City Council - Regular Meeting

Call the meeting to order of the Wilmington City Council. I'd like to welcome all those who are with us here this evening and all those who are watching us at home. Thank you for taking an interest in your government. At this time, I would like to introduce former Mayor Pro Tem Clifford Barnett Sr., pastor of Warner Temple AME Zion Church. If you'll please come forward and give our invocation. And I would like everybody to remain standing afterwards for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Good evening, Mayor. And may I approach him? I asked Nasir to help me with this invocation because for the last couple of weeks, we've been watching some fantastic soccer games. And here, one of the neat things about the soccer game is before they do the Pledge of Allegiance or the anthem, they walk up. And they have Nasir on their side. And the reason for that is because they believe that every child wants to grow up to become a professional soccer player. And my prayer tonight is that as the work that we do is that our prayer is as Nasir grows up, we do the right things for him. Every vote that we make, every discussion, every argument, every heated debate, everything that we do in this sacred space will be so that Nasir gets the opportunity to grow and become a mayor or a soccer player or even a good-looking pastor like me. Let's pray. God, we thank you for Nasir. And we thank you, God, because he reminds us why we do what we do. And we thank you for Major Capers who was willing to sacrifice his life so that we could go to soccer games and we could do the things that we do. So we ask you, God, to remind us as we do the things that we do tonight May they help others to grow, to become what you destined them to be. For it's in his name we pray. Amen.

Amen.

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

United States Congressional Medal of Honor, honoring in the room of Tant Hutt, present arms. Ready, two, three.

Well, it is a true honor this evening to have Major James Capers Jr. with us this evening, a true American hero who has just received the Congressional Medal of Honor by the President of the United States in the East Room. And I think it's very important that everyone here at least hears the citation that was delivered in the White House before Major Capers received the Medal of Honor. And let me read it for the record, please. for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty as a team leader with 3rd Force Reconnaissance Company, 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion in the Republic of Vietnam from 31 March to 3rd April 1967. Tasked to locate a North Vietnamese regimental base camp southwest of Phu Loc and provide observation for the flank of Company M, 3rd Battalion, 26th Marine, 2nd Lieutenant Capers maneuvered his nine-man team on a four-day patrol through rugged enemy territory. The team had contacted with 20 enemy soldiers on the first day of patrol and two additional contacts on the second day, resulting in one severely wounded team member. Despite being outnumbered by enemy forces, Second Lieutenant Capers relentlessly pursued his vigilant and tenacious adversary and called for fire on an enemy base camp to thwart an impending attack on Company M. On the last day of the patrol, his team was engaged by a numerically superior enemy force with an initial attack from Claymore Mines coupled with direct and indirect fire. Despite severe pain and blood loss caused by multiple fragmentation and gunshot wounds he sustained, Second Lieutenant Capers bravely continued to lead his team and maintain the initiative. Even after being administered morphine, he continued to coordinate supporting fire and his team's movements to a helicopter extraction site. While struggling to maintain consciousness and still under enemy attack, Second Lieutenant Capers maintained command of the situation to ensure all of his Marines were evacuated before he, barely able to stand, finally boarded the helicopter. By his bold leadership, undaunted courage, and complete dedication to duty, Second Lieutenant Capers reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service. Well done, sir. Thank you and God bless you. This time I'd like to recognize Jack Pollock, who's gonna deliver a few comments. And Jack was very instrumental allowing the city council to move forward with a resolution in support of Major Capers receiving the Medal of Honor.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Saffo, members of council, city staff, distinguished guests, and members of the Wilmington community here tonight, we're gathered to take a moment to honor a distinguished former Marine for his service to our country. As a backdrop, The United States instituted in 1861 the Congressional Medal of Honor to recognize members of the various branches of our military for conspicuous actions above and beyond the call of duty while serving our country. Since its inception, over 40 million individuals have served in the various branches of our military services. So significant is this award that only 3,538 individuals have received the recognition for their actions in service to our country, and only 300 of those have been Marines. So another fact that is extremely important, as this is the highest honor to bestowed on any member of the military, When a Medal of Honor recipient enters the room, all members of the military, including the President of the United States as Commander in Chief, are required to stand and render the appropriate salute and recognition as at that point that individual is regarded as the highest ranking individual in the room. Tonight, we are here to honor the 3,536th recipient. So at this point, I would ask the mayor and city council to please come down in front of the dais to be joined by Major Capers for the reading of a proclamation.

And I would also like to recognize we do have several elected leaders and former elected leaders. I know former Mayor of Ham Hicks is here with us, also a Marine. We also have Judge Faison. Happy birthday, Judge Faison, by the way. And also Judge Hodgson in the back right there. Thank you for being here this evening.

So let's read this proclamation.

Okay.

I'm going to read the proclamation.

You bet.

I'm going to get right here next to the major. You want us to turn this way? City of Wilmington, North Carolina recognition reads, whereas Major James Capers Jr. served in the U.S. Marine Corps for 22 years, completing more than 60 missions, many of which were classified, and whereas he was the first African American to serve in the elite reconnaissance community, the first to complete diver training as the top of his class, and the first African American to receive a battlefield commission, and whereas Major James Capers Jr. was severely wounded in the Battle of Phu Loc, Vietnam, receiving 17 wounds and willing to give his life to rescue his team, broad-minded. And whereas after a year of recovering from his wounds, he became the first African-American featured on a Marine Corps recruiting poster. And you did look great, by the way. I saw it. Whereas after service to the United States, Major Capers retired, taking employment with Jefferson Pond Insurance in Wilmington, North Carolina as an African-American vice president. And whereas Major Capers then became the first African-American in 1983 to purchase a radio station known as WWIL, 1490 AM in Wilmington, North Carolina. Now, therefore, let it be known that the city of Wilmington recognizes Major James Capers, Jr. for being awarded on June 18, 2026 by the President of the United States the military's highest award for valor, the Medal of Honor, being the first African-American Marine Corps commissioned officer to receive such and continuing to effect positive change for our nation. God bless you, sir.

God bless the United States.

At this point, I'd also like the city clerk, city attorney, city manager, Don Grants, if she's here, and prior members of council to please come forward as well to receive a champion coin from the major.

I'm sorry, Informant Council Member Paul Lawler is here. Major, I believe the community wants to hear from you now.

There you go. I knew this was going to happen. If you don't mind, I'll return to my seat. And before I do that, I'd like to honor my my fellow veterans behind me. Thank you so much for coming, and God bless you, and thank you for your service. And for the citizens here, I served many years here in Wilmington as a business owner, and it's good to be home. Thank you. I had a wife for 50 years. I had a son, they're all gone now. But when I come to Wilmington, I feel like I'm home again. And a lot of our military who are at Camp Lejeune, at Camp Lejeune up in Jacksonville, they all feel the same. You give us something that I lost along the way, But when I come home, I feel like I'm part of something again. So thank you for allowing me to come home again, and you've been very kind to the old warrior. A few weeks ago, when I was in Washington, the president gave me the Congressional Medal of Honor. Kind of a nice guy. My knees weren't doing all that well. And he kept saying, James, hold on to me. I'll help you. And I was struggling walking. And he was holding on to me. And he was squeezing my hand. And very compassionate person. I'm not used to folks. with that much power, being so gentle.

And I appreciated it.

And I appreciate the country giving me the highest honor. Not so sure I deserve it, but this is for my men. This is for the ones that fought with me and ensured that I survived and come home to be a part of this today. And having said that, You know, I don't know what else I can say. So thank you for all of your kindness. And Mayor, I'm gonna turn this back over to you.

Thank you, sir.

We're going to take Major Capers outside, and then we're going to break for about 30 minutes. And for a small reception outside, I'd like for everybody to join us. We have a beautiful cake that he's going to cut. And I would like for everybody to join us and honor this great man and this great hero, this great American hero tonight. So thank you.

Yes, ma'am. Straight to the cake.

All right, we're going to bring the meeting back to order. That was a very nice presentation, Major Capers. At this time, I'm going to recognize our city manager, Becky Hawk, in respect to the downtown wayfinding presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We do have a presentation this evening. Our planning director, Linda Painter, is going to introduce this item.

Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and members of council. I'm very excited to be here this evening because a few weeks ago you adopted the Greater Downtown Plan and I get tonight get to introduce you to one of the implementing actions that is already underway. So back in May of 2023, the Convention and Visitors Bureau initiated a Riverwalk assessment to identify what we need to do to improve our Riverwalk, what actions we needed to take to really highlight this incredible asset that our city has. The recommendations from that plan were presented to you in January of 2024. And in April of 2024, you authorized $650,000 in ARPA funds for tourism enhancements for projects that were identified by the Convention and Visitors Bureau. A few weeks ago, you also authorized an additional ARPA allocation of just over $58,000 for those enhancements. And tonight we're here to present the Downtown Gateway and Wayfinding Plan, which is one of the items that has come out of that Riverwalk assessment. So when the assessment was done back in 2023, the Convention and Visitors Bureau hired a consultant who came into town and really experienced the Riverwalk as our visitors do. He purposely did not do research. He came here and said, let me experience Wilmington. Let me experience the Riverwalk. as many of our visitors do when they come to town. And so he came up with 10 recommendations of things we could do. And two of them really related to how people find the Riverwalk and also how people find their way around downtown. So these were two items that he identified as areas in which we could improve. He noted that in some cases, if you're on Third Street and you're not familiar with Wilmington, you don't even know the river is down the hill and that there's a beautiful river walk there. He also noted that when he parked, he didn't necessarily know which way to go to get to not only the river walk, but other destinations downtown. His findings were something that were echoed by the community as part of the Greater Downtown Plan. When we talked to the community, they really wanted to make it easier to get around, to park once and explore. And one of the things they noted was that it was hard to find their way around. If they're not familiar with downtown, they didn't necessarily know where to go. And so improving signs and maps for parking and getting around is action number two for strategy three under mobility. And one of the measures of success is completing the Convention and Visitors Bureau Wayfinding Assessment and Conceptual Design. And that's what we're here tonight to present to you. I will note that Kim Huffam with the Convention and Visitors Bureau is here to answer any questions that you may have on the Riverwalk Assessment itself. We also have Martha Wayne, our CFO, who is here to answer questions that you may have on the ARPA allocation. And with that, I'm going to turn things over to Guide Studio. Guide Studio was retained through a competitive procurement process, and they were selected specifically for their expertise in wayfinding. They are not just people who design signs. They understand how people approach communities, what they're looking for, and what will help them find their way. So with that, I'm going to introduce Kathy Fremette, who is the president of Guide Studio.

