come to order. m. I'd like to officially call this work session of the Durham City Council Durham City Council to order for purposes of faithfully discharging the business of the people of Durm. I want to greet our executive staff today.
His honor, the mayor is in route. He'll be back uh here with us shortly. Uh to all of you in chamber with us today and to all of our residents and neighbors on whatever platform you may be viewing, uh thank you for being with us uh this afternoon. Madam Clerk, would you please call the role?
>> Sure. Thank you, Mr. Mayor Prom. Mayor Williams is in route.
>> Mayor Prom Middleton, >> I'm here. >> Council member Baker >> here. >> Council member Cababayero >> here. Council member Cook >> here.
>> Council member Freeman >> and Council Member Wrist >> here. >> Thank you. >> All right. In chair's opinion, we have established quorum and we will go about uh the business of the city.
At this time, I'm going to yield to my honorable colleagues for any announcements they may have. Council member Cook. Good afternoon. >> Um good afternoon.
Just want to welcome everyone. I don't have any announcements. Thanks. >> Thank you, Council Member. Council member Baker, good afternoon.
>> Council member Cabierro, good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. Just wanted to say uh thank you for everyone who helped put on the strategic plan refresh this morning, including the consultant and to all my colleagues for the really lively and good discussion. >> Thank you so much, Council Member Ris.
Good afternoon. >> Thank you, Mayor Tam. Good afternoon, colleagues. Good afternoon, residents and staff here.
Thank you for being here. Um I just have two things. I will ask um to add a matter item under other matters and that's to add a resolution on bofilic cities. I'd like to to I'd like to add to the other matters with the intention of bringing that to our work session our first work session in October.
Okay. The other thing is um I do want to just want to make sure I've been getting a lot of as we all have been getting all the emails a lot of emails from folks in the Watts Hillale um uh Watts Hospital Hillenddale area about a lot of the I think water and sewer rehab as well as Google fiber going on there. So, I just want to make sure the manager and staff are aware that in communicating to residents, there's been a lot of concerns about about traffic disruption, about potentially, you know, losing their internet, you know, gas lines being cut.
So, I don't know all the details, but wanted to make sure you're aware of that and staff and communicating with the residents about that challenge. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor Prom.
>> Thank you, council member. You you did ask for something to be placed this biohilic resolution to be placed on the next um agenda >> or like on other matters to discuss putting it on the >> today other matters >> today. Other matters. That's right.
For the purpose of like putting the resolution on the work session >> unless you had some you wanted to engage in conversation about it. I think we can just get a thumbs up now that we'll put it on >> put Yeah. >> If without the next work session. >> Yeah.
Okay. Great. Thank you so much. Okay.
>> Thank you, council. >> All right. Um, we'll go ahead and move to priority items by our executive leadership team. At this time, I'm going to yield to the city manager.
Good afternoon, sir. >> Good afternoon, Mayor Prom, members of council. The city manager's office has several priority items this afternoon. Uh, agenda item number six. This is amendment number four to the south wetland and stream restoration design services contract CT14277. This item does have a presentation that will be offered during the work session
today. Uh, agenda item number 13. com for digital plans submittal and review. Uh due to some time-sensitive issues, we are asking for council to suspend the rules and vote during this September 18th work session so that we may execute the contract in time for uninterrupted service.
For agenda item number 19, report on wildlife feeding. This is a supplemental item that has been added to the agenda. Uh and for agenda item number 21, interlocal agreement with Durham housing uh with Durham County for the provision of housing assistance and related supportive services FY2526, a supplemental item was added. >> Thank you.
Those are my >> Thank you, Mr. Manager. I'll go ahead and take action on your request to suspend and vote on item number I believe that was 13. >> All right.
com for digital plan submitt. Colleagues, I'll entertain a motion to suspend the rules. >> So moved. Um, do you have a question? Second, >> sure. I have a motion and a second uh to
suspend the rule. Let me go and suspend the rules and then you want to speak directly to the item, right? >> Yes. >> All right.
Let's let's go ahead and uh I'll entertain uh we have a motion to second to suspend the rules. All in favor? >> I >> I those opposed. >> We're still going to enter.
I just wanted to go ahead and suspend the rules and and then we'll we'll take because your comments are germane to the actual item, then we'll take up the uh Go ahead. What was your question? I just want to know about the uh need for the rule suspension on this item. >> Do I have a resource person and development department? com folks. Um this is a software used to transfer large documents um to the the city for uh development review
purposes. Um it's uh important and much needed for for our ongoing services. And so we um given the delays that we had uh with our negotiations with them um we can't uh afford um a delay you know waiting for the approval of the contract. So um it would uh hinder our ability to provide that service.
>> Mr. Binsky, am I correct that there were uh negotiations for renewing this contract started in a normal timely manner that our attorney's office I don't want to speak for our attorney's office, our attorney's office requested some changes to the vendor's uh contract language. The vendor was unresponsive. Uh we tried in good faith to get those resolved and finally reached resolution, but in so doing used up the rest of the existing contract time. And so that's what created the time-sensitive request
for renewal. We didn't have approved language until just before this work session and the contract expires in September. Am I getting those facts straight? And madam attorney, is there anything you want to add to that?
>> Uh, you got that exactly right, Mr. Manager. I will add I believe this contract previously had fallen within the manager's contracting authority and the vendor has raised their prices and put it into the purview of the council as well. So that was another factor that caused it to even be on your agenda.
>> That's correct. >> Follow question on that. So um I'm I'm familiar with box and move large files often. Um there are other companies that do this.
Do we have concerns about this vendor giving given the lack of responsiveness? >> So we've been using box uh for 5 years ever since um we converted to uh digital review um as a part of COVID response. Uh we have no concerns in terms of the service they've been providing. Um the uh slight increase um has been uh
somewhat expected. It was just right at that cusp um in terms of the uh permissions. Uh when we move to our nextg um development review software um we may no longer need it. So this is potentially or most likely a very temporary um solution.
So, you think that it might not be renewed after the one year is over? Well, we don't know, but >> yeah, I don't know, but but yeah, certainly not long term. >> Okay. Thank you.
Those were all my questions. >> Thank you. Uh, council member uh colleagues, I'll entertain a motion to authorize a city manager to execute a service contract with Box, Inc. 50.
>> So, moved. Second. >> I motion in the second. All in favor?
>> Those opposed? All right. Item 13 is disposed of. Thank Thank you, Mr.
Manager. Um, I'll yield now to our uh attorney for any priority items she may have. Good afternoon, councelor. >> Good afternoon, Mayor Prom. I don't have any priority items for the council's consideration, but with your indulgence, I would like to make a brief
introduction. >> Of course. >> Um, I'd like to invite Tony Baker up to the lectern to introduce himself. Uh, I sent an email around earlier, but just got to it today.
Uh, Tony is joining us in the city attorney's office. Um, and he is taking on the tremendous task of being the chief legal adviser for the Durham Police Department, which is the largest administrative unit in the city and a heavy lift for one person. But I just wanted him to be able to say hi. >> Thank you for the introduction and very pleased and excited.
>> Hit your microphone button, please, sir. Right there on the right. >> Sorry, Tony. >> Thank you.
I got it. Thank you. Thank you for the introduction. Uh, very excited and pleased to join Kim's team um and join the city of Durham. I can tell you as I was looking and speaking with other attorneys, municipal attorneys, but even folks that represent cities, um they all uniformly spoke very highly of your city attorney's office and of Kim and and very much encouraged me if I could get an offer, which I was very thankful to
receive, to take it immediately, um which I did. So, very happy to be here and and thank you for the introduction and for the welcome. Yeah. Thanks for joining us.
>> Thank you, folks. >> Welcome aboard. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
Appreciate you. All right. At this time, I'll yield to our city clerk for any priority items she may have. Good afternoon, madam clerk.
>> Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Mayor Prom. On the city clerk's office does have one supplemental item.
It's item number 20 to add a new subcategory, section F in the code of ordinances, chapter 10, article 6, section 10-241, violation penalty fees as proposed. >> All right. I uh yeah, we we'll take that up under >> other matters. Thank you, madam clerk.
All right. Thank you uh to our executive staff. At this time, I will read our administrative uh consent items that we will be dealing with today. Of course, any of these items can be pulled by a member of the council or a member of the public. And
I'll begin uh reading city clerk's office. Item number one, approval approval of city council minutes. Departmental items, audit services department. Item number two, 2025 fiscal year in inventory performance audit August 2025, budget and management services department.
Item number three, request to carry over funding from fiscal year 2024 to 25 to fiscal year 2025 through 26 to amend the fiscal year 202526 budget, capital improvement plan, CIP, and internal service fund spending plans. >> Pull out. Item number three is pulled under our engagement from our engagement department. Item number four, grant project ordinance accepting through Central Pines Regional Council and North Carolina Department of Information Technology digital champions grant for technology acquisition for digital digital literacy training under environmental and street services department. Item number five, contract amendment number four for SD 2021-06 municipal separate storm sewer water system MS4 inspections. Item number six,
amendment number four to South Ellerby wetland and stream restoration design services contract CT-14277. This is a presentation slated to go 10 minutes from our finance department. Item number seven, resolution to authorize the execution of opioid settlements with secondary opioid manufacturers Purdue Pharma LP and the Sackler family and approving the third supplemental agreement for additional funds from opioid litigation SAF-3. Item number eight, resolution author authorizing the virtual city auction.
Item number nine, rewrite of resolution designating city manager contract approval thresholds, formerly number 9673. I'll >> pull that one. >> Item number nine is pulled. The general services department item 10, second amendment to the city of Durham and the Carolina Theater of Durham, Inc.
building and services agreement. or planning and develop planning and development department. Item 11, resolution to recognize Merrick Moore as a Durham Heritage Community. Item 12, revisions to historic preservation commission's interlocal cooperation
agreement. com digital plans. com for digital plan submitt and review. That item's already been taken action on per the uh manager's request from a technology solutions department.
Item 14, contract for information technology research and advisory services. Item number 15, contract with Open Sesame, Inc. to enhance the city's learning content for transportation department. Item 16, letter of request for North Carolina Department of Transportation to conduct a feasibility study for a passenger rail station in Research Triangle Park.
>> Don't want to pull up, but I just want to say thanks to the manager and staff for putting this on the agenda. >> That's great. >> Duly noted. and for public hearings uh from our planning development department to be heard at our Monday uh council meeting.
Item number 17, local historic landmark designation the chicken hut. Item number 18, consolidated annexation heartland and heartland park subdivision. And I believe a member uh of our community has pulled that item uh
to speak on that today. m. uh virtually. I have Darren Lang Dean Langley and that citizens matter item number 18 is Sarah Thielen and then in-house with us today uh I have Jack Holtzman Milo Greyber Ezra Gustaf Norberg and Reebeck Nick Mloud looks like Doran Doris Batista Odonna Batista Italio Medalius and that's all the cards I have >> those were for speaking on item 20 >> Oh these are all Okay, they're not okay.
I thought they were citizen matters. Readings fundamental. All right. Uh for we'll move now to our citizens matters to be heard at one.
Madam clerk, would you please uh make Darren Langley hearable? >> Can you hear me? >> Mr. Langley.
