and talk about another development that's going on in our eighth district. I think we have now a total of 11 developers, which I know back in 1998, I couldn't get a developer to even return my phone call or either to even come into our eighth district. I know that these smoke alarms and my colleague right there, my colleague, I might have to give this to her. Because my colleague, she loves the firefighters too and our police officers. They work together. They're sisters and brothers. They work together. And if you need a smoke alarm, they will come to your house or come to your apartment, and they will make sure that you have a working smoke alarm. And right now, it's probably the only thing that's free in the city. You can always go to the nearest fire station. They'll make an appointment to come out there. And also, I want to thank our fire chief who went out there He was telling me the other day he went out there to one of the mobile parks on Richmond Highway. And most of those, I believe all of them, maybe 30 to 40 mobile homes did not have any smoke alarms. And they put them up for them. And that's a good thing. And I know my colleague, I'll let her talk about that. But anyway, I appreciate our firefighters and our police officers working together and all that they do. If you have any questions, you can call my home at 804-233-7382. Again, my home, 804-233-7382. Or you can call my personal cell, 804-240-5050. 804-240-5050. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilwoman Schrammel. Councilwoman Alba-Bacher.

Thank you. And I still defer to my colleague as the queen of public safety. But I do enjoy working with our firefighters and all of our public safety officers. This Wednesday, we've got the Westover Hills Neighborhood Association meeting at 7 p.m. at the usual spot, Westover Hills, United Methodist. On Saturday, we have the Forest View Cemetery cleanup, so you can still sign up to volunteer for that. And then also on Saturday, we've got Cedarhurst, the newest neighborhood association in the 4th District, will be having their picnic next to 5400 Bonsor Lane. The rain date for that will be June 14th, though I do not think it's going to rain. Next Tuesday, we've got back-to-back neighborhood associations, Forest Hill at the Presbyterian Church, and then South Hampton, a change, it will be at Boyd Realty Group, which is at 6784 Forest Hill Avenue. So you can go there. As always, you can reach my office, 804-646-5646, or sarah.ababacher at rba.gov and timmy.siverd, S-I-V-E-R-D, at rba.gov. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Ababacher.

Councilwoman Robertson?

Good. Thank you. I have three announcements, I think, four. Start with the first one, World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. That's going to be held on June the 18th from 9 o'clock to 1230 at Midtown Green, which is at 2401 Wesley Street. City of Richmond Office of Aging and Disability Services in partnership with VCU Health, Span Center, Henrico County, and Chesterfield County. For additional information, please call the City of Richmond Office of Aging and Disability Services at 804-646-1082. Also, the mayor did a press release this week earlier about displacement and several events that are being held to provide services to ensure that people can stay in their homes and services that the city is providing to assist. In addition to that, I wanted to announce that eviction diversion onsite support, This event is limited to Richard and Redevelopment Housing Authority residents who live in public housing. That event will happen on June the 9th from 1 o'clock, 1.15 to 2.45. And so on June 9th, it'll be at Armstrong Renaissance Community, 1665 North 3rd Street. Is it 3rd Street or 33rd Street? Probably. and Churchill, I'm sure, Dr. Newbill, that's in the 7th District. Hosted by the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority and Southside Community Development and Housing Corporation, call Nicole Douglas at 804-780-5210 or Ms. Hampton at Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority at 804-780-4358. Anyone that is having problems meeting their rent payments, they are behind and subject to eviction. This is an extremely important opportunity to get services to prevent that. We are also, there's an event that will be taking place on June the 26th called Beyond the Bars, Mental Health, Intellectual Disabilities, Chronic Illness and Justice Service Summit. That will be held at the Richmond Justice Center at 1701 Fairfield Way, hosted by our own Richmond City Sheriff's Office. For more information, call Catherine Green, 804-646-0140 for additional information and registration. And lastly, Howland Park is having our second phase to our charrette. That will be held at the Ann Hardy Community Center on June the 27th from 10 o'clock a.m. to 12. That's at 1000 Pollock Street. You may contact my office at 804-646-7964 for additional information. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Councilwoman Gibson.

Thank you, Madam President. Just a few updates. I wanted to share our next district meeting will be June 17th at 6 p.m. at Holton Elementary School. We'll be joined by Fire Chief Siegel, and we're finalizing other elements of our meeting. And as always, light refreshments will be provided. We'd love to see the community there. On Tuesday, June 9th at 6.30 p.m., there'll be a civic association hosted by the Rosedale Civic Association that will be at 1704 West Laburnum Avenue. And that same evening, the Battery Park Civic Association is hosting their quarterly meeting, which will be at 2803 DuPont Circle at the Stone House. On June 16th, At 6.30 at the Waldorf School, there will be a community meeting regarding a potential closing or partial closing, pardon me, of the right of way on Brooklyn Parkway and Robin Hood Road. This is in the Sherwood Park community. We have heard several concerns from residents regarding this closing. And so we encourage folks to come out and ask questions and share their thoughts with the school. And as always, please email our office if you have any questions or concerns. My email is Kenya.Gibson at RVA.gov. And you can reach Sarandon Elliott at Sarandon.Elliott at RVA.gov with any thoughts you have. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Vice President Jordan.