Good evening, everyone. It's always nice to come back to Wilmington. I've been here three times now in this year. So it is actually been a lot of fun. It is a wonderful city and you have a lot that you want to show off. So our hope for you is that this program will really help everybody who comes to Wilmington understand what it is that you have to offer them. So just to quickly go through what the project goals were. So we have been working with the CVB and members of city staff to kind of put our arms around what are some of the issues and what do we need to address and how can signage and wayfinding help improve those things. So we started off setting goals for ourselves on how we would address this. So we really wanted to look at creating a cohesive downtown wayfinding system so that when people see it in and around the downtown, they know it's part of Wilmington, they know it's part of the downtown, they know where to look for information. Guiding people to those key destinations and experiences were important. We wanted to support a park once and explore the downtown experience. We also wanted to strengthen arrival and district identity, design for clarity, accessibility and inclusion and ensure long-term durability and maintainability. So we don't wanna put anything together that you're not gonna be able to implement and maintain. And we had a pretty interesting and broad view. So the downtown has the core, but there's also a greater downtown. So we had to look at how all the ways in which people were coming into the downtown area, what that looked like, what that felt like, and how we could implement signs in certain areas to help them know when they've arrived, where they need to go. And the intent is always to put information at the moments they need it, not all over the place. So we know there's already a lot of signs in your downtown. So the intent is not for us to just add more signs, but to really look at what you have, remove what is unnecessary, place things that are necessary to improve that experience. And the challenges that we found when we did our assessment was that the downtown arrival points and districts were not always clearly recognized. It was sometimes pretty difficult to know when you were in certain areas. There's also a lot of parking confusion. So public parking can be difficult to identify and you might find that funny because there are a lot of you know, signs everywhere indicating that there's parking. But I think there's confusion about what is city owned public parking? What is the cost of the parking? So these are things that we're looking at and trying to find ways to establish how do you identify things clearly for people who are looking for that amenity. orientation and scale. So visitors, I think, can underestimate the downtown's walkability and they lack some simple tools to understand what is nearby and what is around them. There's some connections that are a little bit unclear between district and transportation modes. So we wanted to make those a little bit more intuitive if possible. AS THEY MENTIONED, WE NOTICED, TOO, THE RIVERWALK VISIBILITY WAS DIFFICULT. IT'S JUST A FEW BLOCKS AWAY, BUT ON CERTAIN STREETS, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT IT'S THERE. SO HOW CAN WE BRING THAT A LITTLE BIT CLOSER? AND AGAIN, THE SIGN CLUTTER AND CONSISTENCY, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE CREATING A SYSTEM THAT IS COHESIVE AND WORKS TOGETHER AND WE'RE NOT ADDING TO THAT CLUTTER. SO THE PRINCIPLES THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON AS WE DEVELOP THE SYSTEM FOR YOU IS ESTABLISHING THOSE CLEAR ARRIVAL AND ORIENTATION MOMENTS. TO SIMPLIFY PARKING AND DECISION MAKING, SO MAKING SURE THINGS ARE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED AND HOW WE'RE GUIDING PEOPLE TO THOSE LOCATIONS. DESIGN FOR WALKABILITY AND EXPLORATION, BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY WANT THAT IN YOUR DOWNTOWN. to strengthen connections across some of those barriers. So when you're on certain streets, you know how to get down to the Riverwalk. Reinforce the Riverwalk as a primary pedestrian spine that people can travel from one end to the other of your downtown and access different points as they enjoy the river. Integrate multimodal navigation. So we're looking at this from vehicles, pedestrian, cycling, transit, all different modes in which people are moving around your community. So all of those are being considered as we work. We're designing for rural constraints. You have a historic downtown, and there's constraints to that. We've spent the last two days, we had programmed where we think things should go, what those signs should say, and now we're checking our work here on site. So we've been driving around and walking around the city in the heat to make sure the places where we're putting things are where they should be. and dealing with some of the constraints that we might have in those locations so we can make sure we're putting them in the right place. And also to reinforce downtown as a unified destination. So we've been working really hard from a design perspective. And then from the design process, just to kind of, we came to the city and the CVB with six different sign concepts. Most of these were all selected based on what we've seen in the architecture, in the makeup of the downtown, looking at the constraints that we might have. So you're seeing a lot of more vertical structures because you have very narrow sidewalks and roadways, and we have to be careful about what we put in some of those locations. We looked at materials and patterns that are represented within your downtown. So a lot of that was within that context. And this concept D was what the groups we were working with had selected, and this is what we began moving forward with from a design development perspective. And just to kind of show you where we got some of the ideas for the materials and some of the design patterns and colors, these came directly from things that we saw in your downtown. So some of the patterns were a lot of the iron work that we saw in some of your buildings. You have a lot of red brick, so we wanted to contrast that with a little bit of a different color. But you do have a lot of wonderful buildings with a lot of different materials. So we looked at that. We also looked at some of your existing colors as part of that palette. So moving forward, there are, we're breaking this up into a few different sign families. So we have the gateway sign families. So these are the ones that people will see as they arrive within your community. you have one location where a longer horizontal sign would be appropriate. And I'll show you a photo in a minute of where that would be. But most of them, the downtown gateways to signify when you've arrived in the downtown are these taller vertical monument signs. And then we do have THE GREATER DOWNTOWN AREA. SO THOSE THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT FARTHER OUT KIND OF INDICATING THAT YOU ARE MOVING INTO THAT AREA, THOSE ARE THE A3 DISTRICT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS. AND THOSE COULD ALSO HAVE OTHER USES IN OTHER DISTRICTS WITHIN YOUR COMMUNITY. AND THESE ARE JUST SOME PHOTO MOCK-UPS OF WHERE SOME OF THESE SIGNS WOULD GO. And then the next set of signs, all of these signs have a very particular job to do. So the next set are the signs that would speak to people who are in cars, in vehicles. So we have vehicular directionals that move you to the different destinations within your downtown, all the way down to the parking identification signs that you would need to help people identify where your parking is and the information that tells them how much it costs to get in there and what they need to do. So these are also some mock-ups of what these would look like in the environments. And then there's the pedestrian level. So this is really about the exploration within your downtown and giving them the right tools to help them move around while they're on foot. So we have pedestrian directives, we have kiosks. These are things that you do have and you had some in place They have been there a long time. They have weathered. So this is another way to look at how do we replace these with something that is a little bit more updated. We also noticed that you have a lot of pedestrian connector alleyways, and we know that the city had looked at doing things with these alleyways. There's more that needs to be done for sure, but it is an opportunity to begin telling people that the Riverwalk is here and pulling them down from some of these other streets. And then there is a series of signs specifically for the Riverwalk. So this is, again, just some photos of these in place. And this is just an overall timeline. This has actually been a fairly aggressive project. We were awarded the project in February. We were here in March to do our assessment. We developed our framework and plan and conceptual design in March and April. design was selected we began developing that sign work in april through may actually at the end of may we also we knew that there were arpa funds that needed to be spent so we began we selected specific signs we moved those forward quickly into development so that we could put out a bid for those signs, that bid has been awarded to a fabricator. Those signs are gonna begin to be fabricated through the summer months as we're finishing the development of the rest of the program. And then these were the signs that had went out to bid. Not all of these are gonna be built, but we wanted to get, identify numbers. We had looked at just the gateway signs and some of the Riverwalk totems for the ARPA funds to spend. And then I know the next priority is the parking signs as well.

Well, thank you, first of all, for the presentation. And I know you folks have been doing some work on it. I just wanted to ask if the council has any questions, comments, opinions?

Okay. Kevin? Thank you.

Do you want to know which signs we like the best?

Sure. Which signs do you like the best?

I like the, can you go back one slide? Yeah.

Yeah.

So the A2, I like that one. I also like A3. Well, I like J1.

Those are all the ones that are actually prioritized to be implemented this summer. So yeah, we were out there locating where the A2s this morning with a lot of the folks from the city.

You got good taste.

On the fabrication process, how long does that take?

Well, this is going to be a very fast process. So the goal is to have these fabricated and installed by the end of September.

I guess this question would be for Ms. Hawk. In the event, you know, if you have an accident, somebody runs into a sign, tears the sign down, whatever the case may be, and it happens, being able to replace the sign, will we have duplicate signs that we have here stocked, or would we have to order them, Ms. Hawk?

I think we can work with the city. Part of what we do is we look at what a maintenance plan could look like and what it means if something like that happens and what would be feasible to have in stock and what is probably you would just have to be replaced. I will note all of these signs, especially anything within the right of way is breakaway. So if it hits, they're supposed to break in a way that's not going to hurt anybody. And usually, sometimes we've seen, not all, I can't promise, but when they do fall, it usually means not every part of that sign needs to be replaced. Only some of it would need to be repaired and you can usually put them back.

And just to add to that, Mr. Mayor, I think the best path forward would be to work with the master fabricator in terms of what is the expected turnaround time to fabricate from scratch because they would have all of the master designs to make a determination of did it make more sense to keep at least some stock already made so that we could respond quickly or if they're able to turn something around to know that that would be something that we would have them under contract to be able to do on an as needed basis.

That's good to hear because that's my bigger concern is replacement sometimes on the lights of the Riverwalk some of the people that have fabricated or created those lights are gone or somebody's out of business and you don't have the fabrication capabilities. So I just want to make sure that we have enough in stock when we do have an issue. If we need to replace a sign, we have enough there.

And you will have and own all the shop drawings for those signs as well. So you will have what is needed to give even to a different fabricator if you needed to.

We have several questions here. We have a question from Council Member Clinton Quintana.

Yes, thank you for your presentation. My question, I'm not sure if you can answer this or it's for our city manager, but any chance we would do this for the rest of the city?

i see dennis shaking his head yes yes there um the goal was to focus on downtown first but a lot of the design portfolio looked at how could these be replicated so that there was some continuity in size and shape but that as they were spread out to different districts throughout the city that there would be an opportunity to give each of them their own kind of flavor and feel so that it wasn't completely repetitive, but there was still some continuity so that you could tell that it was part of the same design family and installation process. Thank you so much.

Hi, thanks for all your work on this. The signs are really attractive and I think eye-catching without also blending in with what we already have and building on our assets. My question, I don't want to assume, but I've been thinking about what the color scheme and the branding What I think is happening is that we're using city colors, like in our city logo, but establishing downtown, Wilmington downtown with its own identity that's not, like we didn't use the city logo on any of these because it's its own identity just here, right, in the downtown area.

And design philosophy for us sometimes is that we try to, because brands can change and logos can change, so we look more at context. So that's why we were looking more at the materials, the colors. You know, the blues made sense because of your location and where you are. So we stuck with that. We did look at a variety of different colors that actually moved away from this. There were some that were a little more in the blue greens or the teal colors. So there was a variety of things we looked at. But we felt this was probably the way to go, at least for the moment. But yeah, a lot of it was more focused on the context without pulling from a brand in case something would change. Thanks.

Thank you. Good presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next order of business is our consent agenda items one through eight. Are there any items that any council member would like to hear separated? If not, what are the wishes of the council in respect of the consent agenda? Okay. Ms. Hull, did you, did you? Yes, ma'am.

I did, Mr. Mayor. If we could please pull item C2 to make a minor amendment to it.

C2? Are we pulling that for further discussion or are we pulling that from tonight's agenda?

It would be pulling it out for discussion at tonight's agenda, immediately following that.

That's also the one I wanted to discuss. Is that the one? Okay, very good.

We want to approve the consent agenda items one through eight, excluding item C2. We have a motion from Councilmember Andrews, seconded by Councilmember Clinton Quintana. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? That item passes unanimously at this time. I'd like to recognize our city manager, Ms. Becky Hall. Ms. Hall.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, members of council. Just a minor edit on the financial impact of this item. It was written in the memo that there would be no funding in the current fiscal year, and that funding would not start until FY28. That is inaccurate. The funding is FY27, 28, and 29. the dollar amounts do not change and there is already funding in the budget for this purpose so i'm just a small typographical error in um in that and apologize for not catching that sooner but otherwise certainly happy to discuss any other questions or concerns that might be related to this item mr john did you have any further questions yeah i see that it's um

I think it's worth just discussing publicly and then getting into my question. So we already have the software in some capacity, but the vendor essentially has been bought out by a different software company. So my question is, are we getting a new software that we're not already using in addition to what we're presently using? And I see the police chief shaking his head no.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, members of council. That's correct. The software is going to be, in essence, the same software we're currently using. So there's not any added features to it or different operational issues that we're dealing with with us. Just as you said, a different vendor bought out the previous vendor that we had contracted with.

Okay. I just wanted to follow up on that based on some of our conversations about technology that did and did not make it into this last budget cycle.

Thank you. Yes, sir.

Okay.

Very good.

Okay.

Thank you. Thank you. What are the wishes of council in respect to the item? We have a motion to approve by Councilmember Lyle, second by Mayor Pro Tem Spears. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? The item passes unanimously. That brings us to our next item of business, which is our public information segment. We have six speakers that have signed up to speak with us this evening. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Our first speaker is Malik Shabazz, who is a city resident and wants to talk to us about youth development.

Good evening. How are you guys doing? Good. I want to start by saying I'm extremely nervous. I've never spoke to city council members before, so please forgive me if I do mess up a little bit. I have had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Kima. I've emailed Brother Kevin Spears, and I've had a chance to sit down with Ms. JC. I'm a huge fan of you, Mr. David, and also of you, Ms. Cassidy. I do want to say good evening to all of you. My name is Malik Shabazz, and I'm a father of two daughters. I'm a resident of Wilmington's Northside, and I'm also the Executive Director of Navigational Studios, which is a grassroots organization. I stand before you tonight as a concerned citizen. I love this city of Wilmington. I want my daughters to grow up here and I wanna leave behind a legacy of service and community. But I also want them to grow up in a city that truly invests in children. I recently visited Charlotte with my staff and we met with several nonprofit leaders. And one thing that I heard from them over and over again was that they had the support of the city council. I come back asking, why can't Wilmington do the same for my nonprofit, for our nonprofits and grassroots organizations? I believe our city is doing an okay job, but I also believe that we can do much better. The splash pad on the north side has been closed for weeks because of a water leak. It's July. Our students and our kids should be out in the summer making memories and having fun. I also want to ask why aren't we hosting more community events on the north side? Why aren't we partnering and being more intentional with partnering with organizations that are doing the work like Voyage? I also ask could we have done more to help organizations like the Northside Food Co-op? I don't stand here with complaints only in front of you. I think that I have solutions as well. Small grassroot organizations like mine know these children, we know the families, and we know what our neighborhoods needs because we live here. So tonight I'm asking all of you to meet me halfway. Invite us to the table, partner with us, and help us create more opportunities, more exposure, and more hope for our children. Our kids do not need another promise. They need action, and they need adults who are willing to invest in them right now. Navigational Studios has answers. Other grassroot organizations also have answers. I'm simply asking you to think more intentionally about the north side and to remember the children who are growing up there every single day because they need you and I need you. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Next speaker is Cheyenne Woods, who is a non-city resident, who will be talking to us about crisis de-escalation protocol. Is Woods here? Okay. Next speaker is Joan Keston, city resident, will be speaking to us about the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge replacement.