Good afternoon, sir. Thank you for being with us. You have three
minutes. >> Good afternoon. Can you hear me? >> Hey, Mr.
Um, Dang, if you would suspend for a second. Let me uh continue the reading with supplemental items under housing and neighborhood services department. Item number 19, report on wildlife feeding. Item 21, interlocal agreement with Durham County for the provision of housing assistance and related supportive services uh from the city council or uh city council approval of ordinance revision to chapter 10 article 6 housing code section 10-241.
And that is the ending of the uh reading of the uh published agenda. All right, we'll go now to Mr. Langley. Mr.
Langley, uh if you can hear me, you have three minutes, sir. Thank you for being with us. >> Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tim, members of the city council. I am Dewan Langley. I serve as the executive director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Foundation. It is an impact driven nonprofit committed to advancing equity
and opportunities for boys and young men of color through competency based learning, strategy centered mentorship and career focused skill development. Our mission is to dismantle systemic barriers and expand pathways to academic achievement, careers, economic mobility and leadership. In Durham, we often talk about shared prosperity. But for too many boys and young men of color, that prosperity feels the same.
At the Charles Hamilton Houston Foundation, we make it real. We do not just tell boys and young men about opportunities. We walk with them step by step until those opportunities become career stability and mobility. Let me share the story of one of our young men who pursued a trade in a high demand career pathway.
He graduated from Southern School of Engineering, energy and sustainability. He worked as a chef at Frankie. But like so many of our young men, he experienced trauma, the loss of a close friend to gun violence. He wanted more than just a job. He wanted a career. We met and he
learned about the electrical line technician program at Durham Technical Community College. I invited him to join me for an information session and to our disappointment, the program was full and he was placed on a waiting list. Then CO 19 hit. He lost his job.
But instead of lo letting frustration or despair take over, we encouraged him to stay focused on his career goals. When the program reopened, he enrolled for 3 hours. He trained to climb holes, maintain power lines, and build the state's energy infrastructure. He stuck with it, and on December the 18th, 2020, he earned his certificate of completion.
We helped revise his resume, prepare for interviews. Shortly after, he secured a full-time employment as an electrical line technician with the utility company, earning over $60,000 a year. Now five years into his career, he is engaged to be married and welcomed his first son. He was even able to purchase a truck for his grandfather who raised
him. When I text him with my pride, he replied with gratitude, not just for the training, but for the support, encouragement, and strategy our career pathway program provided. His story is just one example, but it shows what's possible. It shows that when boys and young men of color are given consistent guidance, access to opportunities, and the right support, they not only avoid cycles of violence and poverty, they step into high demand, highpaying careers.
They strengthen Durham's workforce, they expand our tax base, they create safer and more prosperous communities for all of us. That is what we mean by shared economic prosperity. But here's the truth. We cannot achieve this alone.
For Durham to truly fulfill its promise to for equity and inclusion, boys and young women of color must be at the center of our shared prosperity. >> Mr. Langley, thank you so much. That's your time.
>> Mr. Langley, thank you. Mr. Langley, thank you so much. That's your time. We always appreciate you being with us.
Thank you. Right, Madam Clerk, if you would make Sarah Thielen. >> She's for number 18. Do you want to do that one?
>> Yeah. It isn't a a uh you you have her listed as a citizens matter, right? Or you >> She's not a citizens matter. She's number 18.
>> Okay. All right. >> Madam clerk, they won't be here in the public hearing. So if she's going to speak, she should speak during citizens matters.
>> Okay. You want her to speak? >> Sure. >> Sarah Thelen, can you hear me?
>> I can barely hear you. If you can maybe adjust your microphone volume. Okay. Okay.
Is this better? >> That's much better. Thank you for being with us. You have three minutes.
>> Absolutely. Thank you so much. Um so I'm Sarah Thielen um at 11:05 Doc Nichols Road in Durham and representing myself. Um thank you council for allowing me to speak today in favor of higher density housing specifically in Southeast Durham um to increase affordability across across the the city. The facts on
affordable housing which I'm sure you guys are well verssed in. Um teachers start at around $41,000 annually. salaries of police and firefighters around 50,000. Registered nurses are around 74.
Um, and Durham's medium home price is over $400,000. Um, household needs around $120,000 annual income to afford a home. Uh, nearly triple what many of these essential workers earn. Um, so what I'm attempting to do today is to put a kind of human face on on some of these affordability challenges that that we have.
Um, I don't need to tell y'all, but this affordability crisis has immediate consequences for service delivery. Um, Durham Police operates with a 28% um, vacancy rate. Um, fire has vacancy rates as well. Durham public schools has staffing shortages. So, people are going where they can afford um, and forcing out current residents often places like Bradtown, Hay, and the 98 corridor. um research that I have found um demonstrates that building new
affordable housing prevents displacement more effectively than converting existing units. Um research out of UC Berkeley saw that um in San Francisco rents fell uh close to new developments with displacement risk decreasing by nearly 17% uh for nearby residents. Now there is development happening in term obviously um quite a bit on Little Bitty Doc Nichols Road. Um, when we moved there, it was pretty close to a dirt road, uh, quiet little place to raise our family.
Um, now it is much, much busier. We got lots of new neighbors. Um, we have smooth laptop and sidewalks in some places. It's very exciting.
Um, places for our kids to go trick-or-treating. Um, and yet the affordability crisis is is still very prevalent. Um, we, you know, we see the apartments going up in downtown renting for well above what what our essential workers can afford. 1% vacancy rate um indicating an over supply in that luxury segment. Um while affordable housing remains remains quite
scarce. Um the city's mixed income development model aligns with research best practices and what I'm asking for today. Um and that is action on that model. um build higher build higher density actually affordable housing where development is already happening in in southeast Durham.
Larger question for the council is what does Durham want to be? Is it a place where only you know the wealthy can live? Um there are some higher density projects that have been waiting for approval for two and a half three years. Um Hartland Park subdivision is one of them.
Um and it's still not approved. Uh there are people still waiting for housing, still getting priced out of their own neighborhoods with nowhere affordable to to go. >> Melan, thank you. Thank you so much for being with us this afternoon.
That's your time. I appreciate you being with us. Uh madam clerk, please note that the arrival of the mayor. Good afternoon, sir.
Good to have you with us. Um I'm going to move to the pulled uh items uh item number three and that was pulled by council member Riss. Start with you. Um,
Mayor Prom, may I quickly um since we had the issue with the citizens matters, could you just tell us which items are pulled from the actual agenda? >> I'm sorry. >> With the citizens matters. >> Oh, item I have item number three and nine pulled.
>> Um, and and I think that you have a lot of speakers on 20 and then um if it hasn't been pulled, I'd like to pull number 19 as well. >> Okay, we'll pull them. Yeah, 20 also approves uh appears under uh city council. I was going under supplemental items.
So, I was just going to do that uh uh when we got to supplement it. >> That's being pulled anyway. >> Yeah. Yeah.
Well, it's it's actually printed. So, we'll treat it under supplemental items since it's appearing on the agenda. >> But you did say you also wanted to pull >> number 19 as well. >> Absolutely.
Thank you so much. >> Yes, ma'am. Absolutely. Uh uh item number three, Council Member Ris.
>> Thank good afternoon. Thanks for being here. Um, so I just have a question. I know we do these carryovers a couple times a
year, right? And I just >> we do the excuse me, Christina Reirden, budget and management services director. Um, we do amendments a few times a year. The carryover process only happens once a year.
>> Gotcha. Okay. Thank you. Um, and I just want to confirm, so these are these carryovers are these are not multi-year projects, right?
These are projects that were in last year's budget that were not completed for some reason or other, right? Uh yes, car uh carryovers are um things that um departments for the most part would have tried to get done in the last year and maybe for some reason didn't get them. If they're encumbered, they roll into the new budget um as a carry forward. Carryovers are things that they could not get done.
And so we have um asked departments to let us know if there's something that they need to get done in this year's budget that would impact. >> We're talking about the carryovers today, right? So, I just noted there a lot of a lot of parks and sidewalks projects in there. And so, I guess I want to know, you know, >> is there are there any patterns there why these projects were not completed in the last year that we should be aware
of? >> Um, I'm going to have our parks department is here today to talk to you a little bit about I know there's some half penny stuff that is in the carryover. Um, so they're prepared to talk to you today. >> Thank you.
Hi, good afternoon. Denise Chaplick, DPR, assistant director of park planning and development. Um, question about what is being carried over and what will be using those funding for this this year. >> Well, it's been a larger question.
more, you know, so the carryovers, are there any like I know we do this every every year, but I'm I'm just wondering if there any patterns. These are projects that weren't completed last year. Anything we should know about why these are being carried over? >> Um, I guess I would say capacity of what our current staff is able to do. That would be a pattern.
For instance, our DPR staff, we have one project construction project manager and her bandwidth to be able to complete projects. Uh, for instance, she did um the Sherwood playground redevelopment replacement. Uh, that project in itself takes an entire year. >> I guess my followup question would be then are we are we is this a is this a chronic problem that we have?
Is this going to happen again for this year's budget? then we don't have the right staff. So to sounds like >> if schedules slip. Yes.
And there are many factors that influence schedules whether it's weather, contractors, permitting. Um so if if schedules do slip because this is an annual cycle and if we don't encumber it within that cycle, you'll see things roll over. >> Yeah. I guess for the manager I just want to make sure we watch this. Obviously, if this is a chronic stabbing issue that we're going to see all the
time, I think we need to we need to address that head on. So, want to flag that. Thank you. >> Thank uh Council Council Caballero.
>> Thank you. Um I would like to add uh additional funds. I know that this is an item I brought up um at at budget adoption uh which was increased funding for justice matters. at the time uh that was not um included and I specifically said that I would be bringing it forward so it's not a surprise.
So I would like to have uh an additional $200,000 added to the contract of of justice matters. Um I know we have to vote on that item so not today obviously but I just wanted to share that with staff and I know that other council members have to weigh in on that. Now, thank you, council member. And you indeed did telegraph that you would you would be mentioning that. I think I also telegraphed that the uh Museum of Derm History um is requesting just under $50,000 as well and and the county will add in as well for uh some work on their future plans as well. But
it is noted um that council member Caviierro is is is will be making it ask. Anyone else on item number three? All right. Uh, I have item number nine pulled.
>> Quick quick question >> with um with the additional funds um Mr. Manager, do we um how does that work? Do we pull from somewhere else? Is it a is it how does a balancing of it works?
>> So carryover funds are um happen through our fund balance. So because they're one time in nature and um so this uh request would as in as part of this process would have to be a one time. So I think um staff would just like you know uh direction from council if if that's your pleasure to to kind of do that as well too. >> Yeah.
And I and I'm and I support it. I'm I'm just trying to I'm trying to operationalize it. Uh these are car if I remember correctly these are carryover
funds that are unallocated based on >> Yeah. So they carry over from one year to the other. There are usually projects that um as council member Wrist has had spoken about before, projects that um departments may not have gotten done. Could be a myriad of things going on or something that came up after we had done the budget process, but they're intended to be one time because we are using fund balance as the revenue source.