Thank you so much, President Newbell. The main news for the second district is that we will be out in the district. We have a summer district meeting to be scheduled after we have a little more information on when draft three of code refresh is going to be coming out. That'll be a subject-specific district meeting, probably sometime in July. From now until the end of August, though, you can expect to see myself and 2nd District Liaison Sven Philipsen out in the district. We're going to be on your block, knocking doors, providing materials on different services at the city. We're really excited to get back out on the street. Additionally, if you have a group and you would like us to come meet with you, we meet with neighborhood associations routinely, but if you have a group that would like to hear more directly from our office about Code Refresh or any other topic, please reach out to our office so that we can get on your calendar. And if you have any issues, the issues, please reach out to us either by phone, 804-646-6532, or via email. And that either myself, Catherine, K-A-T-H-E-R-I-N-E dot Jordan, J-O-R-D-A-N at rba.gov. And always please cc liaison sven.philipsen, P-H-I-L-I-P-S-E-N, at rva.gov. And we'll do our best to assist you with whatever city issue you're having. Thank you so much and look forward to seeing you out in district.

Thank you. Just a few announcements. We have several civic associations who will be meeting tomorrow. So the next Union Hill Civic Association meeting will be held tomorrow at 6.30 p.m. at the Challenge Discovery Building at 2405 Jefferson Avenue. The Fulton Civic Association will meet tomorrow at 6 p.m. at the Powhatan Community Center located at 5051 North Hampton Street. And the Churchill Association will meet on Tuesday, June 9th, Singh, at 6 p.m. at the East End Library, located at 25th and R Street. Please come out and join with the members of the Civic Association for current updates and opportunities for involvement and engagement in our community. On Wednesday, June 10th, we will have a press conference at Chimborazo Elementary School, 3000 East Marshall Street. In this press conference, the mayor, the superintendent, school board representative, myself, will be announcing our upcoming annual RVA Easton Music Festival. And it is for the last several years, the opportunity to raise funds funds to purchase musical instruments, art supplies, and materials for the children in our school in the East End. In all ways, we certainly partnership with the symphony and a variety of partners, but now we have a cadre of children who, because they've had the opportunity to have access to instruments, who will be performing. And so I'll be the person in the back with the tissue crying because we have so many of our children coming forward. And we have our children who will display their artwork, which is really phenomenal. So again, Wednesday, June 10th, Shembaraza Elementary School, 3000 East Marshall Street at 1130 a.m. Juneteenth. uh, at, on Saturday, June 13th at two o'clock PM at the East end library, 1200 North 25th street. There'll be a Juneteenth event and, um, It is titled The Meaning of Freedom, History, Memory, and Civic Responsibility, a Free Public Lecture by VUU Professor Clive Tinsley, Saturday, June 13th at 2. Then on June 13th and 14th, we have the Juneteenth Celebration Honoring Ancestors by the Legba Folklore Society. On Juneteenth, we'll be starting with the Torchlit Night Walk along the Trail of Enslaved Africans at 6 p.m. and Gathered the Devil's Half Acre, 1500 East Franklin Street. And then on June 14th, from 2 to 7, at the Chaco Bottom African Burial Ground, 1500 East Franklin Street. Please feel free to come out and join. On Juneteenth celebration on Friday, June 19th at the Main Street Station, the head house. This is the underground kitchen. It's called the Celebration of Freedom. Chef crafted food and vibrant cocktails honoring independence, culture, and community. It will start at 5.30. And last but not least, you certainly heard that we have a significant number of events at SAIL 250, City of Richmond and the Virginia Museum of History and Culture are proud to partner in hosting Richmond SAIL Fest, the SAIL Virginia 2060 Affiliate Harbor Kickoff. Central Virginia's countdown to America's 250th anniversary. Richmond will host several impressive tall ships June 12th through 14th. Please feel free to call for more information on each of the dates in terms of when the tall ships will be here at the intermediate terminal starting well June 12th through 14th. So for more information please feel free you can reach out to my office and My liaison will be able to direct you, 804-646-3012. Or you can call Mr. Patterson at 804-241-7544. Or you can call me at 804-543-7837 for more information. With that, the agenda for the formal meeting of the Richmond City Council has been accomplished and the meeting now stands adjourned. Thank you, everyone.