Good evening Mayor Saffo and Council Members. My name is Joan Keston. I'm a member of the Historic Preservation Commission and I'm here tonight representing the Commission regarding the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge Replacement Project. The Commission is very concerned about the adverse effects on the Wilmington Historic District caused by the proposals for the replacement of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge. Our role as Commissioners is to assist the City in protecting historic properties and districts. The Commission has reviewed the project and two proposed bridge alternatives of 65 foot lift bridge and a 135 foot fixed bridge. We have reviewed the programmatic agreement, received briefings from city staff, and held two working meetings regarding the project. Based on this information, the commission finds that the lift bridge is the option that will do minimal harm to historic districts, while the fixed bridge will do substantial harm. The Historic Preservation Commission hereby makes the following recommendations to the city. Number one, we are recommending that the lift bridge option be chosen rather than the fixed bridge option based on our findings set forth below. A, the lift bridge will maintain the same right of way as the current bridge, thus greatly limiting the adverse effects on historic properties and historic downtown. The Fricks Bridge will result in significant adverse effects for historic properties, cause severe traffic issues, create extreme noise pollution and vibration in historic downtown. These significant adverse effects cannot be mitigated by aesthetic design features. B, the lift bridge will continue to exit on Third Avenue, which is a four-lane road running north-south continuously connecting Carolina Beach Road and Martin Luther King. thus being much more efficient and advisable for transit, traffic, evacuations, etc. The fixed bridge will exit onto Fifth Avenue, which is a two-lane road, includes the Keenan Fountain on Fifth and Market, and runs from Greenfield Lake to the Taylor Homes housing project. It basically dead ends if no further road construction is undertaken. It is clearly not the same continuous, efficient, and advisable road for north-south transit, traffic, evacuations, etc. In addition, the city recently made considerable investments along 5th and the Kenan Fountain, which will be destroyed. Since both options cost the same to construct, the lift bridge option will preserve our historic downtown and not incur additional high costs in traffic problems and downtown road construction and renovations, that will be required by the fixed bridge. Two, we are recommending that there be no tolls on the bridge as tolls will cause severe traffic issues in historic downtown as folks avoid the bridge by using alternative bridges such as the Isabel Holmes Bridge. Tolls will also affect the Central Business District as folks cross the bridge daily for recreational and professional purposes such as restaurants, bars, theater, concerts, work, tourism. These are important economic drivers for the city. Three, we are recommending that the lift bridge, based on our findings, that the fixed bridge is not congruous with the character, visuals, and overall feeling of historic Wilmington, an important aspect for historic tourism and events, and thus also an economic benefit to the city. The lift bridge attempts to preserve the iconic nature of the current bridge, a most important visual of historic Wilmington. As the city noted in the Greater Downtown Wilmington Plan, the historic districts give the city the sense of place and are economically important. An overly large, incongruous fixed bridge runs counter to the plan. The Historic Preservation Commission hereby makes the following requests of the City. One, that the City pass a resolution in favor of the lift bridge and in opposition to the fixed bridge and take the necessary steps to communicate this to all the parties involved in the project and the members of the project merger team. Two, that the city pass a resolution in opposition to tolls and take the necessary steps to communicate this to all the parties involved in the project and the members of the project merger team. Three, that the city take the necessary steps to communicate to all the parties involved in the project and the project merger team its desire that the project study area designated pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA, for assessment of adverse impacts on historic properties be expanded to include the area of potential effects in the downtown local historic districts and the area of the Wilmington National Register historic districts from Marsh-Steller Street to Isabel Holmes Bridge and between the Cape Fear River and Sixth Avenue. We truly hope that you will pass the resolutions that we are requesting and protect historic Wilmington. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Kessler. Could you please share that with the clerk? Give her a copy of that. I have a copy for you. If you can give it to the clerk. Thank you. Next speaker is Ian Cassidy, a city resident, AI flock, surveillance, and violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Good evening, everyone, and thank you. My name is Ian Cassidy. I stand before you as a North Carolinian and a son and grandson of four American veterans. Flock cameras, automated license plate readers, and other types of AI-powered mass surveillance tools are a symptom of our community in decline. But rather than stand here and read statistics off the internet that you can easily find for yourselves, I will simply remind everyone here of what lies in wait for our community as we travel down this road. Mass surveillance has but one goal, regardless who has the data, the cameras, or the keys. That goal is fear. Fear is a means of control. It is a means of power. It is a means of destruction. Police are charged with the solemn duty to protect and serve their communities. Governments, regardless if they be federal, state, or municipal, are charged with that same duty. But when those bodies who exist at the will of the people use fear as a means to serve those very people, our communities that once thrived under the rule of law begin to languish under rule by law when the current ruling party determines what is law. That is how democracies decay into autocracies, where governments no longer draw their power from the consent of the government, and citizens are branded enemies of their own state for justly exercising their constitutional rights. Power that rules by fear inevitably teaches their citizens there is no law to protect them regardless of who is watching. History shows us such a lesson will be learned with pain and loss. The erosion of our communities will further stratify our people until there is but one recourse left. History may forget the names of the people in this room, but history will remember the choices that we make in the face of authoritarianism. The rapid and widespread development of mass surveillance across North Carolina and the United States is a signal. We could acknowledge this truth, learn from our history, and protect our communities from the decay of democracy, or we can ignore this truth. We can ignore the lessons of our forefathers' sacrifices and hold the door open for autocratic overreach in our cities, our states, and our homes. History will remember what we do here today, tomorrow, and come November. History will show our children's children what kind of citizens we were, what kind of neighbors we were, and what kind of Americans we are. In the 18th century, being American meant defying the power of tyranny. Today, that spirit lives on in true patriots, those that do not bow to power out of fear. North Carolina has the opportunity to be a leader to all Americans in these coming months, and our beautiful port city can be integral in that movement. Or we can stand aside as tyranny sweeps across against this great nation of ours. I beseech you to think of our forefathers and the ultimate sacrifices that they made to protect our liberties across the world and here at home. Think of how history will remember each of you in this moment and how we can faithfully honor the mighty and free American spirit. Thank you. Thank you.

Next speaker is Katie Randall, who is a city resident supported for a resolution addressing city compliance with federal immigration law.

Good evening. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today. My name is Dr. Katie Randall. I'm a member of the Immigrant Allies Forum here in Wilmington, and I have also worked in immigration for about the last 10 years. I would like to speak to the resolution addressing city compliance with federal immigration law, which I understand was pulled from the agenda for this meeting in order to undergo additional review. I would like to encourage the council to reintroduce this resolution for discussion and eventual adoption. Our city has many people affected physically and emotionally by the aggressive overreach of federal agents that we have seen creep into cities across our state. Since the increase in reckless immigration enforcement last year, I have heard from immigrants in Wilmington that they are afraid to interact with schools, go to the hospital, drive to work, or speak with local police due to fears of racial profiling and detention. This fear is not specific to status. ICE detained over 170 US citizens in the first nine months of 2025, and that number has only been increasing. The recent passing of NC State Bill 153, which authorizes state troopers to train and act as immigration agents, has only added to this fear. Making clear to city residents the WPD does not have the authority to enforce immigration law or collect immigration data, and that a judicial warrant is required in order to involve municipal property and federal government enforcement activities is even more important than it was before. A city resolution cannot change federal or state law, as we know. However, a city can certainly affirm its character as a place that honors constitutional rights and civil liberties for all its residents, even as we see those protections eroded elsewhere. I believe Wilmington can be this kind of city. I look forward to the reintroduction of the resolution with language that speaks clearly on this topic. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And our last speaker this evening is Latonya Johnson, is a city resident. Talk to us about family child care home ordinance amendment. Ms. Johnson.

Hi, good evening. My name is LaTanya Johnson.

I am- You can lower that. No, you can lower the platform there.

It's okay. I don't want to touch anything. So I am the owner of Little Journey Child Care Center. It's a family child care home. And I'm here because I've been talking to the city zoning for almost a year, just trying to get 24 hour care. And section R18207 states that the city, no such child care may operate for more than 12 hours per day. The county doesn't have that rule, but the city does. So what I'm trying to do is get 24 hour care for family child care homes in the city of Wilmington. And I feel like that would be helpful for families, the community, as far as health care workers, first responders, shift workers, military personnel, and flexible care just in general. So I respectfully ask the city to amend this provision to allow licensed family and child care homes to operate 24 hours per day while continuing to comply with all North Carolina licensing. This did not take long. I hope you guys approve this for me so I can have 24 hour care for the community and the families that do work overnight. Thank you.

And we had two late speakers speaking since we do have time. First of those two is Christopher Johnson, who is a city resident, who will be speaking to us about the budget work session follow up regarding the funding request for the Community Justice Center and the Film Partnership North Carolina. Is Mr. Johnson here? There he is.

Sorry, I was in the far back. That's okay. Hi everyone, I'm Christopher Johnson, or as I'm known in film, I go by Kit Johnson. I started at Cape Fear Community College Film and Video Productions program back in 2021. And there, in my second year, I was introduced to the RIDE program through the partnership, film partnership with Wilmington. And not only did it give me some amazing opportunities, but it continued to also foster connections with professionals in the industry and it developed my network. The first thing that we are taught as students is 90% of the industry is who you know and the other 10% is who they know. Your work comes from your connections. And through this, I was able to get an internship with Hendy Street Productions, whose clients range from local to North Carolina's aquarium to all the way to international conglomerates like Netflix and Mr. Beast. The WRI program has given not just me, but other students incredible opportunities, where they've connected and turned their raw talent into sharpened skill. I have witnessed so many students, my peers including, go on to do amazing productions, make amazing opportunities. I've gotten the privilege now as an instructor and tutor at Cape Fear Community College to further see students come after me, see this legacy unfold as more students get these opportunities. And as we continue to see that in this program, I see the outreach it does in the professional world. Our students are known because of this program. They get notoriety and are recognized for it and their talent, those bonds are truly immeasurable. Some of the great work I've seen is some students have recently just entered the union. Other students have just made it onto the new sequel to Superman. I've watched so many students grow in Wilmington and go beyond it and come back and rebuild just like I have. And I would want to see this continue. I would want to see the students coming after me continue to gain the same opportunities that I have. I did not expect it to have that much of a time left. Yeah, but thank you guys for listening and I hope you take those words. Thank you. Thank you very much.

And our final speaker is David Hendrickson who lives in Wilmington and he wants to talk to us about the Kafer Memorial Bridge.

Well, thank you very much, Mayor Pro Tem and Council. As Mayor said, I would like to speak about the bridge in regard to environmental review. Right now, as we all know, the North Carolina Department of Transportation is preparing an environmental assessment. An EA is a second tier level review. It is not a top tier level review. We are approaching the time where decision making on a $1.2, $1.3 billion project is in our future. The mid-level review is not acceptable, not acceptable to law. The National Environmental Protection Act, NEPA, has three levels. This project rises to the highest level. That is called an environmental impact statement. We cannot be, and not allowed to, shortchange the time element. We cannot be pushed where an EA might take, hypothetically, a few months. An EIS might take a couple months longer. It is an in-depth, rigorous review. To each of you folks and council, I sent a letter within the week, a word doc, and I texted it to an email. Within that email, I have identified 10 adverse environmental conditions that would not be addressed in the environmental assessment, will only be addressed in an EIS. the impact statement. I urge you as council to highly consider probably one of the biggest projects we will ever have in this city, 1.2, 1.3 billion. I urge you to consider environmentalism, consider the fact that NC DOT is not preparing that high level of review. What I ask of you Consider your options to represent the city and the community. What can you do to pressure NC DOT to perform the proper and appropriate level according to law? It is law that this particular project rises to the highest level review. Whether that be by resolution, whether you can solely write a letter, whether our attorney that represents the city can represent our interests, we must tell NC DOT this is not acceptable. We need the highest level of review. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

That concludes our public information segment. Our next item of business is our public hearings. Item PH1 is an ordinance submitting the official zoning maps of the City of Wilmington to rezone property containing 6.69 acres located at 320 Military Cut-Off Road from an ONICD Office and Institutional Conditional District and RB Regional Business District to ONI Office and Institutional District. This I'd like to recognize. our city manager, Ms. Hawk, and I will also note for the record that whoever makes the motion must read a consistent statement for the record. Ms. Hawk.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, members of council. This item will be presented by Hillary Taylor, our long range planner in our planning and development office.

Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, members of council. For your review, I present general rezoning from ONICD Office and Institutional Conditional District and RB Regional Business to ONI Office and Institutional District at 320 Military Cut-Off Road. This application was submitted in mid-April, has been reviewed by staff, was approved five to zero by Planning Commission, and is now at the second public hearing. The site is currently split-zoned ONICD, Office and Institutional Conditional District, and RB Regional Business. The portion of the site adjacent to Military Cut-Off Road, zoned ONICD, is currently occupied by a church facility and an addition building. The rare portion of the site zoned RB is currently vacant. The conditioned uses in the ONICD portion of the site are a one-story church facility and addition building with a maximum height of 25 feet and 5 inches and approximately 99 parking spaces. The allowable applicable uses in the RB district include retail and service uses with a maximum height of 45 feet and an optional step back of up to 90 feet. The proposed zoning is ONI office and institutional district. The allowable applicable uses in the ONI district include professional and medical offices, institutions of various sizes, and places of assembly. The maximum height is 45 feet with an optional step back of 90 feet. The site is located on Military Cut-Off Road between Arboretum Drive and Atrium Court and consists of approximately 6.69 acres or 291,416 square feet. The site is adjacent to the Military Cut-Off multi-use path and is in the vicinity of Food Lion, Arboretum Village Townhomes, Arboretum West Apartments, the Landfall Community, Village at Mayfair Condos, and MCS Noble Middle School. These are views of the subject property looking north and south by Military Cut-Off Road. The site is currently zoned ONICD, Office and Institutional Conditional District, and RB Regional Business. Zoning districts neighboring the site include MD17, High Density Multiple Dwelling Residential District to the north, New Hanover County R15, Moderate Density Single Dwelling District to the east, City of Wilmington R15 to the southeast, CBCD, Community Business Conditional District to the south and southwest, and RB Regional Business to the west and northwest. The site is currently occupied by a church facility, an addition building, and a parking lot. Uses of the surrounding properties include a boat storage facility to the northwest, town homes to the north, a four lane right of way and single family dwellings to the east, and commercial uses and multiple family dwellings to the west. Staff has reviewed this application's alignment with the relevant adopted plans. The Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan is the only adopted plan that applies to this site. The Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan's growth strategies maps identifies areas of opportunity with corresponding policies to guide the look, feel, and use of new development. The site is located within a high density transition area of opportunity and along a high capacity transit corridor and existing green connection. The Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan also offers broader policy guidance to shape new development throughout the city. Staff assessed this application with the relevant policies and found modest support for this application's alignment with the plan. Key policies that support rezoning the site at 320 Military Cut-Off Road from ONICD and RB to ONI promote compatible infill, commercial development, and a mix of uses along major corridors. that will improve access to goods, services, amenities and housing options. Comments from the community are accepted leading up to a public hearing. Staff did not receive any comments in support or opposition of this application. To summarize the application and staff's findings, rezoning the site from ONICD and RB to ONI would create the opportunity for institutional, office, and less intensive commercial uses that could enhance access to neighborhood goods and services in the vicinity while providing an appropriate transition to surrounding residential areas. Commercial district mixed use, or CDMU, is also permitted in the ONI district, which would further allow for residential uses in the mix. Staff finds this application to align with the recommendations of the comprehensive plan, particularly policies encouraging compatible infill, commercial development, and a mix of uses along major corridors that will help to improve access to goods, services, amenities, and housing options. Staff finds the request to be reasonable in the public interest and consistent with the relevant policies in the Create Wellness and Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval. This concludes staff's presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions. And the applicant is here as well.