Um and so um we don't do that for reoccurring items. And so that's that's kind of the nature of how this is funded. And just to kind of circle the loop on that, essentially this money if spent now will be uh when we get to the end of the year and calculate the fund balance, this will be $200,000 that doesn't have fund balance. We have uh when we go into the um budget development process, as you know, frequently we'll allocate fund balance for one-time expenditures for the next year. This will be $200,000 that would not be available for those. So, it's you're you're forward forward allocating $200,000 of fund balance that
otherwise might go to other purposes. And as long as the council's aware and understands that trade-off, then that is something that is at the council's discretion. >> Were you done with that, mayor? >> Yeah, I was I was literally asking out of curiosity.
>> All right. Uh item number nine, Council Member Cook, I think you pulled that. Yield to you. I did.
Thank you. Um I'm wondering Hi, >> see you. >> Um I am wondering this item is um is an interesting one and uh the manager and I have had a conversation about it already. um in in suggesting these increases um what went into I know obviously we did some comparable studies for other
cities um our neighbors um but what else went into the um the actual valuations and I'm particularly interested in the service contracts one and because that one is increasing quite a bit >> yes uh Tim Flora finance director uh thank you for that question. Good seeing you all today. Yeah. So, this was this has been a sort of couple years long process where we really did evaluate uh not only our our current thresholds but we also evaluated our internal controls.
We evaluated what our peers have done. Um and and really the conclusion was we also evaluated the length of time it takes in order for us to go from conceptual idea to uh contract execution. And so we were looking at sort of the bottlenecks as well. And not to say that this is a bottleneck, but this is one of a number of bottlenecks where the processes getting to the exit executed contract would get delayed. And so all of those factors took into account um and looking at that and and
really when we started looking at our peers and the fact that uh it had been since I think 2009 since the last time we had raised those thresholds that uh it looked like it was time to do a refresh. Thank you. Um, I'm just going to speak to this item for a minute. I went back through for the entire year and pulled all of the items that were expenditures that fit into all of these categories.
So, I just want to talk about um what essentially we will be doing if we change these uh thresholds. Um, so the reason I was asking specifically about services is because that one was the one that I found to be uh the most problematic. Um, we pulled I mean we pulled lots of items that didn't fall under these categories too. So I don't want y'all to think that this is like the context of everything we pulled, but um we or citizens we as council or citizens pulled three items that were good.
All of goods. All of those were above the $500,000 threshold. Um so I feel fine about those. We are pulled, we
also pulled five items that would fall under the repairs category. Again, actually all of those were above the threshold, so that one feels fine to me as well. Um, but of the items that were pulled that were service related, which was 29 items this year. Um, most the vast majority of them were under the threshold.
So, they were in between where we are now and or yes, where we are now and where we are proposing to go. Uh, so 65% of the pulled items uh mostly from council but some from residents. uh and these would then not be public. So I hear the conversation about a bottleneck.
Um and I understand the need for efficiency, but part of this is also ensuring that council has the opportunity to look closely at this and also making sure that the public has the opportunity to look closely at these contracts. And so for me, when I'm looking at this and understanding that we have that most of those items that we're pulling are now going to be off the agenda, um that doesn't that doesn't feel good to me. It doesn't feel like it reflects our values of transparency. Um
it does not come up for debate and conversation. Um I also, as an aside, I've already told the manager this, but I had asked him to not put this on quite yet. Um he hasn't been manager for an entire year yet. Uh and he's also been filling quite a few departmental uh leadership positions.
Uh and those folks are very new. We have a new deputy city manager. Uh we have new departments reporting to our deputy city managers and we have new heads of several departments. Um for me, I would love to have waited on this just a few months to sort of get our restructure sort of in the flow.
I mean, I don't even I feel like I can't even talk about the departments because I don't know what everything's called yet. Um, but all of these items because um because I saw the patterns and don't feel concerned. I'm I'm totally fine with the increase on the goods. I'm totally incre fine with the increase on the repairs. Um, if we do feel like we need to increase the services, I would propose that we only do it to 100,000. That would link with that would track the county's um
threshold and they redid their uh threshold this year. So that is our most recent comparable one. Uh, so that is going to be my request of you colleagues today is that we um I'm fine with everything else except for this service related threshold and that we bring it back down to 100,000. So still seeing some increase hopefully some more efficiency and I think that that would take into account um obviously that it's been a really long time since we've revisited this and so we've got inflation and other things to think about.
I think it would take out sort of our uh less maybe pressing items, but it would still leave um most of the ones that we pulled um and wanted to publicly discuss. >> Thank you, Council Member. Council member, >> thank you, Me. Um yeah, so um thank you for bringing this forward.
Um I support this resolution. Um I think this is a important way that we can speed up, talked to Mr. about this at the break. Speed up our work as a as a public body, making things move faster, right? And this is back to like parks and roads and
sidewalks and stuff. Um, I also like the fact that it's going to create more space in our meetings to do other things than just approve contracts that are smaller contracts. Um, I I understand the concern council member Cook has about potential tradeoffs. But I would like either Mr.
Flor or the manager speak to what this would look like. This is not that we have no visibility in these contracts. Is that correct? I'd love to hear about that.
The second thing I also wanted well yeah answer that and I have a follow-up question after that. >> Okay. Yeah. So we were we fully expected to maintain or we we fully expect to maintain our transparency through this process.
And so one of the things that we do do in our quarterly reports is we report currently now on the number of contracts that we've issued. But what we would do is in lie now of of these contracts coming to council on a quarterly basis we have a report that lists every one of our contracts. And so we fully intend to change our quarterly reporting to show to council and to our residents every contract that gets approved. So it's it's it'll be by type, by vendor, by department, by amount, and
and by the amount of the award. And so so I I I feel like that we get to maintain our transparency um through uh this this revised way we are going to report uh on uh in our quarter reporting. >> Thank you for that. And then my follow-up question is as you know as as as Council Member Cook identified, we've pulled a number of these contracts and I' I've pulled many of them and had concerns about contracts I felt like didn't have enough um detail in terms of metrics and and milestones and so forth.
So I guess my question would be are we also are there some some minimum standards of what all contracts will contain? So we know that the ones that we're not seeing anymore that there's going to be a minimum threshold that they all will contain certain things which for me would include things like clear benchmarks and milestones for example because I've seen in the ones we pulled and then looked at I've seen sort of different sort of levels of that. So can we is there going to be some commitment to like some minimum standards on a range of things we we can chat about? I >> I think we certainly can uh you know
evaluate that. That was something I I hadn't really been aware of going through the process. But I think absolutely I think we can have that discussion uh with departments as to what what that would actually look like. I mean I think depending upon the contract I I mean I can see in some contracts that that would be necessary.
Others are just you know cut and dry contracts, carpet cleaning, paper good products, those types of things. But um I I I think we can dive into that issue a little bit more. I mean, that's not been necessarily an initiative that we were looking at, but I don't know why we couldn't um include that as part of our as part of our efforts uh working through the the contracting process. Thank you.
>> And and I will say I one of the things I'm not sure that council's aware of we go through two on-based processes, right? So there is a process that we bring these contracts uh to council to review and and provide authorization for the city manager to approve. And so that is one process where we go through multiple steps working with our departments, working with the city attorney's office. Um and then once it
comes through here, it actually goes through a whole another process before it actually gets to um uh execution of contract, which is there are seven signoffs. Once once we get past uh these council meetings and it is approved on a on a Monday night, uh there are seven additional signoffs, a whole other process that gets uh that we go through before the city manager actually gets it to execute. So, so, um, it could possibly be that through that process, um, we we work up something, um, with performance measures. >> Thank you, Council Member.
Council member Kav Caballero, and then Council Member Baker. >> Thank you. I appreciate this item. Um, I just wanted to say I I am supportive of it.
Um, I think this is something that I know I've been pushing for is efficiency, efficiency, and more efficiency. Um and we already get an agenda item that tells us what the manager's um what those what has been approved. I think it's quarterly, right? We get a quarterly on our like these are the contracts that were already executed that were below his threshold that or
sorry yeah that he could do on his own without us. So, I would imagine that it would just be a longer piece of that or piece, right? And then I think to council member Ris point, I don't know if it's the contract or if it's the memos associated. Like I know that I'm just mentioning this when we get um things around our affordable housing.
Like I've often asked I want to see the stack of like where's that where's the money coming from, right? And so I think you often pull things around OEWD. So, I think that that it may not be in the contract itself, but when that thing comes back to us, I want folks to understand, and I'm going to use the affordable housing example. " I want folks to really understand what does it take to put a deal like that together and where where's the subsidy coming?
" And it doesn't. So to council member Cook's point around transparency, I think you can you can do both, right? We can be more efficient
and then add that layer within our own memos. Um and so as you all are reviewing that process, that's a thing that I know I need to see. Uh and I and for me it is specifically around um our affordable housing projects, not just so the financing is one. And then I know that this has come up with some of our RFPs on the delivery of housing.
they were that they were supposed to be tied to special populations. And so it's that that again not really having clarity on who are those units going to and are we meeting the goals of that RFP. Um and that has something that has come up before as well. So, I think that uh whether it's it's it's not really the dollar amount, it's how much what what's in that memo and how clear uh is that information and what and if you need to add some nuance, then add it.
Um and whether that's a $50,000 contract or a $300,000 contract, but information needs to be there. It doesn't really matter what the what the amount is. Thank you. >> Great feedback. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Council Member
Baker. Yeah, I'm I'm uh pretty comfortable with this. I think it it makes a lot of sense. Um I was along the lines of of Council Member Cook.
I was going to suggest a lower uh change in threshold for goods purchase. Um but I'm impressed that the Council Member Cook did her research and looked at what items have been pulled previously, so I'm now comfortable with 500. I do think that for services, I would not prefer uh such a high jump to 500,000. Council member Cook suggested 100,000 which would be doubling which is equal to what the county is.
I would be comfortable with going up to 200,000. So I'd propose that to my council colleagues that we change goods purchase all the way up to 500,000. Construction repair all the way up to 500,000. Electric utility all all the way up to 500,000.
And then for services I would propose going up to 200,000 which would be quadruple what it is today and double what it is for Durham County. Thanks. >> Thank you council member All
right, colleagues. Um I I support um the the proposal as is. You know, it's interesting. We we give great deference to our peer cities um for a lot of things.
When we were wanted to raise salaries, we uh we you know, we treated our pure city numbers as gospel. Um and we trusted the due diligence they did. We trusted their read of the market. And I think these numbers are instructive.
I for me, the number of of and I' I've been in a lot of these conversations. The number of items that were pulled is not so much impressive to me as is the nature of the conversation. I mean, we can pull an item for any reason. And I can't recall a conversation where when an item was pulled, there was anything substantive in that conversation that gave me pause.
It made me think there was here goes the trilogy, fraud, waste, and abuse were occurring or that anything were unoured. If that were the case, then there is no number between 50 and 500,000 that I would be comfortable with. If if if I were uncomfortable with something, I'm not going to tweak it up
at all. Um but but I, you know, the substance of the conversations to me, they were great, they were great questions, I thought important clarifying conversations, but nothing that gave me pause. Um I think this is a good use of of pure data uh from sister cities. Um, I totally support the thresholds um that the manager uh and the staff is is is asking.
And of course, we can always go back. We still have access to the memos. We can do our our due diligence as much as we want and ask any other questions uh we want. So, Mr.
Mayor, >> yeah, I uh I was just listening to the uh conversation here. Um so, one I I'm as I'm listening to the conversation, I think about what's what is or could be translated to the public domain. Uh, and and I did hear some some language unintentionally, I believe, or not in ill will, but insinuating that something may be private. Nothing we do is private. Everything is always public. Um, and to Council Member Cook's point, uh,
she's, you know, stated she's gone through all of these items that were pulled. Um, I have not gone through all of the items that were pulled uh specifically for this reason, but I I would be interested in knowing how many items were pulled and then we we reversed it or we did not approve it. Um the the the other thing is you know we are we are a growing city and we are uh Durm has grown a lot and and to whatever person's interpretation of growth and development it's going to continue to grow. Uh and and growth and development is something quite mechanical.
It really doesn't matter who's sitting up here. Uh it's going to grow whether by right or by approvals. Um that being said, um we are we are a real city and we are experiencing more issues that are going to come before us. We have real I mean I sit on the board of trustees at go triangle. I see what's coming throughout
the region when it comes to transportation and there are some things that we need to like I don't know if we really have realized that we don't talk a lot about our uh regional responsibilities inhouse as much as we should. I don't come back and talk in detail of what's going on at go triangle as much as we should. I don't have the space to you all. I have some of you all on TPO.
I don't have the space for you all to talk about that as much here, you know, and then bringing it home to joint city county planning commission and we do talk about those things obviously, but it's just we we need more capacity to address things that we're really concerned about rather than just being so processed in the in the agenda. But we're a real city, you know, and I there's no way in the world I'm going to agree to pay someone $300,000 in salary and I have confidence in their ability. Um, so I have confidence in your ability to lead us. If you screw up, then we fire you. That's as simple as that. And I would expect the same uh the same.
This is a right to work state. I don't like the working conditions in this state, but that that is, you know, that it happens. you know, you screw up, we're going to fire you, and you would do the same. Um, but I I just want to say, you know, making moves like this, it could uh, you know, it is drastic going from 50,000 to 500,000, but at the same time, the drastic could be described as how outdated we are as well.
And so, I I I I support it. I want us to move forward with it. I want us to open up the capacity uh of of uh of of the agenda to be able to address more things. And I think we saw the the the eagerness for that during the strategic plan meeting this morning.
Um but I I say that with respect to the concern as well of my colleagues. Um uh I'm going to support what's proposed although I I personally kind of lean with council member Baker on it. But at the same time,
incrementalism is I mean it's we're gonna either raise it or we're not. It's still the same people, same topics. So, uh I I uh just wanted to put that out there. I I'm ready I'm ready to move forward on it.
There are a few things we need to evolve uh in our city government. Uh and this is one of those things. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Uh Council Member Cook. >> Yeah, I just want to respond to that. Um, well, a couple things I want to respond to. First of all, um, I'm I'm not trying to be like contrarian, but I think that we can all sit up here and understand that a quarterly report is not the same thing as having it on a bi-weekly agenda where people can pull it and make comment.
They can pull it, they can come to a work session and talk about it. We can talk about it at a work session or they can pull it at a meeting. There's multiple opportunities. um having it in a quarterly report it just doesn't it does not allow the same interaction. I mean and like that's it. It's a
functionality. It it doesn't compare. Um we are a local government. We are meant to be here to be responsive to people and I hear the concerns about efficiency and about having more time set aside for other things.
And I do think that an incremental increase is probably needed here. But whether we need to jump five or 10 times, excuse me, 10 times from 50,000 to 500,000 where we don't get to interact knowing what we know now about what we've pulled just in the last year and I didn't go back further even past 2025. Um these are things that we are talking about and it's not to say that they are approved or not approved at the end. I don't think that's important.
But what is important is that there's concern enough about these issues that we wanted to pull them and talk about them publicly. um as it as it respects to our peer cities, of course we respect them. Um for pay scales, we are competitive with them and so of course we're going to look at those pay scales because we want to make sure that our folks are being paid competitively. Uh we are not competitive with respect to transparency. I hope um we're not like oh who can be more or less transparent.
We would set that value inhouse. Um so I'm not comfortable with this multiplying times 10. Um, I would be open to a conversation about a lesser amount if folks want to entertain that. And if they don't, I'm going to ask that it put them be put on GBA.
>> They can certainly uh put it on GBA. And I Yeah, I you know, I would say your your your point is well made um and well taken. " And then for me to say, well, let's arbitrarily pick a number in between. Um, for me, with nothing to point at other than my own reticence or or or discomfort, then for me, from an intellectual honesty point of view, what what is my basis for that number in between the 50 grand and the 500 grand? Whereas he's pointing to actual peer uh statistics. I don't I don't I guess I look at the pulled items and again the fact that they were pulled
not necessarily as evidence or a basis for an incremental jump somewhere in between 50 and 500,000. I don't think I mean the due diligence that you did council member Cook we're all we can all do that if we want and your diligence is to be commended. I mean at any given time as a council we can we don't have to wait till quarterly. we can literally as a council member every week ask for what's going on um from staff.
So um yeah, I I point is well made, but I I still support the uh the ask as presented. >> Ju just real quick, uh and I know Council Member Freeman was going this time. I know like our 911 call data, we get it every night. um on a weekly basis if I want to know what business you know uh um items have come across the manager's desk can you provide that to us as a report I mean you can do a a quarterly report yes but at any time we should be able to request the information we want right >> correct I mean we we respond to contract
free uh information requests on a pretty routine basis as to contracts and so I I I suspect the report that we run uh is a report that we can run whenever we need to run it for the time period we we need to run it. Um I can look >> and to council member Cook just a quick question. Are is it your concern that you want to just be you want to be able to to discuss >> Yeah. Okay.
you want to be able to discuss it in the public domain or is it for personal like uh like direct interest or what? >> I mean correct me if I'm wrong but the quarterly reports are the contracts that have come to and been signed by the manager's office and have gone through the second step that you've already talked about. Correct. >> And the things that are coming in front of us have not yet been signed.
That is correct. >> And so this is the opportunity for us to have a conversation about the contracts before they are signed >> and for the public to hear about them before they are signed. I would just ask if there's a way for this in between conversation
um knowing that there are contracts that are coming forward before they are signed. Is there a way to report on that um in a way that's similar without >> Yeah, because what I what I do know is sometimes, you know, things come up like I I think what what comes to mind specifically is um it's a it's a development case within Veto VO something, but the way in which they operate in community for people to be able to at least say a thing before it's signed is a little bit different than getting a report post um being ready to send a check. So, and then also I would say that there's there's a difference in us accessing information and the public access accessing information. So I don't know if it's public facing or not, but the the the piece of about transparency is making sure it's not just at council level
>> that I'm hearing that feels feels a little bit like >> Yeah, >> I and I totally get that. I I this is where those philosophical differences may come. the the community, the public elected us here to do the job and it's up to us if we want to go out and, you know, put things on display in front of the community at large. I'm totally fine with that.
I would do it. You know, I've done several town halls, but I I you know, we were elected, you know, and I'm not I want to make sure I'm not I want to make sure I'm really clear. I'm not pushing back on your perspective. This is just my perspective.
We were elected to do a job and I I get told all the time, look, I elected you. Go do the job. Please don't spend all your time coming back to ask me like, look, this is that this is that because we do a lot of engagement. But I also hear what you're saying and I and that's just the nature of Durham politics and politics in general where we go back and we you know display it all and and I you know it's it's just a
for me it's a philosophical perspective of politics. You get you it's 300 some thousand people. You're just never going to get everybody. That's why you know this representative government works the way it does.
But I get what what you're saying as well. So >> you come here. >> Thank question. I have a question.
>> Um I think this is a really important discussion how how we effectively do public business in the city, right? And so I think council member Freeman's point is really good. If there was some way to have visibility on these, we don't have to have them here in this room at the work session. There's some way to have visibility before they're signed.
I think that's actually a really good idea. For me, there's a question and I appreciate Council Member Kush's comments, but I do feel like it's not about like we don't have like infinite amount of time here. If we had infinite time, we could do all the contracts, right? But we have limited time. And so to me, there's opportunity costs if we spend time here in a work session on a bunch of service contracts for $200,000 versus conversations about go triangle or the TPO or like water in Durham,
right? So those are the conversations I'd rather have with limited time here. So to me, it's not a question of like, you know, ideally do we do it? It's more like what's the opportunity cost?
And I think there's real gains here from freeing up the agenda from a lot of contracts to have much more substantive conversations about the issues that really address that affect our city. So thank you. >> Just can I just one question to council is so what council member Freeman stated that's a it's a it's like a pre-approval report. >> It's so I I am concerned about the workload but also don't know how it would be reported.
I'm interested in that because I think that's a >> we would have to go back and evaluate processes because on a daily basis there are multiple contracts that go in through the to the contract workflow. And so I'm not sure that we've got technology that that would that would help facilitate that. It would be more a very manual process of someone trying to track all of the the contracts that are flowing through the city attorney's office through finance through and and
when I say finance uh I I've got contracts that are flowing through my underutilized business compliance division that's flowing through the the purchasing division that's going through our risk management division as they're evaluating uh the in in uh insurance needs and so so their contracts are all in a different phases of being execcut And so, >> and and I'm thinking about the city um attorney's office, there's two ver like two versions. There's the like in addition to city attorney, you're you're sharing with the city council office and then that in turn becomes something that the clerk is made a aware of or there's this kind of a dashboard that just keeps it rolling. You know, whenever contracts come in, this is what's happening kind of thing that's just available publicly. We would have to evaluate the >> But you hear like what I'm saying? >> Yeah, I absolutely I absolutely hear what what you're saying. And what I'll
say is is you know a lot of those contracts are starting as RFPs, right? And so we have a very open process of where we're posting our RFPs, but that's not all of that is not all of our our contracts. And so I would I would be not saying that correctly if I was saying it's oh it's all it's already already posted through the RFP process. But I know there's just many ways that we work through developing our contracts and um it's just not a centralized process other than when it makes it into the OnBase portal for that process.
" And I mean, that might be an option. Uh, I just I I would hate to speak uh for my technology folks and uh uh others. >> Yeah, last >> Thank you. Um I appreciate all the conversation. Um I'm fine with going
down to 250 because that's half on the services. I I that's fine if it means that we're going to be able to move forward on the thing. Um I'd rather move us forward than um not do a thing. Um, so that that's um that's where I'm at just as a because what I heard is everyone's fine on the service.
No, not on the services on the repairs and the construction. It was just a services question. So 250 isn't a big augment. It's half seems reasonable.
Um and >> um and there was a second part. I'll think about it. But yeah, I just wanted to Oh yeah, it's around the pure cities. I think that there is I mean there are metrics around efficiency and and and well-ordered government and I will say this about North Carolina. We don't do some be pretty critical about us but there's a lot of North Carolina cities that get put on well organized municipal government. So there are structures in place I think to how we are by law and
structures h that that are that we all have to follow. uh which is why you don't often see some of the things that maybe are we see in other cities in other communities, right? So, I think that that is one of the benefits of how municipal government is structured in North Carolina. I also say that we have a third party auditor, y'all.