So the basis is that we're taking the RB, converting it to ONI, making it all ONI.

Yes. The site's currently split zone between ONICD and RB and making it all consistent.

So the RB was in the back?

The RB was the rare parcel, yes.

So we're just going to make it contiguous with ONI zoning?

Yes.

Makes sense.

Okay.

Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'd just like to recognize the applicant.

Thank you, good evening. My name is Cindy Wolfe and I'm here on behalf of the Peace Baptist Church. I appreciate staff's thorough presentation and just in the interest, as we started this process, this was in fact two parcels and yes, they were split, they are, they were split zoned. I wanted to point out that we have combined the parcels and so now it is a single parcel. We're seeking, obviously, that single zoning overlay for it. And beyond that, I think I'd just be available to answer questions. Thank you.

Okay, any questions for Ms. Wolfe? Okay, thank you. All right. City Clerk, have you received any additional comments

No, sir, I have not.

OK, so I'm going to open up the public hearing and ask if anybody in the public wishes to speak on this particular item. Seeing none, I will ask, are there any further questions from Council? I don't see any. I will now close the public hearing and ask for the wishes of Council. We have a motion to approve by Councilmember Joyner, second by Councilmember Andrews. Any further discussion? And I will also note that, Mr. Joyner, you need to read a consistent statement for the record, sir.

Thank you, sir. I move to approve the proposed amendment to rezone property located at 320 Military Cut-Off Road from ONICD Office and Institutional Conditional District and RB Regional Business to ONI Office and Institutional District and find it to be consistent with the relevant policies in the comprehensive plan. based on the application materials and the information provided at the public hearing and in the staff report and find approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. The proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding area and will apply a consistent zoning designation across the property. Okay, very good.

Everybody ready to vote? All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Pass unanimous on first reading. Is there a motion to waive second reading? Motion made by Councilmember Clinton Quintana. Second by Councilmember Andrews. Discussion? All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Item passes unanimously on first as well as second reading. Brings us to our next item of business which is item PH2 which is an ordinance granting a modification of the special use permit for a private recreation facility located at 4950 Holly Tree Road and 304 Chester Road. Staff received a request for a continuance. So Ms. Becky, is anything else new about this particular item?

I will defer to Mr. Chambers regarding the request. I know that we did hear from the community today that because they thought that it was going to be continued, I think some of them were no longer planning to attend, but certainly the request to continue, it is up to council whether or not you would like to grant that request or proceed with the public hearing tonight.

Okay. Mr. Joyner. I'm curious to hear from Mr. Chambers first. Thank you.

I would just echo what Ms. Hawk said. We received a number of calls from folks that were intending to not show up this evening because they heard that it was going to be continued to the 4th.

And those folks are residents who would have asked to be tendered as witnesses?

I can't answer that.

Okay. What was the reason that the petitioner gave for asking for a continuance?

I was told that one of their witnesses would not be present this evening.

Did they say which witness or why that person would not be available? Not to me, no.

Mr. Joyner, the attorney for the applicant is here and could answer those questions if you would like.

I think we should hear from the attorney on the motion to continue.

Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, members of council. My name's Corey Faithly. I am the attorney for the applicant, the property owner. Mr. Chambers is correct that one of our witnesses could not be present this evening. I don't have the details of what his conflict specifically was. He is our sound expert. As I'm sure the council is aware, our modification is relating to changing several of the existing proposed pickleball courts to PEDEL. which has a different sound wave frequency than Pickleball does. So we felt that was a critical aspect for the council to consider. We also do have, I suppose, a second basis for the request. We do have ongoing discussions with staff that we're undertaking regarding some of the proposed modifications to the conditions allocated to the special use permit that could have impacts on our site design. We have a meeting scheduled with staff on Friday to continue those collaborative discussions to ensure that the final proposal is aligned with the goals. And I did see a member of the community that was here earlier that did leave, but I do imagine many of them would have either wanted to speak or give some comment or be tendered as witnesses.

Okay. And I'm sorry, I didn't catch your name, ma'am.

I'm Corey Faithley. I'm the attorney representing the applicant.

Okay. Ms. Lee, did you represent them at their last special use permit hearing about a year or so ago?

I did not. The managing partner of our firm did, Mr. Samuel Potter.

What firm is that? I'm sorry.

Equitasco Partners.

Okay. So here's why I was not thrilled about the continuance notice at our agenda briefing yesterday. So probably more for the public certification. I'm sure you're very familiar with the permit if you're getting ready to argue it. But This is not local law. These are not our rules. We will not be voting in our discretion on whether we, as the seven council members elected by the public of Wilmington, responsible to the public in Wilmington, agree generally that this is a good idea. This is an application of state law which takes us into a whole other procedure where we have to go on record and say that we've not talked to our constituents about this. We've not gone and looked at the site. And, uh, our decision is not just a yes or no vote. It's not in our discretion. If you lose, you can appeal this to a superior court judge. And very candidly, I believe that the last special use permit, I asked the question, if you lose tonight, are you going to appeal? And the answer was yeah. So it is frustrating to me for a party to come before us when it is your burden of proof that the, that your special use permit should be granted. and yet you don't have your witnesses prepared and we don't have an answer to the question of why that witness is unavailable when notice was given to the community who themselves will be limited in their ability to participate in this. We will have to vote one by one on whether the community members who want to participate in this hearing can even speak in front of us. They will have to be sworn under penalty of perjury before they can comment, totally unlike the process that we just went through for this church. So I am quite frustrated that the petitioner who has chosen to take away my discretion as a representative in my community, says actually we'd just like to, I don't think that it is as flippant as oh, we'd just like a continuance. And I don't quite know the conversation that you had with staff, but that's how it felt to me yesterday when I found out that this was the process that we were gonna undergo.

Yes, sir, and understood as to your concern, certainly that is not at all the applicant's posture here. Understanding the burden that we do have to present evidence and we want to ensure that what we are hearing from the community is incorporated into the plan. We're hearing from staff and we are presenting experts such that all of you can sit up here and make that very important decision. is important to the applicant. I am certainly also glad to hear that members of the community were informed and did not come and spend their valuable time here this evening, uh, when we did have a proposed continuance. So, um, certainly I'm sensitive to the way that that was perceived and we'll be cognizant of that moving forward. I appreciate you sharing that.

Okay. So Madam, uh, Attorney, what, we just need to continue this particular item to a date certain?

Um, you need to take a vote on whether you're going to continue.

Okay, we have a motion to approve by Councilmember Andrews, second by Councilmember Lyle. Any further discussion?

So Mr. Mayor, is the motion that's on the floor the motion to continue? Yes, sir. Okay.

Okay, so we have a motion on the floor, second. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Item passes five to two.

Ms. Lee, just to clarify, you're requesting this matter be continued to the first meeting in August, which is August the 4th. That's correct.

Okay.

Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, our next item of business is- Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. I can't see you guys. It needs to be clear for the record that the motion, as the city attorney said, this item is being continued to August the 4th. Is that correct?

Ms. Andrews, you were the one that made the motion.

Is that okay? Yes, Mr. Mayor. Yes. Okay. Yes. Thank you.

You're welcome. Okay. Our next item of business is our ordinances. Item 01 is an ordinance making a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $1,837 to the Special Purpose Fund for the River to See Bike Ride and Brunswick Heritage Riverside Bike Ride. At this time, I'd like to recognize the City Manager, Ms. Hawk. Ms. Hawk.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, Members of Council. This item will be presented by Carolyn Caggia, an Associate Planner with the NPO.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and council members. The item before you is an ordinance to appropriate $1,837 to the Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization's Bike Ped Committee Special Purpose Fund for the annual River to Sea and Brunswick Heritage Riverside bike rides. The source of the funding proposed to be appropriated is from the sale of 2026 River to Sea bike ride merchandise, as well as sponsorships. The funds will be used for costs associated with planning for future year bike rides, which include event insurance, portable restroom facilities, event merchandise, and miscellaneous supplies to support and promote the rides, like printed bikeway maps. Passage is recommended, and if there are any questions, I would be happy to answer those. Okay.

Looks like everybody in the city council would be taking that bike ride.

We would love that.

Thank you. What are the wishes of council in respect to the ordinance? We have a motion to approve by Council Member Andrews, second by Council Member Santaguido. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? My name passes unanimously on first reading. Is there a motion to waive second reading? Motion made by Council Member Quintana, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Spears. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? I didn't pass unanimously on first as well as second reading. That brings us to our next item of business, which is our resolutions. Item R1 is a resolution establishing the Northern Riverfront Development District Committee. This I'd like to recognize City Manager Ms. Halk. Ms. Halk.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and members of council. Back when the city acquired the Skyline property in 2023, the area was assigned particular rights, title, and interests under declaration of easements, covenants, conditions, and restrictions, basically as an overlay on a number of parcels in the Northern Riverfront District that are subject to particular design guidelines and particular limitations. In order to fulfill all of the obligations under that process, it is now time to create the committee that will need to be put together so that when there are proposals for development within any of the identified properties that are outlined in red on the screen in front of you, then that committee is able to meet to review those, make sure that they are in alignment with all of the covenants and restrictions, and be able to provide that feedback or that confirmation that everything is in fact in alignment. The proposed committee membership would be made up of all of the members of council, including the mayor. You would all be voting members. And there would also be two non-city district property owners. So those are property owners who own a parcel that is outlined in red that would be appointed to the committee by the council appointments committee process. And then there would be a number of ex-officio non-voting members, including myself or a designee, the city attorney or a designee, planning director or designee, as well as a local architect. And that is just to provide the technical assistance and to answer any questions that staff may have or that council may have as you go through that process. So the request before you tonight is the authorization of establishing that committee in order to fulfill this process. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Okay. Do we have any questions? Okay. All right. We have a motion to approve by Councilmember Lyle, seconded by Councilmember Quentin Quintana. Councilmember Joyner?

Sorry, I do have one question. I didn't hit the button quickly enough, I apologize. So I'm not a fan of creating new committees for the sake of new committees. We have a really hard time recruiting volunteers. I see that this is going to have some non-city staff, non-council members on it as far as an architect from the community, property owners from generally this area of town. And I'm not looking to take anybody off that list or put anybody on that list, but I do want to make sure that this committee's work is going to have several touch points for community members to give feedback. There will be community workshops in the same way that we've been doing them around new parks and recreation facilities. There will be opportunities for groups like Wilmington Downtown Inc. and the Downtown Business Alliance to weigh in. I just want to confirm that, because I got some phone calls asking why some people were not on this list.

Sure, so certainly the makeup of the committee could be whatever council decided. So if you wanted to change that or add other people, you would certainly be welcome to. But the purpose of this committee is to ensure compliance with the covenants, which is essentially a yes or no. So it's a little bit more of a technical review. than what you're probably thinking of, which is more of a aspirational or what are we hoping to see or that kind of thing. It would be, for example, if you look at the parcels that are outlined and read currently, there are two towards the southern end of that page that are currently undeveloped. they would have certain things that they could develop by right. But it would need to go through this committee process or this technical review to make sure that it was in fact in alignment with all of these covenants. So it's basically a legal process as opposed to some of the other public hearings on rezonings that other people might be used to.

Understood, thank you. So that actually brings me to another question, which is on the broader topic of redevelopment of these properties. I know that we had requests for qualifications out. What is the status on the RFQs for sort of the vision building for this area?

Very glad that you asked. And just to clarify, if you look at the parcels that are outlined in red, there are a number of them that are not included in this district at this time. So some of the properties that the city owns to the north of Skyline as well as to the east of Skyline that are also held by some private property owners. The committee would be able to expand the footprint of this district if it so chose, which would then bring those properties under the same covenants and restrictions that everybody else is. That has not happened to date because A, we haven't had a committee to do it, but also when you put those covenants and restrictions on, kind of ratchets down some of the things that might be allowed. And so I think in the past, council was just waiting to sort of get everything up and running and then can determine what it wants to do with the other parcels. But to go to your exact question, we put out three different RFQs related to placemaking, urban design, and then some of the economic forecasting, and we had an overwhelming positive response. We had 18 submissions for one, we had 14 for another, and 15 for the third. I was actually part of a meeting just earlier today with the staff that did the initial scoring for the placemaking proposals. When I say that we're blown away by the expertise, the nationwide expertise that is interested in coming and working in Wilmington and really putting their talent into what we're trying to do in the Northern downtown area it's it's impressive we're very excited so um we were going to be providing a formal update to you all in a couple of weeks to let you know how that review was going and then we've also had some internal conversations with staff i was going to reach out to you all to determine the level of involvement that council wanted to have in some of the final selection of those firms or if you're just looking for a proposal for each of the three just to make sure that um there's appropriate buy-in and that council is also happy with the final choices that are being made okay last comment i just want us to keep our foot on the gas let's move let's move it's on i i hear you and i you know let's keep our foot on the gas let's have deadlines and timelines and i appreciate all the work that's going on yes and all of those deadlines and timelines were outlined in the rfqs and staff is is working on it um some of them spent the entire weekend going through all 18 plus 15 plus 14 proposals. So there's a lot of work that's being done.

Councilmember Law?

I'll just add that when I first saw it on the agenda, I thought it was more related to the master plan, too, so I can see how that would be confusing if you're super excited about master planning like I am, and I'm looking forward to seeing this coming, so I was glad to see this committee. I understand it's kind of a subset of what's really happening with the full master plan. I think when you were answering Council Member Joyner's question, you said the committee is going to have the authority to expand those boundaries. Is that for this particular committee with adding covenants to partials that don't currently have them?