We get an audit report every year. We have to there there's lots of checks and balances in our system and I don't think we would have been on all of these lists over many years now about efficient government, transparent government. We do get assessed by outside parties. Bond agencies assess us.
Like there's lots of things that we are out in the in in the ethers that are assessing how we are running the city beyond whether we saw a contract at a city council meeting or not. Uh and there's sometimes where things even here get missed. So um just because it showed up here doesn't mean that we didn't mess up. So um that that's all I want to say. >> Um and I would be at support. What I was
going to say is that I do know that it's been a long time. So I think that we have to account for inflation and also um I do think that 250 falls like right in the middle of where our peer cities are. So I if that is the number I would be I would be in support of that. >> All right.
I think that I think that um I'm still going to push for what's uh what's what's printed. Um because I I I I think the the activity is the same whether it's 250 or 500. Um I appreciate I I think this conversation was actually very rich and and and it it shows the diversity of this council and it also shows the collegiality. Um so I I I respect that.
You actually just talked about what I was going to say. Um there are over 20 22,000 cities and towns. We're the number 15th bestr run city. Um you know uh we are we have a AAA credit bond rating and there are many checks and balances. I think this it really just kind of goes to the preference of
being able to discuss things in the public domain or not. Uh which I respect. I uh but that's all that's why we see things differently. You know, we we have different approaches.
I am just I am so ready to just get us to evolve as a functioning council um and and evolve the city as well because there are some there's some pretty uh uh aggressive expectations that that we're you know starting to pressure on the on the city staff. Um you know I things like I mean I think we're getting caught up in planning. We just had no public hearings the other night because we're finally through the backlog. Um however we uh have yet to celebrate the opening of the rail trail because it's delayed and delayed and delayed in all of these things.
It's not directly connected but they are connected and um you know that I think that you know an efficient government should be a new culture. Um and you know we are efficient to a particular degree but there are some changes that we can make. So I'm in full support. Um I I'm
I'm empathetic to the actual concerns. Uh, and it does make me, you know, think through it, but I'm I'm also thinking, you know, practically, you know, um, yeah, I I I do support it whatever uh is printed. >> Yeah, I support the the manager's ask. My my my threshold for saying no to a manager is very very high.
Um, we we you know, we pay them handsomely to to study the stuff we don't study, uh, to look at the metrics in the market and come back. And when I get to that point, I promise you there's gonna it's probably the onset of another conversation when I start getting uh to that point. I don't think there's anything unreasonable about this ask. I think it's supported by best practices in history.
So, but what of course whatever the council whatever the council speaks will speak. But me arbitrarily picking a number between 15 and 500,000. I don't I don't know what the the you know the basis is. Um I assume I assume the manager did his due diligence and and asked for a reason.
So, my default setting is say yes until he gives me reason to say no. >> All right, Mr. Manager.
>> Mr. Manager, >> thank you, council members. Uh, I've been purposely quiet while you uh uh debated this and I think you've done an excellent job hitting on a number of uh key uh factors that need to be considered uh with this request. I'm grateful for your consideration and as I've shared with all of you individually, uh I have a recommendation but not advocacy for this.
I want the council to be comfortable with the number. My recommendation is based on efficiency and business practices and I understand uh the concerns uh that have been raised that that speak to lower levels uh my obligation to you is to bring you the recommendations that support our business practices and I did so uh with these recommendations. the the one uh the the only information I want to offer uh because I think there is an obvious understanding that just that for most of these increases uh there is a more modest increase but for services there's a substantial increase. I just wanted to explain my reasoning uh and it's fairly straightforward uh in you if you look at when the ordinance
was adopted in 2009. It is clear that the council who adopted that resolution um had a particular interest in keeping the threshold low for services but none of us could identify what the rationale for that differentiation was. It was clear that the other thresholds were they were comfortable at a higher level. uh the threshold for services were low.
If I could identify that >> I'm sorry. Well, >> there's a recession going on. >> If I could identify and document that for you, uh I would certainly bring that forward for you to be able to consider. Uh given that I could not find a rationale there.
My main rationale in the recommendations I made was benchmarking against our peer cities who have similar size budgets, therefore similar size business practices. uh and uh I felt that that was the most reliable information for me. So understanding that is a substantial increase in service contracts uh my my
rationale for the recommendation was what what appears to be in line with where our peers are at. And so I I was simply driven by Pier City with an understanding that it was a substantial increase. And again, if I had a rationale for you why it was already lower, uh I would certainly daylight that. but we simply didn't have it.
So, the only other government I found that had a lower threshold is in fact Durham County. Um they they have the 100,000 threshold which is below their other uh levels of of of authority. Um and so with that, that's my recommend that was my recommendation. As I've said before, we are very comfortable to work with whatever level of purchasing authority that you decide to delegate to the staff.
Uh and that's those are my comments. All right. Thank you. >> Take care.
>> Just Yeah, just go ahead because I'm not sure what was pulled. >> So, number nine will be on GBA. All right. Uh item number 19, Council
Member Cook report on wildlife feeding. >> I'm sorry. thought that 18 was pulled by a res >> that was discharged during citizens matters. >> Oh, I'm sorry.
Okay. Um, this is coming in front of the council on the mayor and others requests to have a report before we heard saw the ordinance that came forward. Um, so the report is in there, but um I don't know if we if staff wants to give us a just a little briefing on um what is included, what we can find, and maybe what guidance you're seeking in order for that ordinance to come forward on the next council work session. >> Sure.
Good afternoon. Um Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor Pro Tim Carisha Wallace, assistant city manager and acting director of the new housing and neighborhood services department. Um, I am here uh and as as a
commitment from the city manager uh for the administration to provide a response to the request made by council member Cook to perhaps adopt an ordinance that would um regulate or ban the feeding of wildlife. You might recall that some residents from the Troder Ridge community came before the council in November 2024 uh to complain specifically about squirrels and the conditions that the squirrels were creating. Uh I think at that time there was some discussion um that was on the heels of a long discussion that had been occurring for several years around deer bow hunting. So, I do want to provide that as context for this uh not being the first animal related complaint um that has been brought before a city council, this city council, but then also previous city councils.
Um the manager committed for the staff to do some research. Uh there was some work um that the city attorney's office did as well. So, I want to thank the city attorney's office
for their assistance with this work. Um we did identify three I do want to acknowledge Alexis John. Uh she's not here today. Clarence Harris is here from representing code enforcement.
Uh Alexis John is the assistant director of what was neighborhood improvement services. Um but Alexis is out on leave. And so um I just want to acknowledge her contributions to this initial body of research. Um so we did identify we meaning Alexis and uh intern identified three jurisdictions in the state of North Carolina that has um a a ban or or ban or reg ban ban um on the feeding of wildlife.
Sometimes we use wildlife and wild animals uh interchangeably. So, I do want to acknowledge that those three jurisdictions in North Carolina um were the uh town of Hillsboro as well as the city of Asheville and Bunkham County. Uh Asheville and Bunkham County, as I'm sure many of us know, um have an
abundance of bear. So, many of their there many of their complaints about um interactions with wildlife pertain um to bear. Um but in the town of um Hillsboro um they indicated that they do not enforce that was a key piece about the re the information that that was um identified. The regulation is prim primarily um identifying the infraction when possible um but then also following up with education.
Uh there aren't any civil penalties that are issued, but more or less um uh just an awareness of this of the situation that occurs when property owners or residents do not contain um conditions such as food, things like that that attract wild animals. So, as it relates to Durham, uh we do have a couple of instances in the ordinance that speak to animals. So that's included in the agenda memo, but
in the event that folks are listening or watching, I will identify um what those are. It's actually section two um of of our code. And birds uh Durham has a bird sanctuary designation and section 6-2 of our code. 3.
5. So there is not currently uh any language that addresses squirrels in particular, but we want to bring this item forward so that the council could have some conversation um one to determine whether we want to establish an ordinance here in Durham that will regulate the feeding of wildlife. If the council chooses to um adopt an ordinance, then we would certainly need some direction or guidance on what you would like to see in that ordinance. There have been some um some considerations included that we
would ask that you consider if the decision is to adopt an ordinance. And one is to have a definition of wildlife. Um number two, what um actions are prohibited? There are some concerns about are we looking to address um specifically feeders or devices that are utilized or purchased um for feeding squirrels um or might be intended to feed birds or some other animals um but squirrels take advantage of that um as well as um what the enforcement who will be doing the enforcement um and consultation with the city manager.
There is the a recommendation that if the council makes this decision that the code enforcement division within housing and neighborhood services be responsible for enforcing um enforcing the ordinance and then subsequent to that what does enforcement look like? Do we want property owners to be penalized? Do we want property owners to be educated? Do we want um just what what the extent of those consequences would be? So, um I'm
here to answer any questions that you might have for me, but I will acknowledge up front that Clarence Harris is our um code administrator, and so he's he's here with us today in the event that you have some questions specific to, um the code. >> Thank you for that summary, colleagues. Um y'all know exactly what my ask is. Uh we've had this issue that was brought up by constituents.
Uh we talk a lot about being responsive in a timely manner. We're looking at almost a year here on this issue. um and it was brought to me prior to it being brought um in citizens matters. Uh there have we've done some research uh the city attorney and I have looked at some of these codes um not only in North Carolina but in other cities across the country uh that restrict feeding in such a way that doesn't make it accessible for other types of wildlife outside of birds. So very much want to ensure that like y'all know that there's nothing about this my intent or I think the community's intent to like forbid bird feeders or anything
of that sort. But what they have done is looked at feeders that are meant to attract other types of wildlife like troughs and things that are on the ground or open etc. So, um I'm happy to speak more in detail about any of those things, but uh it would be my ask that we just get something on the books so that we can address these community concerns. And I know y'all probably remember, but we talk about squirrels and I think it sounds silly, but uh they're doing like lots and lots and lots of damage in this neighborhood and other neighborhoods um as well as they're brought in from the woods attracted to whatever people keep out.
And in this case, there was uh literal like troughs full of peanuts. Um we have folks with peanut allergies who are actually like in danger. Then there's like issues of having increased wildlife in the area and what that means for uh residue and safety uh health and safety for excrement and that sort of thing. Um and then also just the the sheer damage from them chewing through vehicles and
like parts of their homes. I mean it was like pretty extreme. Um, so that's my ask. I don't think that I have any interest in criminalizing this activity, but I do think that an educational piece feels attractive to me.
Um, and um, yeah. Anyway, I'm happy to hear if anybody else has any thoughts on that. >> I just have one question either for staff or or council member Cook. So just in reviewing the memo, it says that the review of complaints and calls for service about concerns um about wildlife feeding that those are rare.
Can you give me is there a number like >> No. So uh great point. So in that same section it it it actually speaks to dur one call um does not typically document so we're not able to quantify um the calls that come into uh to dur one call. What we were able to quantify is the information or data that has been collected by the zoning staff. And so that speaks to um chicken and roosters. I think that's a little bit further um in that paragraph, but generally
speaking, it is not a um a pervasive issue that that we are aware of. >> There's no data on like actual number of calls about wildlife. You don't have that. >> That's correct.