Yes. For example, some of the parcels are owned by the city. There was a conversation previously about do we want to extend these covenants to some of those parcels because then it sort of puts additional requirements on what can and can't be done and that has pros and cons. So on the one hand, it can give more control. but on the other hand, it can diminish value, it can eliminate certain uses that you might otherwise be interested in. And so it's a conversation that council and the other committee members could have. And then also with the private property owners that are adjacent to this, they might want to be a part of it for whatever reason, or it could sometimes be a maybe a requirement of, hey, if you want to do this, you have to be in alignment with these covenants and restrictions. And so it's just a conversation to have at a later time. But it is a possibility if council is interested. Thanks.

And I'll just clarify that these are covenants that came with the land. These aren't covenants that the city dreamed up and put on the land.

No, we inherited these.

Anybody else? Okay.

Okay, thank you, Ms. Honk. We already have a motion to approve by Councilmember Lowndes, Councilmember Quintana. That was the first one, so that's what I'm gonna go with. So all in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Say aye.

Aye.

Passes unanimously. That brings us to our next item of business, which is this items to be brought forward by the council to the, by the city manager from the budget work session, follow up regarding the funding requests for community justice center and the film partnership. I know that doing the whole budget issue, we had a lot of work that we were working and doing. These were two items that we did not take a look at more in depth and, or we did, but it was, We passed on these and so we're bringing them back as the people, some of the folks are here with us this evening. I know former DA Ben David is with us and also We have the field partnership here with us also. So I'm going to turn it over to you, Ms. Hall.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and members of council. Once again, as was stated in the agenda briefing yesterday, the purpose of the conversation today is just to bring this topic back up. This was something that was sort of tabled during your budget work session conversations. So no decisions were made to officially include Either of these organizations in the FY27 adopted budget, but there was a request to bring them back once we had some clarification on what the county was doing with funding, what was or wasn't going to be included in the state budget. And so I wanna walk you through tonight sort of where we are with all of those things and then what options are on the table if council is interested in providing funding to one or both of these organizations. So really quick background, as mentioned in the spring of 2026, the city did receive unsolicited funding requests from both the Community Justice Center and the Film Partnership of North Carolina. Each of those was for $100,000. And then during your work sessions, we broadly talked about it, but council again opted to continue that conversation for a later date. A little bit of background on the Community Justice Center's request. They have not received funding from the city of Wilmington prior to making this request. But again, for FY27, it is $100,000 and the request did make note that they also desire to have that be reoccurring funding for the next three years. That is certainly something that council could just decide to take up in future budget conversations as opposed to making any kind of a long-term commitment. But I just want to put that on the table that that was what they specifically requested. In the FY27 budget year, New Hanover County has committed to providing the CJC with $300,000 from their budget, and I was messaging with the county manager today. They do expect that to likely be reoccurring funding, so they do anticipate that they are likely to be funding the CJC in future years. The last formal communication that we did have with CJC though was that we did inform them that there was no direct funding opportunity that could be part of the budget approval process. And I'll get into some of those reasons here on just some of the next slides. So if council does want to provide funding to the CJC, there are a couple of pathways that you can consider. The first one would be to just direct them to apply to our human services grant program. If you'll recall, that is something that is being revamped this year for FY27. Those draft proposals of what we will be seeking to go out to the community and request proposals for, those will be coming to you in the next two months. There is $783,000 set aside in the FY27 budget for this grant program, but it is, of course, a competitive process. We typically do get more requests for dollars than there are dollars available. So there are certainly not any promises or guarantees that would come from shifting to a recommendation for them to follow that process. And depending on how the eligibility criteria is determined, they may or may not even be eligible to apply. On the positive side, though, that is consistent with how other funding for nonprofits is treated. That is where we send everybody is if you want your dollars and you're a nonprofit, then we have this program for you, but you're going to have to compete. And we do not fund other organizations outside of that process. Option number two would be to consider a lease agreement to account for the space that is occupied by the police department within the CJC. This was something that I emailed back and forth with Mr. David about and was able to get some additional information from him on what they're paying annually for The space that they are in at the Harrelson Center building, I will say they are getting a heck of a deal on their cost per square foot. $17.08 is normally a monthly rate, that is their annual rate. But we do have some of our detectives and investigators and social workers who do occupy a portion of their space. And it's about 500 square feet, which is a fraction of the space that they have, but we are there. And so when you compute the numbers, that does create an equivalent rent amount of about 8540 annually for the amount of space that we're taking up. And then if you wanted to provide an equivalent portion of the administrative overhead that they also have in their annual budget, based on the amount of space that we take up, you could get another 4845 out of that. So what you'd be looking at maximum would be about $13,385 in equivalent lease funding if you were to just strictly divide out the numbers like that. On the positive side, that would be the most equitable approach from the sense that it does account for the city's actual use of space that right now we are not paying for. However, it is of course a much lower funding amount than the $100,000 that was requested by the CJC. And then if there were to see that funding through for future fiscal years, those would be new dollars that we would be looking for as part of the FY28 budget process. Number three is sort of building off of number two, but city council does have a contingency fund line that is part of the FY27 approved budget. There's $100,000 in that line that is for council discretion throughout the entire fiscal year that if something were to come up, and you wanted to allocate dollars, you do have that pot of money to be able to allocate from without needing to tap into other sources. So if council so desired, you could use that for direct funding or to fund a lease agreement if you were interested in going that route. On the positive side, using the contingency fund for a lease agreement does, create a clear differentiator from other funding requests that we might get from non-profits as far as why we might be looking to do something like this out of cycle and on the positive side the cjc does appear that they do have a sustainable funding source in the funding that is coming from the county and so their future looks pretty certain right now in terms of being able to cover the majority of their operating costs through other funding sources. On the cons side, early usage of that fund, $100,000 can go really quick, and we are halfway through the first month of the new fiscal year. And if you were to not make this part of a lease agreement, then that would be out of alignment with the typical process that we follow. And again, we would need to find funding in future fiscal years if you wanted to do this. Moving on to the Film Partnership of North Carolina. Prior history, the city of Wilmington has provided them with $400,000 total in the past. Those were non-recurring ARPA funds. The last round of funding that was made to them was in May of last year, so about 14 months ago, and that was 113,000 and change of the 400,000 total that they received from the city. Their FY27 funding request is $100,000. Looking at the other partners' funding, they are set to receive $100,000 from New Hanover County, but it is unknown at this time if that will be reoccurring or if those are one-time funds. And I do know that the film partnership was hoping to have some dollars in the state budget to sustain them. Unfortunately, those dollars did not come through. And so the approved state budget did not have any funding for the film partnership included in it. The last formal notifications, they were notified that the ARPA funding was ending. As it is for everybody, those dollars have to be spent and they were one-time funds. And then at council's request, the film partnership provided performance metrics to you all back in May when you were looking for some of the ROI out of the dollars that had been invested. So that had been sent to you previously. If council is interested in considering funding for the film partnership similar to the CJC but a different pot of money, you could direct the film partnership to apply for a civic development partner agencies development program grant. Unfortunately, though, those are three-year funding cycles, and we are, we have two years left. And so new dollars would not be available until FY29. And so all of the dollars for FY27 and 28 are accounted for. through prior allocations that council made. So unless you put more dollars into this grant program, they are essentially all accounted for for the foreseeable future. So this doesn't really help us for FY27. But again, if we're looking for consistency, ARPA recipients were told these are one-time dollars and there were not pathways for additional funds. and that would be also consistent with how we treat our other nonprofit civic development partners by directing them to that grant program. But as I mentioned, two years from now doesn't help an FY27 grant request, and it is of course a competitive grant process. We do expect it will be moving to the same kind of format that we have moved our other grant program too. And so there will be a different set of expectations and responses that we'll be looking for out of that process in a couple years. What that leads us to, that should say number two, because then the option here, if council is looking for the ability to provide funding to the film partnership and FY27, there are two contingency funds that you could look at if you so chose. The first one would be, again, that city council contingency fund of $100,000. And then there is a separate contingency fund for economic development purposes that is part of the FY27 budget that has $135,000 in it. On the positive, if you were to fund up to $50,000 of their request, that would be in alignment with the ratios of how the city and the county previously funded the film partnership of essentially a two to one was the funding ratio prior. So that would be in alignment with what the county has provided for FY27. On the cons side, it is again, early usage of that limited funding. and it is out of alignment with other ARPA recipients and nonprofit funding requests that the city receives. Additionally, at this point in time, I'm not aware of any clear source of sustainable funding for the film partnership beyond the $100,000 that they are receiving from the county. So the next steps would be for council discussion and feedback. And if there is consensus from at least four of you regarding how you'd like to proceed and the funding source that you would be interested in using, then staff would prepare a resolution to consider at your next meeting for one or both of these organizations. So tonight we're just looking for feedback to see if there is anything that council would like us to prepare for you to take formal action on at a future meeting. I know that's a lot, but happy to answer any questions that you may have on anything that was presented.

Let me also make a correction. We have former House Representative Susie Hamilton is with us here tonight who's representing the film partnership. Sorry, Susie. And we also have Tim Merrick with the school board that's also here with us this evening. At this time, I'd like to recognize Councilmember Andrews.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, so I really appreciate Steph, um, bringing this back to us. I would not support using contingency funds for any of these requests, for either of these requests because, because to me, contingency funding, um, should generally be reserved for, um, unforeseen or one-time needs, um, not the ongoing operating expenses. And once we begin funding recurring costs through contingency, um, and as you mentioned, We're two weeks into our fiscal year and we could drain both of these accounts tonight. We're creating an expectation that those requests can return year after year. That's just not sustainable. With regard to the film partnership, I do recognize the value that the film industry brings to Wilmington. However, if the organization is seeking funding for economic development, I think it should submit a detailed proposal. through our established economic development funding process, and that would allow us to evaluate the request, its anticipated outcomes, and its return to the city alongside of other economic development programs that also apply. And for the Community Justice Center, and I've toured it twice, and I love it. But the city, as you mentioned, the city has some detectives, and I didn't know about the social workers, so that's good too, who work out of the office space. And I think that I would absolutely consider doing a lease agreement to help them recoup some of that cost for the space. And I think your estimates are quite reasonable and for us to be paying our way. But again, I don't think it's a contingency. I think we have to find some form of recurring funding to fund that. And then I also believe that the broader costs are really, with the Community Justice Center, it's really a state and county function that we are HELPING THAT WE ARE PROVIDING OFFICERS TO HELP WITH THE PROCESS AND EVERYTHING AND I THINK THAT'S GOOD. BUT I WOULDN'T SUPPORT BRINGING BACK A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FUND EITHER ORGANIZATION FROM CONTINGENCY. I WOULD SUPPORT THE FILM PARTNERSHIP TO USE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDING PROCESS AND I WOULD SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY JUSTICE CENTER TO USE OUR COMMUNITY FUNDING PROCESS. I just think that that's the most transparent approach. You know, we had somebody come up tonight, Mr. Shabazz, talking about another organization that sounds very worthy of funding. We have so many. I've really never been in a place that has as many wonderful nonprofits as we have here in Wilmington and New Hanover County. And, you know, we want to make sure that everybody has an opportunity to apply for the limited funds that we have available. So that's my position. Thank you.

What I do know, I did speak to Ms. Hamilton and I think she had shared with me that the county put it through their economic development structure for three years, for three years. Something I would like to take a look at also from that particular structure is to look at the economic development portion of it.

Are you saying through our grant program that we currently have? Yeah.

Mayor Pro Tem. Great presentation, Becky.

Thank you.

Very clear.

I try.

Is, is either organization prepared to make a presentation or provide data to council at this moment?

We, we didn't ask them for that. Right. So this was really just a bringing back the conversation to see if that's something that council is looking for, then that could also be direction that you could give tonight. But we didn't ask them to prepare anything.

Right. Down the road, I think that's, that's something I'm going to be looking for. Sure. And I would also mirror the sentiments that have taken place before me as to going through the proper process to do this for both organizations. You know, we have relationships, well I have relationships with both organizations and with the heads of both organizations. And I would not want us to short any other nonprofits within this in this area. So I would love to see the details and the data that will support us doing something with both organizations, but not to circumvent or to short any other organization. We want to be fair.

So just to clarify, so what you're suggesting is that it would be part of the grant program that exists for both economic development and for community nonprofits? Yes, that's what I'm saying. Thank you.

Council Member Santaguido.

Thank you. Becky, thanks for the great presentation. I want to echo, it was very clear. Thank you for providing that. I'm not a no on this, but I'm also not a yes yet. There are some things that I think I just need to understand better. And I know both organizations do great work and have folks here tonight. I think it would be really helpful for me to understand what other funding sources are being pursued. We've talked about the county and the state, but I'm not sure what other development work is happening. With the nonprofits, I think that's useful for me to understand. I also think that if we're gonna be asked to circumvent our typical process, I would ask these organizations to provide the information that they would if they were applying on cycle. Whatever that application process looks like, I would like to see that same information and content from the organizations. To Mayor Pro Tem's point earlier, I don't want it to look like we're making an exception because we like the work that these organizations do because frankly, I love the work that hundreds of organizations do. I just want to make sure that we're making an objective decision. The information that we would look at for other organizations, I would ask the same for CJC and for the film partnership. Like I said, I'm not necessarily a no on this, but I'm not quite a yes either, thanks.

And just to clarify on that, because we are changing the process for the community grants, what is going to be requested may be different for each RFP. But that is something that if you wanted to delay that by a few months, like as an example, the CJC would at least have an opportunity this fiscal year to be submitting as part of that RFP process that would essentially align with when we would have clarity on what information they would be needing to provide anyways. So if you were desiring to do so, you could just say to the CJC to go ahead and apply for whichever funding opportunity they thought might fit.

I understand that. I also think that if we know now what we would be asking, I think it's fair to ask that now. These are requests that came to us in the budget cycle and we said we'll consider it once the budget is done. I don't want to just continue to kick the can down the road and not have a determination. So if we know what we would be asking now, I would ask for that.

And we don't.

But we will in the next six weeks.

All of that will be hammered out.

Okay, I think I just, again, I want to honor that we said that we would consider this after the budget for these particular organizations. So whatever information we can get that would look like the applications that we're going to get in the future, I think would be the most fair way to consider this.

Anybody else? Mr. Joyner.

So that would be a yes on both to bring forward a budget amendment allocating those discretionary funds which we purposefully earmarked in the budget for council to spend at some point in the year on initiatives in our community that we deem worthy. I would be proud to stand beside the Community Justice Center and the funding there, and I feel that we could defend that to our community, that we are gonna stand with law enforcement in Wilmington Police Department, in the New Hanover County Sheriff's Office, and with the people who are doing work to end violence against women and children in our community and are providing them with resources that are currently being drained away because of the impact that the state budget has had on legal aid, which is preventing people from getting much needed help in the civil system when it comes to domestic violence protective orders and things of that nature. And I would be really proud to stand beside the Film Partnership of North Carolina when we look at the state budget and see zero dollars for this initiative. And we heard tonight testimonials about people who have been helped by these kinds of programs and just a firm belief in this community that film equals jobs. And I think that's a core principle of ours and that we should stand by it. I totally understand folks wanting to be, it's hard to distribute dollars, right, when there's so many applicants who do such good work and need our help. But at some point, you have to tell people yes or no. And we have had this conversation over and over and over. And I will point out that we are in a procedural posture that is completely abnormal for this council. We don't do general policy discussions at the end of a meeting. So I'm not quite sure how we got to this procedural posture. But the idea that we have not had opportunities to ask questions of these organizations and to tell them what we needed to know and to get specific benchmarks from them. I disagree with that assertion and I think that it is time for us to give them an answer one way or another. Stop kicking the can down the road because just as we have been frustrated with the endowment constantly telling people a soft no by saying you need to go get city and county funding before we'll even consider you when really the answer is you're dead on arrival, we don't also need to be too polite to say no to people. If the answer's no, the answer's no, but I am a yes. It would be a yes for me. Thank you.

Could you please specify the dollar amounts that you would want to see in those?

I would do $1,000 for each organization per their requests.

100,000?

I'm sorry, what did I say?

You said 1,000.

100,000 per their request. I would match what they requested. And the information I don't have that I want at this juncture is, what has been our history for the $135,000 economic contingency, because I'm familiar with what has been in the contingency fund. I think that's how we kept the horses last year, if I remember correctly, Mr. Mayor, or at least in part, but I don't have it memorized what we've done with the economic contingency, but this is how I would allocate it. Thank you.

Thank you. And I do just want to, of course, let Council know that we have a economic development manager who will be starting at the end of this month, very experienced in that world. And so we do expect that to be a very active position that you will probably be hearing from them a lot as they find their feet and get rolling with the programs that we want them focused on.

Councilmember Law.

I'm very familiar with the nonprofit sector, and yes, this is only going to get harder. And the thread that I'm seeing with these two applicants and also with other nonprofits that I know is the funding from other levels of government is drying up, and so it's kind of a trickle-down deficit. to the city. But I don't wanna kick the CJC to compete. I mean, the council isn't even gonna be selecting those from the last I heard about the procedure there. The council isn't even gonna be selecting the actual recipients so much as just approving the RFP, is that right?

No, the final funding recommendations would come to council for approval, modification, or denial.

Okay, so they'll just be recommended by the CROC and then final? That's correct. Okay. But after all that, I'm kind of leaning toward the, we've had a long history with these two organizations and told them that it wasn't a formal process in the budget and now come back and now to keep dragging them through that, I don't think that's very professional. So I would like to support some funding for the organizations as well through a budget amendment, so.

And you support the same amounts? I would, yeah.

May I approach that?

Yeah, I'm a little confused as to what Councilman Joyner is saying as to us this not being a part of the regular process when it most certainly is a part of the process. This was brought to us during the budget session. And I know for sure when Ms. Hamilton came to me, I pointed her in the direction of, Deputy Manager Tom Mowen to apply as such. I don't know when you could come to a governing body and ask for funds and not provide any data. We're most certainly not kicking the can down the road. We're asking that they apply. That's a part of the process. And so, you know, we have relationships, right, but we're asking to actively be a part of this process. And as this governing body, I think that's the correct thing to do because there are a plethora of nonprofits in this community based on the relationship that they may have with any number of us who feel like they can just come in and ask for money and it'll happen. So, I mean, I respectfully ask that they apply. And I think certain members have been selected to have conversations with over others as it's gotten a little thicker about whether you get a decision or not. And so I would just say actively participate in the process.

Council Member Clint Quintana.

Good evening, and David, it's good to see you. And I am very familiar with the Justice Center as well. I remember you coming to channel. We talked about that for quite some time. So congratulations on being active and doing great work. Susie, also, thank you for your conversations. I think we've had a couple. regarding your need for funding. As I sit here and listen to my colleagues, I understand that there is a need for funding, not only with the two of you and your organizations, but with other organizations, as Mr. Shabazz earlier indicated as well. And I've heard those requests. Living Hope Day Center was here a few, maybe a month and a half ago. But there are a lot of organizations who are needing that funding. I'm not against giving you funding. What I would like to see is simply what my colleagues have stated is the data so that we're not showing what looks like favoritism. that's all I'm asking for at this time. So if you will just provide us with that data, um, we'll happily review it and make our decision, um, my decision as it stands right now. Thank you.

Councilmember Andrews.

Yeah, I wanted to thank everybody for their input, and I especially wanted to thank Councilmember Clinton Quintana for mentioning Living Hope because it's not like we haven't gotten other funding requests during the budget process, after the budget process, and I will go back to, you know, What is a contingency? A contingency is an unforeseen need and what we're being asked for now is really sustained funding because both of these organizations that are coming to us are absolutely in need of sustained funding, and I get that, that it hasn't come from the state, that it hasn't come from the federal government, that it hasn't come from other organizations. I get that. But when we talk about a contingency, we have the Living Hope Day Center that they're literally out on the street right now, and it's 95 degrees out on the street. That's an emergency to me. This is not. I know that one of the gentlemen, I don't remember his name, came up and spoke about what the film partnership had provided to the community college. I don't even know if we're talking about the same program here. I have no idea. I don't know if it's the same program or not. I agree. infographic that we got in May regarding the film partnership, it really did not provide us, it was difficult to interpret to really understand what we were spending taxpayer money on and what kind of return that we were getting on it. So I would need a lot more information than that.

Well, then everybody has a consensus here that we need to get more information and let's make a decision within how many, what did you say, six weeks, four weeks?

We will have clarification on the grant program in the next six weeks.

Okay, very good. All right. I'm sorry. Councilmember Lowell, you had a comment?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to mention that for anyone who's applied for and received funding from the city of Wilmington previously would have some pretty detailed reporting on file at the staff level somewhere. So I think that's where the, Field Partnership has provided us a lot of information already on the performance on their previous grant, so that's something that we could make sure the Councilmembers see and at least written proposals to help the framework for funding moving forward. Seems reasonable.

Thank you.

Councilmember Santa Guida.

Yeah, do we really need six weeks, or is there information that we know we're gonna need that we can start to ask for? I mean, I understand that we may not have a firm application process in place for another six weeks, but I just don't wanna unnecessarily delay. If we know that we're gonna want information about how they've used city funds in the past, let's go ahead and start to collect that information and ask for it so that we're not burning time as we work through this.

Sure, yeah, I mean things like your annual operating budget, right? There's some pretty basic things like that that we could certainly ask for. I think as long as they're clear that we'll be coming back and asking for more documents too, that it's not a one and done, certainly we can do that. I think that's fine. I just don't want to spend six weeks waiting and

have an avalanche of information coming. Really what I am looking for is more information from the organizations that are making the ask than what you showed us in this presentation. I understand fully what the organizations do. I fully support them. I think I just want something in writing from them about what they're asking for, what the past work has looked like, what this budget is going to be used for moving forward, and how they're going to report back to us on it. Thanks.

Anybody else?

So Becky, you said six weeks and I'm going to try to articulate this as best I can. They're sitting here today asking for funding and I'm simply saying I just want to see the data. I didn't want them to wait six weeks. I want to see what it is and where we can go from there because to Mayor Pro Tem's point, this was already in the budget work session. We just brought it back for a discussion. So sure, but what I'm hearing are two different things.

So one is that we want to align it with exactly what we're asking from others through a process that council has adopted the general framework for that process, but the minutia of what is going to actually be asked for of the applicants is still being determined. So that's one ask, and then it sounds like your ask is that you would just like A, B, and C that you think that they could provide today. And so those are two different things.

Right. For example, you're asking for $100,000. I don't have any data to look at to say this is, I'm not trying to be funny when I say this. This is worthy of $100,000. I'm just saying anything that I've ever made a decision on, I like to have the data in order to make that decision. I don't necessarily have the data in front of me. It's not being presented tonight. Sure. That sort of thing. I'm looking at Susie and she's like, I have it. I can get it to you. That sort of thing. I just want to see the data.

Sure, and happy to get it, happy to work with them to get it. The reason why it wasn't asked for is that what has been communicated is, as the discussion has indicated, there is not a formal process that they are following. So we have a formal process that does outline all of those things that everybody else goes through. These are two unsolicited requests that were put into writing. It was a letter asking for the dollars. And they were told, hey, thank you for this, but this is outside the norm. There is no standard mechanism or process for us to do this. We're happy to bring it forward because you've submitted it. And so we want to make sure that council is aware that it has come forward. But there was not a directive to go get that data because typically an unsolicited request would be sent to the formal process that exists. In this case, there was enough appetite by council that you didn't immediately direct them there during the budget work session. You just said that you wanted to bring it up once the budget was passed. And I think a lot of it was that we didn't want to get mired down with a $350 million budget over $200,000 requests. And so certainly we can do that and have that brought back and as it comes to us, we can go ahead and forward it to you all so that you have it well in advance of when this might come up again. But just know that that's why none of that was asked for because if you know, I guess the question would be then next year if we get five unsolicited requests outside of the grant process, you know, then, you know, we'll certainly let you all know, but it starts to open up a can of worms of then, um, you know, how does council want to do that? So until you say yes, we want to directly pursue additional information for these two in this way. That's why we haven't done anything.

I get it. It does open up a can of worms, but also I'm still thinking about living hope and so forth. Do we have metrics for economic development yet?

and related to the,

for this process for the economic development grant?

No, because that's a three-year grant program. And so there will not be new funding available until FY 29. And so everything that's in place was awarded a year ago. And so they are under contractual, I guess the contractual ability to collect all of their dollars from us. So that pot of money is spoken for until FY 29. unless council were to say we want to see more dollars in the FY28 budget because we want to change it sooner and we want to increase the funding that's available. But right now there's no new funding and so we wouldn't be changing that process for two years.

That's interesting. I'll put a pin in that.

Thank you. May I pray, too? Becky, can you provide some clarity on this? In your presentation, you said that the CDC could apply for the community, what now?

Option two. It's the human services grant.

Yeah, the human, okay. So, yeah, go, option two, please. Let me look at that.

So option two was the lease agreement.

Oh, so, no, so.

So the option one was the human services grant.

Okay. So, and they could do that.

tomorrow they can't do that tomorrow because the rfps are being written they will come to you all you will approve them then they will go out on the street so you all so it's still six weeks so yeah so you all approved that framework months ago that we took it outside we took it away from the budget work session discussion you've approved essentially a pot of money And then it will be distributed, certainly in this fiscal year, but it's now behind by a couple of months. So it'll be mid-year funding as opposed to before they were getting funding in July, but it was then getting all intertwined with regular budget discussions.

Cool, thank you. Council Member Andrews.

I've been so engrossed in the conversation, I almost forgot what I was going to say, but I did want to go back to the contingent. No, I'm not. It'll come to me. I'm just old. I did want to go back to the contingency fund. I think Council Member Joyner mentioned that maybe the horses were funded out of that last year. I don't think that happened. I don't either. I don't think that's accurate. But it does bring up a good question of maybe if you could just give us a report on, over the past few years, what we have used contingency funds for.

Sure, staff had pulled what you used it on last year, but we can go back three years if that would give you a better look at it.

Yeah, thank you.

That's right, Council Member Clayton Quintana.

Thank you.

Any chance that we can hear from the Susie and Ben David? Susie, I just wanted to hear from them, see if they had any comments, concerns, just wanted to speak with council about.