Okay. >> And can I speak to that really quickly, too? Um I know that by the time that the things got to the city, lots of folks had already count called the county because they have the wildlife enforcement. Um, and that are and you heard this in the Troder Ridge conversation or excuse me, in the sorry, oh yeah, wait, no, I the bow hunting ordinance that there we uh Yeah.
Okay. Sorry, I'm getting all my neighborhoods confused. Um that uh that that position isn't always staffed and so folks had gone back and forth quite a while with the county and sheriff's department trying to get those services before those complaints came to the city. So that also might make up for some of the lack of calls.
just um want to go on record and say uh I lived in Troter Ridge. I'm so sick of those squirrels. Uh so I get what the neighbors are saying. I know it sounds silly, but they cause havoc. Um I I
think my um my question is is there an opportunity to work with the county since they have some department that does animal enforcement or something? So, um the manager and I did have some conversation um around this in particular. The county's work um is primarily around emergencies and so um like deer deer that that's hit that's in the in the public rightway for example. Um and the county's action is usually on capturing the animal.
I don't think the intent here was to capture the squirrels. I think the intent was to address the behavior of the property owner um and change modified behavior through addressing a property owner and what we are what the council is expecting them to do or not do to decrease the presence. >> I think I'm about to resubscribe to the list serve because I know what's going to happen if this pass and it's going to you know be some celebration. >> Yeah, good point.
Oh, okay. No, no, you're the mayor. I So I I >> So when we had we had a localized incident with the deer culling, the culling thing, which we we we didn't pass. We haven't passed that yet.
And an or >> well, okay, we voted it down. An or an ordinance has it has universal impact. Although these things are being introduced to introduced to us at a at a local level. So I I'm I'm just and you know when we pass an ordinance there's got to be some consequence and we don't want to criminalize it to council member Cook's point and I agree with her but we got to do something if it's an ordinance if once we you know put the city's improm motto on it. I and I I'm intrigued by the educational piece. I'm wondering so are we what are we telling folk not to do in in in you know around the whole city because of what happened in Troder Ridge and and because we can't pass a
localized ordinance. I I'm wondering is there some in between number or in between uh method or or place we can stop to kind of address to help our friends and try to rich with the squirrels. Um, yeah, something incremental with with because I'm wondering if ordinance what's going to be the punishment and and do we want to and what's going to be our bandwidth for enforcing it? And to the earlier point, we're not getting a whole lot of uh calls about this type of stuff. So, I'm just wondering about crafting a response that's commensurate with the the level of the issue rather than a full governmental ordinance if if at all. add on one more question on the end of that is is also what is the current >> I know when people's alarms go off there's some there's a method we go through it's like a warning and then this amount >> false alarm >> false alarm fee
>> um yes there is a um assuming that the this is actually a finance item so I don't know if I can phone a friend from finance but Um, also Lauren so um as somebody I mean I can speak as my personal experience but there's a there there there's an initial notice that's sent to the property owner um that says we received a um an alarm and I think I think you're given like one time um grace so to speak and then after that after that one time I think there's a fee. Do we still charge that fee? >> $75. >> Miss Wallace and Council Member Freeman, if you'll allow me, I might answer the question in a different way. I think the the more relevant answer might be how does code enforcement handle I mean because while the alarm is a question, I think I think we would most likely
recommend a process similar to our current code violations. So perhaps having Clarence just describe, you know, what happens when somebody calls in weedy grass or Okay. Okay. We we can answer the alarm question if you like.
I just that's a different body of of enforcement for the city. So since this would likely be code enforcement, you know, I thought that might be the more relevant. I'm happy to have both answers if if uh staff are available for that. >> Let Clarence get some.
>> Get some. Clarence, take that. Good afternoon, Clarence Harris, housing code administrator, Department of Housing and Neighborhood Services. Uh, in relation to the enforcement action, uh, we're we would consider actually doing additional research and as it relates to the educational piece and determining, you know, what are what are we identifying to be in in particular in violation, whether it's actually the feeder itself or the activity of leaving food out for for the squirrels to obtain. Uh but during that process in
similar code enforcement processes, we would actually identify uh the conditions of of the of the violation. Meaning that we identify the property owner to be in violation of those conditions. And usually what will occur, we will actually reach out to to that property owner and make them aware of those conditions uh to be in violation. And in most cases there is a discussion as it relates to the educational piece or the impact that these conditions are are having on on the community.
Um prior to that I mean after that following that that those conditions we would send notices uh to the property owners making them aware of of such violations. Um, one of the resources that we did obtain from North Carolina Wildlife Resources and Commission is that during uh, as it relates to Asheville and Bunkham County, uh, they technically did not have a lot of uh, information or a matrix to identify uh, the impact or the effectiveness of of such citations. uh
because as it relates to their communications they shared uh they still there's still an issue with uh feeding of of the wildlife. However, uh they he did share uh that there is a significant improvement as it relates to the educational uh piece or or sharing of the the information as as it relates to the impact of feeding wildlife. Uh so to answer the question as it relates to code enforcement process, we would first uh identif identify the property to be in violation, educate the property owner, send notices to the property owner of of potential violations, and then most likely uh it will be challenging to actually remediate. In most cases, uh, our department will actually, uh, we utilize a rapid response team, the impact team for remediation and or a contract services to remediate such violations. Uh, this may proven to be a challenge. Uh, so we'll most likely look at some type of u fines or or fees
associated for for actual punitive or not punitive, but some type of corrective measure. colleagues. Council, please. Council, >> I just I just want to say that um I think we should bring the ordinance forward.
Um and so I just want to answer the questions that staff needs tonight and then I think that we can have a conversation on the actual ordinance when it comes forward on the work session. Um, so I just want to like limit our conversation to that because um, I'd already asked for it to be put onto the next work session agenda and I do think that that's responsive to folks and so that's my ask is that we just sort of focus on these few things few pieces which I know you were asking about the education piece. Um, but that is that's my ask today and um, I don't it's not coming from me, it's coming from the community. So I'm not necessarily like pushing it one way or the other. I just am just bringing it that's all.
Okay. This guy, I know he about to have a whole law pass. >> I just want to post in the Facebook group. >> So, Council, you're saying you're just saying you just want to you want to direct staff to to >> draft an ordinance and bring it forward >> and then we can look at that whether then we can decide whether we like it or not.
>> Yeah, we like gave that a thumbs up last time. We said that we would do an ordinance in two work sessions and if we got a report from staff in one work session. So, this is our report from staff. Um, and so I just I feel like if we wanted if we want to say that we have um an an ordinance that comes forward then we can like kind of talk about the more specific details but just to answer the questions that they need for moving forward or and also I don't know if madame if you want to speak to what would be helpful to you as well um because I know you've been looking into the ordinance as well.
Can I insert a clarifying point? Because and for correct me if I'm if I'm mis mischaracterizing the conversation. I I didn't think that the ordinance was a foregone conclusion. I thought the
report was supposed to help us determine whether or not we were going to move to ordinance. Um cuz if that were the case, we could just brought the ordinance. I mean, the whole point of this conversation was to determine the viability and appropriateness of the ordinance is was my understanding of the conversation. That was mine.
I mean, >> yeah. So, my my specific ask was to bring the ordinance today. And so, what we had decided last time was that we would have a staff report um before the ordinance so that we could that we could narrow down the language for the ordinance. I don't think it was ever like we're doing that instead of bringing the ordinance forward.
It was sort of like a we have we'll have some more information kind of how we did it around the bow hunting where we like had the staff report first and then when we got to the ordinance, we like had all that information. We had already heard a staff presentation. >> Right. I remember the staff report part.
Yes. >> To facilitate the conversation. Go ahead, council members. >> Yeah.
No, I I feel like this is the same as as the bow hunting thing. And I think I was one that sort of brought that forward. I felt like the residents deserved a like answer from the city council and so we got we had the ordinance and we decided we didn't we
vote it down. So to me, this is the same thing. I think, you know, if we want to be responsive to citizens, I think drafting something is fine with me. I may not support it, but I think we should bring it forward.
>> Okay. M um >> I think based on this discussion we have enough um information to draft an ordinance that contains sufficient definitions and describes the conduct that the city is trying to regulate. I I think the the remaining questions would still be enforcement related um and how the education piece fits into you know the ordinance. Um, but we could certainly draft something based on prior research that we've done and council would then just have to provide additional direction on where it lives to what and how it to what extent and how it gets enforced.
>> All right, Councilman Cabar, >> that's fine. I I just Sorry, this is like a parks and wreck episode. Um, I've been really trying not to like cackle
the entire time. Um, the government's too involved in our lives. >> Yeah. I'm just like this is um so a couple things as long as it can be somewhat comical where people in like don't feed the bears, don't feed the squirrels.
I think that because um Yeah. And I can see why Asheville has bear problems. Folks in in Boone also have bear problems. It's it's real.
They're just giant raccoons. Um they Yeah. Well, not those bears. Uh but they're they're scary.
Um, so, uh, I think that, yeah, I'm not interested in any like people need to stop feeding the squirrels. And so, essentially just can we write an ordinance that's like stop feeding the squirrels, you're making it bad for your neighbors. The end. Hey, >> are you sharing that you're part of this >> colleagues? Anything else on squirrels?
>> I do have one uh staff request. So, I appreciate council member Cook asking staff. I know uh what what we need to move forward and I know the attorney has addressed what we need for the ordinance. Um, the one other matter I think that that came to my attention from the Dearb Honing ordinance is uh whether or not council has an expectation that between now and the hearing of the ordinance that we engage in any sort of public notification that an ordinance is being considered or if you just want it brought forward.
I know that there were people who expressed displeasure uh in the deer hunting ordinance to find out that changes were being proposed uh and that we had not done any sort of public information campaign. So, I I am not advocating for or against one, but I would not want council to be uh surprised if we just brought an ordinance forward and understood that we only placed it on the agenda and did not do anything else with it. So, I I would appreciate direction on that point. >> I I would I would think that we I mean, a guy's feeding deer and then the government passes a whole law for for
the city. I I would I would think we would need to do some type of notification. That's this is me. colleagues.
>> I mean, I do feel like there's a difference between like changing the hunting ordinances and restricting feeding of wildlife, which I think is not a thing that generally people are uh maybe doing. So, I I feel fine about this being the official notice. Um, but I am happy to defer to others if if folks feel strongly about it. I don't know.
All I got to say is when the when the when the county was having their like cat conversation about caption release, it got real heated. So, >> yeah, >> I remember that. >> You'd be surprised what people are into. >> Yeah.
I mean, >> yeah, we can we call it the don't feed the squirrels engagement? Sorry. >> All right, we we're going to bring this back to we have we have young people here like is this how city council meetings work
sometimes? So, uh, >> fine either way. Just just >> No, I think Yeah, I think we're I think >> Yeah, I think that as folks, we we need to sort of like we need to keep moving, you guys. Um, I think we need to Yeah, given your comments, I think we should do some notice on this.
Yeah. >> All right. Thank you colleagues for great conversation. Um, it was great.
Item number 20, approval of ordinance revision re revision to chapter 10, article 6, housing code section 10-241. We do have some speakers uh on this item. Council member Cook, you are listed as a resource person. Do you want to give any framing remarks or you just want to go straight to speakers?
I'll I'll defer to you. >> I'm happy to give a very very brief framing remarks. So, um thank you uh Clarence for not going anywhere. Uh this is another code enforcement situation. So, this is actually something that I talked about in my um interview for city
council uh for my appointment to this position and um something that I was really um excited to see that several uh members of the community including the Riverside Housing Group brought forward. Um so, this is an added layer of protections for tenants who are facing extreme habitability issues. So, the state defines um imminently dangerous situations for tenants, but it doesn't have any follow-up to that. Um and then the city code also, of course, says that you can't have any of these in imminently dangerous conditions.
They don't define it that way. It's just in their list of violations. This would be sort of bridging the gap to allow uh tenants a little bit more control because they don't own the property. They don't get a say in how city ordinances are um how they impact the units in which they live.
Uh, so this is just a tool to allow tenants a little bit of extra protection. It is um on the books in two other municipalities in North Carolina and it has been used for many many years. It was recottified in
Charlotte in 2019 um and then Pittsburgh put it into their code in 2022. Uh so you've seen recent action around it. Um, we've also seen recent cases uh where um attorneys that are tenant advocates have used this and it's gone up through the Supreme Court, I mean sorry through the court of appeals um and uh so far has been used in a way that's effective. So I think I'll be interested to hear what the speakers have to say and happy to answer any questions after they've had an opportunity.
>> Thank you C. We council me >> I was going to say I really appreciate council member Cook staying focused on this issue and bringing this forward and I'm excited to hear what folks have to say um around it. >> All right, let's get to it. I'd like to welcome uh Jack Holtzman, Milo Greyber, Annne Reebeck, Nick McCloud, and Donna Batista.
Our first um was that five? I think I may have skipped the name. I'm sorry. After after
Milo Gravis is Ezra Gustav Norberg card was stuck then Anne Reebeck and then Nick Mloud and then Donna Batista you'll be after that and then Italo Medilius. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for being with us. You have three minutes.
>> Yes. Thank you. Uh Mayor Williams, Mayor Prom, members of the council. Thank you.
My name is Jack Holtzman. I'm a retired housing attorney and I'm speaking here in favor of the motion to revise our housing ordinance to include this uh section 11 similar to what Charlotte has in its housing ordinance. Uh adoption of this would uh um strengthen the ability of both private and nonprofit uh housing attorneys to advocate on behalf of tenants. Um uh back in uh 2019 and 20 through 2021, I as a senior attorney at the North Carolina Justice Center together with the Charlotte Center for Legal Advocacy and the private law firm
of Robinson Bradshaw, we um uh using this ordinance uh filed a class action lawsuit against an outofstate property owner uh where the city had determined that there were housing code violations. that were dangerous uh among those imminently dangerous uh sections of the housing code in Charlotte. Uh after about two years going up to both federal and and coming back down to state court, we were able to settle that case for about $550,000 for the tenants who had been experiencing these extreme uh habitability problems. Um, I think that uh whether the specific rent prohibition section uh of this uh uh uh ordinance revision uh is going to be enforced by uh the city attorney's office or not. It would strengthen the ability for those of us in the private uh uh housing advocacy market to be tenant uh stronger
tenant advocates. Um there is uh the issue uh you know whether or not the city has authority to do this, whether there's a preeemption issue. Um I don't think that um that the city should fail to enact this important housing tool because of what might possibly happen sometime in the future. Uh like uh council member Cook mentioned, I think Charlotte and Pittsburgh each have this ordinance.
um uh housing advocates have been able to use it. Uh it has not been challenged. Um I think that uh it's an important tool that should be adopted here. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much for being with us, sir. Milo Greyber. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for being with us.
You have three minutes. >> Good afternoon. Uh my name is Milo Greyber and I'm a senior at Riverside High School as well as the founder and leader of our affordable housing club. I'm here to speak in favor of this
ordinance and the for the prohibition of for landlords to collect rent when there are emily dangerous conditions uh in a housing unit. Affordable housing is one of Durm's uh most urgent issues as we all know. It affects a lot of students in DPS and we all see the effects of the affordable housing crisis here in Durm. There are limitations on what we as a city can do because we are a Dylan's rule state and there are many things that are preempted by the state explicitly such as rent control.
However, this tenant could be a thing that we can pass to give tenants uh more tools to protect themselves from eviction for non-payment. even if they're prosay. And it would basically outline clearly if any of these conditions are present and someone is evicted for nonp payment, they can use this ordinance in court to um get the rent abated or refunded, which can be critical to keep people in
housing. I have heard feedback that they're worried about passing this ordinance because uh the state might decide to step in to preempt it, but I don't think that we should not pass good policy now just because we are afraid that we might lose that policy in the future. We shouldn't make our policy decisions out of fear, and we shouldn't be afraid to lose the power if we weren't going to use it in the first place. Furthermore, similar ordinances have been used in other municipalities here in North Carolina, such as Charlotte and Pittsburgh, which have been mentioned, but also in Pineville, and those ordinances have never been invalidated or challenged.
The Charlotte version was even cited in an unpublished court of appeals case earlier this year. So, I think that by passing this ordinance, we could have better protection for tenants and that it would generally be a good policy decision. I appreciate everyone's time and thank you for your consideration. >> Have a great day. >> Thank you so much, Milo. Did you say an affordable housing club?
>> Yeah. >> How old are you, Milo? >> 17. >> Outstanding.
Thank you for being with us. Ezra Gustaf Norberg, good afternoon. Thank you for being with us. You have three minutes.
Is that working? >> Yeah, there you go. >> All right, great. Uh, good afternoon, Mayor Williams, Mayor Proy Middleton, and members of the Durm City Council.
Um, my name is Ezra Norberg, and I am here as a member um and a representative of the Riverside Affordable Housing Club. Um, and Milo actually got me in on the affordable housing club in order to speak on this issue. Um, so, uh, I'm here to speak in favor, um, to speak in favor of item 20, uh, which would permit rent abatement to renters living in properties, uh, found to be imminently dangerous to health or safety. Um, to me, this seems like, uh, a perfectly reasonable ordinance. Um it
uh it follows like the basic standard of living um and allows for uh dignity and fairness um offered to people um living in uh conditions that aren't necessarily um uh ideal uh conditions that might be dangerous to their health or health their safety. Um, so if a home is unsafe due to fire hazards, uh, unsafe wiring, pest infestation, or lack of heat, uh, or portable water, um, I don't think that a tenant should be legally obligated to pay, uh, if they're in this, um, uh, condition of suffering. Um, and I know that uh members um like uh my friends um members of the wrestling team um that I'm also uh on have in the past struggled to be able to make it to school uh or make it to practices due to uh living basically rent um living in unsafe conditions or uh unhealthy
conditions such as not having access to uh clean running water um or living uh in insect infest ed homes. Uh, and so I think that this would uh like positively affect um members of the community uh but especially like many people that I know, my friends, uh my teammates um and I think that this would be really good for them. Um, I also think that uh we can't live in fear and not pass this bill because of um uh fear of uh ret like retribution or um uh uh or it not going through um because similar bills uh similar ordinances have been passed in other places. Um, and I think that it's important enough to uh try to get it through. Um, uh, even if it doesn't work out, I think that this is important enough that we should make a case for it. Um, and lastly, I feel like uh it something
something like this um is good because it holds members of the community accountable uh for you know um ne negligence and allowing their uh renters to live in potentially dangerous conditions. Um and I think that that's really important. Uh and so for these reasons and more um I would ask you to please uh vote yes on this proposed ordinance. Uh, thank you for your time.
>> Thank you, Ezra. >> Excellent job. Riverside Affordable Housing Club. It's really impressive.
>> Henry Rebeck, good afternoon. >> Just really quick as they're coming up. Ezra and Milo, um, want you to stop by the mayor's office. I wrote you an excused letter for school.
>> I was going to ask him about their hall pass. >> Yeah, was she's working on it right now, so you'll be able to take that back to school. >> All right. and and a selfie.
>> Good afternoon. Take me with you three minutes. >> Yeah, thanks for having me. I am actually just here not to make a formal
statement from PA, but really just to talk about process um six or eight months ago, eight months ago. It's been a while. Um they reached out to the PA uh asking if they could be connected with our housing team. Um, and sure enough, when they came to our first in-person meeting, the team's response to them was, as was with yours, Riverside High School has an affordable housing club.
Okay, go Pirates. Um, and so it really became sort of like um, for lack of a better metaphor, like a lot of aunties um, around them um, connecting them. And what was so beautiful was and then they just did the work. So they went to multiple um coalition for affordable housing meetings.
Um met with the same kind of response. Um they met with many I am on the receiving end. Sorry I should say I'm copied on many emails. So I see the work go by even though I'm not really
doing anything. Um and so lot of emails to attorneys in Charlotte, emails to your attorneys. Um, absolutely want to say thank you so much for your time, Council Member Cook. Um, a lot of mentoring um, from you and super appreciative of that.
And I think actually the people that are showing up here today are also a testament to the hard work that they've done. So, while I don't I personally think this would be a great tool for Durham um and uh and I just am like so impressed with these young people and and look forward to reading about your decision in the Pirates Hook, the Riverside newspaper, which is where I get all my news. Thank you. >> Thank you so much.
Good to see you, Nick McCloud. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for being with us. You'll have three minutes.
>> Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Mr. Mayor Prom and council members. My
name is Nick Mloud. I'm the executive director of the North Carolina Tenants Union. We represent tenants across the state through our tenant union locals in Asheville, Winston Salem, Durham, of course, Raleigh, Newurn, and Wilmington. And I am here to speak in favor of this proposal.
This would be a really valuable critical addition to protecting tenants in Durham who are living in unbelievably dangerous conditions. I'm really grateful that Donna will be speaking after me. She can speak to that in much more detail than I can. But I think that uh we need to reckon with the fact that there are some meaningful inequalities in the way that these things are structured now.
And a good way to think about it is this. If, god forbid, in your home you had a big hole in your roof and you hire me to come repair that hole, right? And then I disappear, I don't return your phone calls, I'm not available, right? You are not legally obligated to pay me first and then go to small claims court to sue
me to get back the money you paid because I committed, we got to talk a lot about contracts today. I committed in a contract to do a set of work for you, right? And then I didn't do it and therefore you were totally within your rights to say, "Hey, you didn't hold up your side of this contract. " Right? The way what this would mean is it shifts leases from a category of requiring payment even when services are not rendered right to saying that these are those obligations are meaningfully reciprocal which is absolutely in line with the state law and it's absolutely in line with what other cities have done and I'll say that speaking to the experience of what has happened in Charlotte this has been a meaningful tool that has really helped tenants be able to advocate for themselves and work with lawyers and other organizations to be able to make sure that they're not living in dangerous housing conditions.
And I'm very pleased to say that there's a long track record here that they've not faced preeemption challenges. This has been something that has been on the books for a long time. and so uh very confident that this is something that the city could absolutely step up and do and would make a meaningful difference for your constituents so that they're not living in uh dangerous conditions. Thank you all so much for your time.