Thank you, Councilmember. Yeah, we have tremendous concerns. The organization's been in existence since 2021, so we are going on our fifth year. We have employed, provided jobs. That's what we do. We're an economic development organization. When we put people on a live television production set, they are paid. Most of the time, 80% of the time they're interns, people that would not have had an opportunity to participate in that kind of business before. They wouldn't have had the right connections into the community. We've also paid film and television production professional crew here locally when times were bad to act as mentors and to do training. So we create jobs. And so in our five year history we've created over 450 jobs statewide. 239 of them have been in New Hanover County alone. So we're looking at 64% of our total placement for interns and experienced crew members to train them. 64% of that is coming into Wilmington. I'm not really sure why it keeps coming up that there aren't any other funding sources. We received a half a million dollars from the state of North Carolina in 2023. We have just closed down that grant within the last 30 days. So to suggest that this isn't sustainable I think is unfounded. It's also incorrect that we have not done any reporting to the city. I assure you that the $400,000 we got from the ERA funds from the city of Wilmington We were reporting on a weekly basis back to the city of Wellington as well as New Hanover County and the other sources, the city of Winston-Salem and other sources that we received funding from. There has been a tremendous amount of reporting. I'm sorry that your staff was unable to provide that for you today, but the record is there and it's very clear. I went to the city a year or so ago and asked what the process would be for us to apply for additional funding and I was told there wasn't one. And so we've kind of been left in limbo trying to figure out what the process is. If we have to wait another two years to be in the economic development process, that'll be a huge hardship on the organization. We have a three-year contract with New Hanover County that's exactly the same as what New Hanover County and the city of Wilmington have with the Wilmington Regional Film Commission, as well as Wilmington Business Development and Wilmington Downtown Incorporated. The county treats us that way and has since the beginning. Also, the county gave us $600,000 of ERA funds in the beginning compared to the city's $400,000. By the way, you all were the first to fund the organization, so it's not a 50-50 split. Since that time, the county, of course, has given us additional funds, which the city has not. But all of those funds are spent locally. None of the state funds that we received over time have been spent in New Hanover County or in the city of Wilmington. They have been spent in other places in the state and the rationale behind that is that we were trying to show the rest of the state and frankly the General Assembly that we can pull employment opportunities from all over the state of North Carolina out of all 100 counties We thought that that would be something that would help us, help the General Assembly understand what the industry means, not only to Wilmington, but to the state of North Carolina as well. And I'm proud to say that we've worked with 29 counties throughout the state to spread that joy, and it did matter this year. We had a tremendous amount of support in the General Assembly and the House from a representative out of Forsyth County named Representative Donnie Lambeth. He helped us with our enhancements. He worked across the aisle and he worked with Senator Lee from New Hanover County to get those enhancements done. Our program has worked. It has risen a lot of boats. People who have never had an opportunity before and they would not have had an opportunity because they weren't related to somebody in the industry. That's what we do. We put people in these situations, these positions that otherwise would not have been able to be there. And they build their resumes and they have jobs now in the industry. So, you know, we're just doing our work We're creating jobs, we're paying people to be there, which is not something that most workforce development programs do, and I think that's a big testament to the commitment that the state and New Hanover County and City of Wilmington have made, but if this is not, this is existential for us, and I would really hate to leave here with believing that the majority of this city council does not support workforce development for the film industry in this state. We are the hub of the film industry in this state. New Hanover County has stepped up. If the city of Wilmington can't do it, I'm not really sure what we're trying to do. You all are the people that know that this industry matters in New Hanover County and that it matters in North Carolina. So we appreciate your consideration and yes, we would really like some clear direction because at this point it's just been as clear as mud. But we have reported, and I'm sorry that information wasn't provided to you tonight, we were not asked to provide any information for this discussion either. I'm happy to take any questions.

I don't have any questions, but thank you for that information. I appreciate you. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, honorable members of the City Council, good evening. I'm Ben David, the CEO of the Community Justice Center, and I appreciate the opportunity to say just a few words tonight about our center. First of all, you might be aware that it was created from a $5 million grant from the New Hanover Community Endowment. We became a 501 corporation back on January 9th of 2024. But we're having the wrong discussion when we talk about us wanting nonprofit funding or competing against the more than 1,000 501 s in New Hanover County. The much more appropriate thing to ask is, is there another group of nonprofits standing before you right now that is given $2.5 million to expand the district attorney's office by 20% or opened up its own courtroom? or provided e-filing remotely for victims of violence and civil applications for 50Bs that I personally argue now on Friday mornings on behalf of the people who need lawyers. And we're talking about victims of crime. They have constitutional rights also. Most people think of the Constitution as protecting defendants' rights. And certainly, we all know about the Bill of Rights. But there's actually a Crime Victims Bill of Rights in our North Carolina Constitution that we uphold every day. What I would encourage you to think about is that the county just gave $300,000 in its budget. Michael Lee and the state of North Carolina came in for another $200,000 for this fiscal year. And what we're asking you to do is look at whether the Community Justice Center should be funded as a lease agreement. To be clear, we have 15,000 square feet immediately across the street from the courthouse. We were out of room over there for the 20 years I was the elected district attorney. We never had a place for victims. We've had a place for defendants. Now we have a place for the survivors of violence. The nearly two dozen justice officials who call the CJC home every day have been living rent free that whole time. We are here tonight to say, If you want this to succeed as a place where government comes to synergistically work on behalf of victims, at some point government needs to step up and fund it in a recurring budget. I know many of you on a personal level, and this is not wanting special treatment. You've never asked for any data from us. Happy to provide it. I've taken most of you on tours. For those of you who haven't come, it's a standing invitation. We bring in established nonprofits like Domestic Violence Shelter and Services, Carousel Center, Rape Crisis Center through Coastal Horizons. I not only greatly support them and have been on some of their boards through the years, but the last thing I would want to do is take any of the money that you were just talking about from them and put it into our coffers. We're talking about funding government operations right now. And we're talking about making sure that we are a one-stop shop for hope, healing, and justice for people who are the survivors of violence. Just one quick story and then I'll stop. The year I became district attorney, in 2004, we had eight first-degree murders related to domestic violence. Five of those women had protective orders in place and none of them had reported it to the police. What we tried to do was set up a family violence unit at the DA's office to co-locate a police officer from the WPD, one from the sheriff's office, and one of my prosecutors and victim witness assistants to be in 600 square feet in a group that we called the Family Violence Unit, which I renamed the Homicide Prevention Team. I'm absolutely certain it has saved lives through the years. What I did when we created this community justice center is we took two dozen, not just four people, into the same space and created 15,000 square feet instead of 600 and co-located all those nonprofits to deal with the trauma that people were experiencing and to have a safety plan. My prosecutors weren't able to fill out, because it's a civil case, protective orders. Now we get to do that. We have incredible professionals working alongside each other every day. If you want that work to continue, the grant for New Hanover Community Endowment runs out December 31. That's why the county has stepped up, that's why the state has stepped up, and that's why I'm asking for you to step up. It is something that we have to decide as a community whether we're going to support the Community Justice Center. I believe in asking the community for support, but I also believe that the core function of government should be to keep its citizens safe. And with every ounce that I have, we are trying to build something that I believe will be here for 100 years to fill in the gaps that I saw as 25 years of speaking for the dead, giving victims a voice, and trying to be the conscience for this community every time a crime occurs. This is the right thing by the people of Wilmington and New Hanover County and the state of North Carolina. New Hanover County has said that. The state of North Carolina has said that. I'm respectfully asking for you to say that tonight as well. Thank you and I'm here to answer any of your questions.

Ben, I got a question. Yes. So you said that you're asking for the lease agreement option, right?

That's all I've ever asked for. So you're not actively asking for 100,000, you're just asking for- No, I'm asking for the pro rata share of the lease plus the operating budget is roughly $400,000. The county's come in for 300, we need another 100. And if you look at the shared space that we have and the caseloads, you would be in for one fourth of that as the city of Wilmington. That's what I've consistently asked for and that's why I brought this screen up now. I'm not asking for funding from this pot of money that is from a human services grant that is competing against the other more than 1,000 501 s in New Hanover County. I'm asking for this one.

Understood. Well, I know you pay great attention and you've heard on many occasions that The City of Wilmington exists within New Hanover County. Correct. We've been actively trying to get New Hanover County to carry the burden, to carry their weight as it relates to us. In a lot of instances, we overcompensate for what should take place, not only in this city, but in this county.

I'm a city resident in addition to being a New Hanover County resident. I will say that in addition to the 300,000 they came in with direct funding to the CJC, they also funded an additional $430,000 to the eight prosecutor positions that were contemplated under the grant starting January 1st through June 30th. So they're really in for $730,000. Well, that's what, not to cut you off, but I mean, that's what they do.

We don't do that. The city doesn't do that.

And neither does the county. The state has historically done that, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. The county sees the benefit because they have seen the work of the members of the CJC. They've heard about the specialized courtroom for child abuse and domestic violence that never existed. Those cases sat for years behind car wrecks and larcenies and prostitution cases. Now it's in one courtroom with those dedicated members every Wednesday in courtroom 200. It didn't exist before all of this. We never had e-filing and the ability to remotely have a protective order filed from a cocoon of safety across the street from the courthouse. We've never had the ability for a person to receive services in one place without having to go into the same interrogation rooms for defendants or go through metal detectors like they've done something wrong. That's something that we've done at the CJC in two short years. And just some perspective. I ask you to call Mecklenburg County and take a look at what they're doing. They're building a very similar center to the Harrelson Center right now. They're at year three of construction, they're $55 million in, and they're still building. Our center won the award by crew this year for the top public space to be under $5 million in all of New Hanover County, where we took a former place of incarceration and turned it into a center for transformation. We did that in six short months, and we did that with some incredible work by a lot of collaboration. All the letters of support that have come in from the sheriff, the chief, the district attorney's office, the chief district court judge who sits on the board of the CJC, the people who are in the nonprofit community that I've just mentioned, the 175 community leaders that showed up for two business days, back in May to sketch out the next five years of the CJC. This is something, again, that I'm asking you to think of as city leaders right now, to be all in for making this something that survives a grant cycle of the New Hanover Community Endowment.

Two more things. Yes, sir. I do want to say that I'm not minimizing the work that you do. I think it's great work.

I've always known you've supported us and I appreciate it, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.

We've done plenty of things, whether it was trying to get money for legal aid years ago. So, you know, we do have a great rapport as it works, as it relates to the work that you do. And what was the other thing I was going to say? I was going to say if, you know, looking at option two, if that was just what you were asking for, you know, we give you $13,385 right now, but $100,000, and we're not saying no to you. We're just saying we would like for you to actively participate in this process. I'll be happy to do that. Thank you.

Council Member Castaneda.

Thank you. Thanks for your off-the-cuff presentation. I know you and I have spoke about the CGC before. Thank you for visiting. Yeah, and I deeply appreciate the work that you all do. You know this. We've had this conversation. Really, when I'm hearing you speak about some of the numbers and we're looking at the numbers on the slide, you're saying there's some discrepancy. This is why it's so important for me to see this request in writing, get the request from you. What is the funding that you're requesting? How will it be used? If the request is recurring, what does that look like over time? Put some of the metrics that you shared with us today in this conversation in writing for us to look at. I think that's a fair ask. I hope you feel the full support of me for this effort, but I just want to see the requests in writing so that we're not stuck in a situation where you're saying, well, this is the request and staff is saying, well, this is the request and this isn't. I just want to see it from you and I want to see it in writing like we would from any other applicant.

I have submitted it to the city manager in writing and I'm not sure how the numbers got up on here. These are not the numbers I've submitted. I've always submitted a request for $100,000. To be clear, the rent is about $280,000 for that 15,000 square feet. The operating budget is roughly $120,000. And we're audited and passed with a black pen. And I can show you all of those numbers. So that $400,000 is what we're talking about. It's really the overhead, so to speak, of the CJC. And what you're unlocking is over $3 million of taxpayers' money to work co-located under one roof. let alone all of the nonprofits that are also working there, many times funded by the new Hanover Community Endowment. For instance, you just mentioned Legal Aid, Mr. Spears. They're moving back into the third floor of the Harrelson Center at the end of the summer en masse, and they have a dedicated a lawyer who's going to work alongside me to represent folks in court every Friday morning for those protective orders. So this co-location is working. We just need to make sure that the lights stay on and that there's an operating budget. And we're really asking you to fund government, not a nonprofit.

Yeah, I understand that. And I think, so I'm hearing that a written request has already been submitted to staff. Can you please make sure that we see that? And if you haven't already provided the numbers that you talked about in writing, can you provide that so those can be forwarded to us as well?

I'm happy to do that.

Thank you. Appreciate it.

I just want to say thank you and appreciate your clarity. I've been over there many times and what you're doing is great work. I think what we're all sharing here is, and you guys too, a level of frustration because it starts at the top and it rolls down to the bottom. If they're cutting in Washington, if they're cutting at the state level, it comes down to the local level and everybody comes to us, whether it be the city or the county or the endowment or whoever it may be and say, help. And that's what we're seeing here in real life. And it's nice to cut. I get it. I understand you want to cut taxes. I get it. But at some point in time, it impacts everybody in your community. And somebody's got to either step up or they're going to step down, either which way. You know, nothing is for free. And, you know, what they do in Washington, playing this game where, oh, we're going to cut this, but we're going to go out here and borrow this money. We've got a trillion dollars we're paying in interest. Doesn't work. And this is what this is real life. And I get it.

but we shouldn't hold a bake sale to protect the women and children and sometimes men who come through the Community Justice Center that are in crisis and that need a safety plan. These are real life cases with real life consequences. I know it is. I know that all of you share our concern for public safety. I don't doubt the commitment of any of you. If this is about the process, I'm happy to adhere to any process. I tried to do that when I made this submission months ago in writing, and I was told tonight I should come and answer any of your questions and to not give a presentation, so that's why I came, and I'm trying my best to do that. If any of you need the information that I submit to the endowment or anybody else to say what we've been up to, I'm happy to do that.

Appreciate it.

Ms. Lowell.

I was trying not to get into the weeds, but here I am. I want to take this opportunity to mention for whoever's listening that we can't depend on the endowment for everything. Agreed. That's an easy kick the can to the endowment. Some people think that the city council can tell the endowment what to fund and what not to fund, and that's not the case. And another issue is if one source of income and the endowment is 100% of a nonprofit's revenue, they cease to become a 501 nonprofit. They just completely lose their 501 . So they become their own private charity, private foundation. We have to help the endowment help people. We can't just depend on the endowment. We have to decide what our values are and what's important to the city and get into it and commit to it. One of the things I like about this proposal is that supporting other groups in the Justice Center that are 501c3s, that really helps them leverage and I'm hoping that they can track that So that's where my weeds are going, that the nonprofits that are there getting the free rent thanks to the center, they can track that and leverage it towards some of their other funding. So I don't know if you have that information around.

Well, like Tracy Harrison, who runs the Keep Your Hands Off Me Foundation, she is an incredible advocate for the survivors of sexual violence who has office space and all the resources of the Community Justice Center on the fifth floor right next to me. There are other groups that are in there doing great work that rely on this. That's why I said I'm not wanting to compete against them. I ask you support Tracy. I think she does an amazing job. She needs that money. The government needs to support government. Getting back to what you just said, as the number one recommendation that came out of our strategic planning session was don't rely on a single source. You have to have funding from diversified sources. And so we've done that. In addition to private individuals who have stepped up to give to the CJC, as I mentioned, we've had great support from the state and the county. We are actively seeking other grant opportunities as well. And I'm very grateful for the support of the endowment, but I also agree that they need to see support for what this is from government as well. And that's why I've appeared before all three bodies, the state, the county, and the city. Thank you for your time tonight. Mr. Spears, I'm sorry.

One more thing. I'm along with JC in the weeds. We had a young man who talked about partnership, right? And you just mentioned partnership. But what was missed from the young man's presentation is where he operates right now, he's partnering with the City of Wilmington. He mentioned another nonprofit that the Mayor and I and Councilwoman Clinton Quintana that we have supported in an astounding fashion yearly when the county has not stepped up. So when you talk about partnerships, you can't minimize the capacity that we play in this area as it relates to funding, presence and a lot of other things that we may not get the credit for or people may take for granted. We don't want that to happen. I don't want to throw anybody under the bus or make them look bad, but if you're operating as a non-profit and you don't have a space and you're temporarily in one of our spaces and you're temporarily using our vehicles, that's a partnership.

That's a huge partnership. It is. I do want to mention, because I do know the organization that Mayor Britton was talking about, which I believe you helped all of us, we got together, was Voyage. Absolutely.

The Blue Ribbon Commission on the Prevention of Youth Violence became VOYAGE. We reduced violent crime by 28% by increasing graduation rates by 25% in the youth enrichment zone over a three-year period. Two out of three people in jail and prison are high school dropouts, so keeping kids in school is pretty important. What they've done 10 years in, and by the way, We incubated some of the best ideas and put them in the Harrelson Center through the years. That's what we've been doing. We did that with hometown hires. We're the first in the state to hold an expunction clinic where 500 people showed up and then put them back to work through what is now Step Up Wilmington. All of those things started in the Harrelson Center. What this grant just did, to be clear, is we took the abandoned jail tower that's been vacant for 20 years and created this incredible awesome that is the Community Justice Center. So it is a place. It's a place for nearly two dozen justice officials to work every day. But it's also a place for a lot of nonprofits to work collaboratively with them and have a seat at the table and meet every week consistently at an operations meeting. So when you're funding the CJC, in effect, you're taking care of a lot of different groups that are all in the fight. And that's why I just stand before you to say, put your money where your mouth is and fund the CJC. I've never asked the city for money before this year. And the reason I'm asking for it for this year is because it goes into next year when the funding that we've had for the new Hanover Community Endowment runs out December 31st. You're on a fiscal year, they're on the calendar year. And so I'm looking ahead, and I want to make sure that we're leaving this in a place that there is recurring money, just like the county has said, and just like I think we're going to need in order to make sure that the person who will replace me is going to have a runway to really take this to the next level.

Thank you. Thank you for your time tonight. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you very much.

My question is for the city manager. So in the event that we get this information, this data that we need, what are our next steps in order to get an approval for funding?

Sure, you are in unchartered territory with this. So again, every other nonprofit request is sent to our grant pots of money. So once you get the information that you've requested tonight from these entities, then we would be looking for a direction from you all as far as what dollar amount you would want in a resolution to come forward for you all to then vote on.

Thank you.

Sure.

And, uh, Mr. Mayor, I do have one other walk-on item, uh, tonight, if you all will, um, consider waiving the rules in order to, uh, consider it.

Okay.

We want to waive the rules to listen to this item that, um, our city manager is going to be bringing forward.

You want to tell us? It's an easy one. So the clerk is passing it out right now. This is just a resolution authorizing myself to apply for the 2026 Department of Homeland Security port security grant in the amount of $468,758 with $117,190 local match. for the grant match portion of it. These are items that were submitted as part of the FY27 budget process that we believe that we can secure some grant funding in order to help pay for them. The reason why it's a walk-on is the deadline is coming up very quickly, and so that's why we are here tonight.

We need to waive the rules. We have a motion to waive the rules by Councilmember Andrews, seconded by Councilmember Santagrida. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Passes unanimously.

Okay, so again, this is just a grant application. We do have a grant match fund that can cover the $117,000 and change if we do receive this grant that we will be able to come up with the matching funds. If we are not successful in receiving this grant, then we would be looking to need to tap into some asset forfeiture dollars that we have, but this would save us from having to do so. So we believe that this is a good, match for the grant requirements and we want to move forward at this time. If awarded, it would provide a SWAT robot and also some technology and software for our communications command center.

Yes, sir. Mayor Pro Tem. So that's an additional robot, right? Don't we have one?

The robot needs replacing.

The robot's broken?

The robot's old.

So the action that you need for us to take is to go ahead and vote on this?

It's just to pass the resolution that will allow us to apply for the grant.

We have a motion to approve by Mayor Pro Tem Spears, second by Councilmember Quintana. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. I can't vote, so because of the- I can't vote. Thank you. A voice that would say it was unanimous. Thank you. Okay. This concludes the regular agenda. Are there any items brought forward by our city manager?

No, sir.

City attorney?

Yes, sir. We do have a closed session at the appropriate time.

Okay. Madam clerk?

No, sir.

Thank you. Okay. Councilmember Santaguido?

It's good to be back.

Good to be back.

I hope everybody enjoyed the break. It's great to be up here with you all working again. Thank you. That's it.

Council Member Andrews?

Yeah, I just wanted to say that I attended not the first, but the second Ask an Arborist session this morning because there was actually one at 9 and one at 10.30. And Council Member Joyner and I attended the 10.30 one. You didn't attend the 9 o'clock, did you?

I did not make it to the first one. You get that extra point.

No, I didn't, I didn't either. Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you said you made it to both. No, I attended, I was about to say I attended the first one, but then I remembered it was actually the second one. And it was fabulous, and I really wanted to thank staff for coming up with that. We had probably, I don't know, I don't count crowds very well, but we probably had about 20 or 25 people there. from the neighborhood and I heard all about the difference between a live oak and a laurel oak and I still couldn't identify them without my little plant app. But it was really good information and I think it really helped the residents to understand why some trees have to come down. So thank you to staff very much for that.

It is, I guess it's good to be back. Almost, we were working even though we weren't here. But we're officially back. I guess July's a busy month for the Spears household. Two of my grandkids had birthdays. And today is my son Asher's 15th birthday. So happy birthday, Asher. We're almost back to school, starting quarterback. NFL, here we come, baby. I need to retire.

Councilmember Clinton Quintana.

I think I'll just toot my own horn. Next Monday is my birthday and so I've tried to celebrate all month but it's been a bit trying just due to some family illnesses but I'm still positive and I think that's the you know, energy I'll give for everyone else is that regardless of what's going on, try to find the positive in everything. So think about me next Monday. I will not be anywhere to be found, maybe on the beach somewhere with my toes in the sand, but happy birthday to me.

Do you want me to get you a cake? You know I'm known for getting people cakes.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's a little belated, but this is the first meeting we've had in FY27, so happy FY27. But what's belated is my happy anniversary, happy one year anniversary to our city manager. who's just wrapped it up and I as a new council member I've just really appreciated how patient she is and I've learned a lot from her as I've gotten through the first I guess half year of our of our term she's a great problem solver she is super smart and doesn't miss a thing she's got this great ability to see things at this high level and and analyze it and also dig in deep into the details and so I've learned So much from her, and we learned during the budget process that not only is she super smart and understand the numbers, she'll go to the mat for her staff. And I've had dozens of staff members tell me how much they love working at the city, and that means everything, because first and foremost, the city is an employer. So happy anniversary, city manager. Thank you very much.

Council Member Joyner.

I have a, sorry I'm gonna speak in legalese probably, I'm gonna slip into it, but I have a litigation update related to Cape Fear Public Utility Authority. I'm sure anybody who has been paying attention to the news has seen that Chemours is currently in a 30-day window to sign a settlement agreement with the United States. Environmental Protection Agency through the Department of Justice as well as the State of West Virginia's Environmental Department. That does not affect CFPUA. We have our own separate lawsuit. We continue to move towards a jury trial, hopefully in the spring of 2027, where we are aiming to hold Chemours accountable for the money that we have had to spend cleaning up their mess before the Cape Fear River water gets to your faucet. Our lawsuit continues and we are aggressively litigating that. The federal government and the West Virginia lawsuit does reference Fayetteville Works. It also references New Jersey and West Virginia. Unfortunately, it prioritizes North Carolina last. If you look at the outcomes of that settlement, West Virginia is clearly prioritized, New Jersey gets some things, and we get the short end of the stick. So I will be submitting a letter of objection to the Department of Justice to weigh in on that lawsuit, saying that they should not settle because it doesn't prioritize North Carolina enough. But even if we find out in the next few weeks that it does settle, I want to make sure people understand CFPUA's lawsuit continues to move forward, and we are still going after all the money that Chemours ought to be responsible for for polluting our Cape Fear River.

Thank you. So I want to ask a question. I know that we've had a lot, at least I have, I don't know about the rest of you, but I've had a significant amount of calls about these trees that are coming down around Live Oak Parkway. I'm just wondering, Becky, is there any way that we can give these trees a reprieve until we have a way to look and educate the public and also get a clear understanding as to when we cut them, why are we cutting them, because this has become a pretty significant issue, not only for South Lightwood Parkway, but all over the community. There's got to be a better process when we go out and start cutting down trees in any neighborhood to share with those people why we're cutting them down. That neighborhood specifically has been wounded over and over again because of Duke's power coming through there, cutting. This is the third year, I think out of a 10, third year out of 10 years that they have gone through there and they have cut again. And I know that people are frustrated there, they're upset, and we may have very legitimate reasons as to why we're taking them down, but they've been there for quite some time. They look alive. I'm sure there's some internal issues within the tree that needs to be the reason that you're asking for them to be cut down. I know there was a big neighborhood meeting there, but could we at least put a reprieve on these until we have a much thorough understanding for this council to understand when we're taking them down and why we're taking them down? Is there any way we can do that?

What I would say, Mr. Mayor, is that the public health life safety is going to be paramount in making that determination. And so I would not be prepared in this moment to promise that those trees should have a reprieve because I haven't talked to staff to know what is the risk tolerance level that they have and how quickly they need they believe that they need to come down. They do believe that the trees are diseased and that they're at the end of their life. And so even if there was a reprieve for these particular trees, the determination from competent qualified staff have determined that they do in fact need to come down, which is unfortunately something that happens to all trees at some point in time. In terms of the public communication and outreach, there is a robust process that has been brought to life. Appreciated the shout out for the Ask the Arborist. There is a new signage that is now going out. There will be public communication going out about where we will be working the signage with the QR codes and the ability to find out more information. And we're also working on some additional information to help educate the public about what they are looking for and what goes into how they make the determination. So all of that is happening as we speak and some of it is already in place. That will be citywide, that will be for all tree work that we are looking to do unless it is an absolute emergency like must come down. this minute. But we've also had a conversation just today about some technology. There's some equipment that we can purchase that I believe, I'll defer to the attorney, but I believe we can use some of our tree mitigation funds to pay for it. But it essentially x-rays into the tree that sort of, I guess, definitively proves some of what they're talking about that staff would like to have because it is also helpful for them in making these determinations. So I do anticipate that we will be procuring that equipment one way or the other. But in terms of these particular three trees, I would need to defer to staff. And we don't have the arborists in the room this evening.

Well, I just like a better process. It's how we engage the neighborhoods and the community. whether it's a tree arborist, however you put that process together, I'd like to at least have a much better detailed way that we communicate with the community because it's just not there. It's been at Sunset Park, it's been in Forest Hills, it's been in Lincoln Park. It's been in almost every community when we have to go down a tree and then you have obviously self-imposed tree arborists that live out there that may not have a tree arborist designation, but they think they know more about it. To give us some definitive ways that we can communicate, but also the type of tree you're going to plant back. That's a whole other issue in itself is if you're going to take it down, When are you going to replant it back? I know there's a planting season, but I'd like to get a much more detailed view as to how we do it. This community is crazy about trees. I know a lot of it is dictated in regards in development with the state dictates or doesn't dictate, but when we can make that decision and we can save trees, or we can work with the people from Duke, which by the way, the way they take care of trees is atrocious, and they get away with so much. But I would like to have a much more detailed plan that you can share with this council at some point in time in the very near future because this seems to be an ongoing issue over and over again. When you see trees, they look alive, they're green and what have you, but the arbors are saying they're dead and they need to be removed. We'll get that pulled together in the next couple days. It makes everybody's life easier. What's that?

We'll get that pulled together in the next few days and sent to you.

Thank you. Okay. I'm gonna make the motion to enter into a closed session pursuant to the provisions of North Carolina General Statute section 143-318.11 and in order for the city council to one, instruct city staff regarding the city's negotiating position concerning the possible acquisition of real property and two, to consider the qualification, competence, performance, character and fitness of public officers or employees. The closed session will be held in the Charlie Rivenbark room behind council chambers and at the end of that closed session, Council will reopen its public session and adjourn at that time. So is there a motion? A motion made by Councilmember Clinton Quintana, seconded by Councilmember Andrews. Any further discussion? All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? I pass unanimously. We will now go into closed session.