>> Thank you so much for being with us. >> Donna Batista, >> she said finally. >> Good afternoon. >> Good afternoon.
Thank you for being with us. You have three minutes. >> Good afternoon, fellow Duramites. I encourage all of you to check your emails.
You get a picture of my mushroom. getting ready to tell you about. My name is Donna Batista and I am a resident at JFK Towers. I've been there three and a half years and this is the first summer I've had any air conditioning at all. That's because the fifth floor was renovated and I got to move from the third to the fifth. While in the third floor for over three years, there was no hot water in my bathroom
the whole time I lived there. I had mushrooms that would grow behind my sink. It's a disturbing picture, but tried living with that. The stains underneath are the spore.
There's no way to get rid of it. It was very frightening and I found out that the red that you see is the spore and you cannot see it and it's invisible to the naked eye. So imagine the fear I had. I have breathing difficulties anyway.
I was too afraid to be in my kitchen, especially with no air movement. We are not right now the whole building is under renovation and all but the second floor is finished and we had got in this month's newsletter. We are not allowed to open our windows because they were improperly installed. And if we do open our windows, that would be terms for lease termination. Whenever I had the, you know, we've had
really hot weather the last few summers, but it just got hotter. I was given a portable air conditioner. Within five minutes, it was blazing. I thought it was going to burst in flame, so I unplugged it.
There's been dog poop throughout the whole building various times. And I went to the manager's office just Tuesday before going to my volunteer job and I was reporting it and I looked down. I went, "Oh, there's some right here in front of your desk. It's pretty disgusting.
We have had serious problems. There are three elevators, one freight, and two passengers. There have been more than one occasions when all three were out. A great number of patient or people who live at JFK Tower are wheelchair bound.
Anybody that was upstairs had to stay up there half the weekend. Those that were down, there were a lot of tears. They soiled themselves as they were in their wheelchairs. Bathrooms have been locked
on the bottom floor for years. They've opened them up in the past few months, but they're locked on the weekends. I'm running out of time. This is very important.
It's even more important than the sewage, which is really bad. I got to talk really fast. Sewage problems from the seventh floor down to the first. People have poop coming up in their kitchen sinks and in their bathtubs.
And one woman who was in her late 90s had to live with that poo poo in her bathtub for 10 days and it just came back. Speaking about the fire department, I was told by the fire chief a few months before >> your time's up and I'm going to give you an additional minute. I'm sorry. >> Thank you.
Because I'm speaking for more people. I'm the only one that was brave enough to come. There is such fear of reprisal from not just me but way I came today. People don't want to say anything because they're afraid that they'll get kicked out. We were sold, the building was sold to
another company and it so far it looks like there's not going to be much difference in change. There's some serious problems. Bed bugs, they are so bad that one week last summer, I must have eaten seven before I could get the sandwich to my mouth before they got to my mouth. I don't want that kind of protein.
I really want one thing, affordable, safe housing. I'd like to give a special thank you to council person Cook. I work very closely with Grace Wakeakeman as a volunteer in our assistance program for people who need help with affordable housing and paying utilities. I urge all of you to consider and all of the fellow dermmites to consider making this reality.
Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. >> Thank you for being with us today. Itello as he's coming up, can I ask a quick question? Do we know when that was sold?
>> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for good to see you.
>> Good to see you. All right. Can I go? >> All right.
Uh well, good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Prom, mayor, members of the city council. I'm Italo Medilius. I'm representing the North Carolina Tenants Union as general counsel today.
Um first of all, sorry for the hair. the curls are doing their thing. Uh, Mr. Mayor Pro, I see you're beating me with the nice hair today.
So, beautiful, beautiful work. Um, so I don't want to uh uh take over what a lot of people have already said, the proponents, but the big enemy in the room that we've heard today, right, is preeemption, Dylan's rule, right? And actually, what a lot of people don't know is legally, uh, Dylan's rule is actually very different in the state of North Carolina. kind of elevated Dylan's rule, super Dylan's rule, however you want to call it, or absolute preeemption. Uh, I've talked, I think, personally with a lot of you and the council about, you know, maybe at some point being able to take on preeemption constitutionally, go
on a judicial offensive. We don't need to do that right now, right? This right here, I think, is a beautiful way to be able to exercise the sovereignty that we do have as a city, right? Um, this falls right within uh code enforcement guidelines within our police power.
It hasn't been challenged in Charlotte, hasn't been challenged in Pittsburgh. And I do believe that this is going to be a day one thing that will help us at the tenants union. Just 5 days ago, I wrote a demand letter against a landlord for this exact issue. Right now, we have a homeless tenant because there was a rat infestation.
There was no heating. There was no kitchen, uh, no window egress, and now because of the landlord not being able to fulfill their duties as a landlord, we have a homeless tenant. That's not okay, right? And we have to fight for the back grant, we have to fight for uh all of these things that this exact ordinance would fix.
So, as soon as we pass it, and thank you, Council Member Cook and our good friends at Riverside. Uh, we're following your leadership on this. Uh, on day one, our
members will have redress against their landlords. And as Nick said, we would have the same uh sort of reciprocity that normal contracts under contract law have to not pay somebody if they're not handling their end of the of the bargain. So, this would make uh tenants contracts, leases, uh equitable just like any other contract. I think it's a no-brainer.
It's legal. It is fiscally responsible because landlords are then going to understand that they need to actually fulfill their obligations. That means less code enforcement. So, I think this is a no-brainer.
This is great. Uh, and I'm sure that it will pass unanimously. Uh, so I appreciate you all. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Tula. Good to see you. You got one more time to make a hair joke, buddy. Telling you, one more.
Thank you so much, colleagues. That's all the speakers that we have uh that have signed up to speak. I'll open now to questions, comments from honorable colleagues. >> Sure. Council member Caballero. I was
waiting for Council Member Cook. I didn't know if she wanted to kick us off. Um I appreciate all the work that everyone's done. Uh this is really good information.
Uh really necessary uh work. I do also just want to thank the city attorney's office for the memo. It's pretty thorough. Um I guess I am interested in it seems like there are some interim steps that we can take that set us up better. Um I I'm going to a number of years ago when we were trying to figure out the um tax relief program that we currently run the county attorney at the time the belief of the county attorney's office if I'm remembering correctly was that we didn't have the authority same thing preeemption no authority whatever and that but Charlotte did have a similar program and so that is the justification that we used to move forward I would actually like to have an understanding of if ours runs differently in Charlottes like how were does that make sense madam attorney? Um because I that's the best analogous situation that I've got in my mind as far as these
kinds of questions have come up before. Certain city does it d and so that's the one that I'm aware of. And so just if if you remember maybe how that proceeded. That's a question I have.
I don't remember precisely how the long-term tax relief program was distinguished from Charlotte's, but there were some differences in the programs and where they were implemented from, if I recall correctly. Um, in terms of this particular initiative, you know, again, you referenced the memo that we've written. We have not changed um our analysis on this issue. Um, and code enforcement is generally code enforcement.
I I don't know specifically how our code differs. Uh, Sophia Hernandez has done a lot of work on this issue for us over time and has been the attorney advising our code enforcement function for some time. So, I'd like to invite her up just in case uh she might
have some other ideas about how code enforcement might differ between Durham and Charlotte. But I'm not sure I'm exactly understanding that >> I'm saying we have a case where we were able to figure something out before with a very similar situation. >> Right. So what what lessons did we learn and what is the takeaway that then could be applied to the situation?
>> Okay. I'm not I'm not sure that um the long-term property tax relief, if I remember correctly, we weren't able to tie that activity to initiatives that the city had been engaged in that had caused Right. >> Yeah. Because it started in Southside and then there was like it had to be a career like def like tied like directly to a city investment in a neighborhood.
Correct. And then we were able to broaden what that definition really was. I I'm basically trying I y'all's guidance is real clear. I'm just going to be real clear and and the Riverside students have that memo.
I think you sent it. I sent it. Um um
>> so like I I'm y'all said a thing. It's clear what y'all said. Um I also know that historically we have run into this issue before and we have figured out what we often call the Durham workaround. So, I guess my hope is that we can find a Durham workaround.
That is basically where I'm at. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. Councelor, did you want to question?
>> All right. >> Sophia Hernandez. >> Hi, Sophia Hernandez, deputy city attorney. Um, u helped with the research and I assist code enforcement and happy to take any questions >> for the per for the benefit of the viewing public.
would you just give us the reader digest version of what the attorney office position is on this? >> Sure. Um, and this this initiative has come up in years past. It is something that of course our elected officials and our community as a whole cares about. Um, so we've done some research I think in 2020 and in 2022 and then again with
this new recent unpublished opinion from the court of appeals that council member Cook pointed um our attention to our concern is um around preeemption certainly around enforcement certainly um the the unpublished opinion doesn't have what we call presidential value as far as authority goes and so the fact that the court of appeals heard a case regarding the Charlotte um ordinance and vacated and remanded, meaning kind of scrub the lower court's decision on that um ordinance doesn't tell us that yes, a court found that that law or that ordinance is in fact legal or not. And I think what the court did is it pointed to some potential flaws in the Charlotte ordinance such that it says that a landlord can't collect any rent for any of the conditions listed. And so, for example, in the case it was that the windows that some of the windows didn't open. And so, you could have a situation
in which one inoperable window would close the door to a landlord charging $1,900 of rent per month, right? You could see where that the court might take issue with that and think that the ordinance is too broad and strike it down for those reasons. And so our research was to show that one, we're not sure under preeemption that we can do this because the landlord tenant act is a fairly sweeping statute that um the general assembly has enacted. So we may be in preempted sort of field preeemption for doing anything in that in that realm. Um, we don't think that our code enforcement authority necess necessarily equates to being able to control what a landlord and tenant agree to as far as lease terms or when a landlord can run its business as collecting rent. And we do think um that there are alternative existing remedies for residents right now such as under
the unfair and deceptive trade practices statute. And even that court of appeals pointed us to other situations in which they have said under the unfair deceptive trade practices law that hey landlord you have to abate your rent in a certain percentage based on the conditions of the home if those conditions make it an unfit for human habitation. And so one of my recommendations is we certainly could consider an ordinance um code enforcement of course leading that way that would list certain conditions that for our residents we think are conditions that would make it unfit for human habitation. " And the unfair and deceptive trade practices case law says that a rent or a landlord has to abate the rent if one of those conditions is present because it makes it unfit for human habitation. So I
think the authority to say these are conditions which are unfit for human habitation is there. What I don't think we feel is that the authority is there to say and then the landlord can't charge rent at all. Right? Because that's getting involved in the business relationship that is between the landlord and tenant.
That is us controlling that relationship in some way which I do think that we may be preempted by field preeemption. Um so that's kind of what we were saying. There's also obviously opportunities for education. The code enforcement folks are in the community. " And so that's another um council member Cavayto mentioned interim step that we could take to help get these folks more educated about the rights they already have under state statute. >> One of those rights, real quick specific
question. I I grew up in public housing. I I remember um being very young and we were once advised uh because we had issues with our living conditions to to pay our rent into escrow. Um demonstr is that something we demonstrate that we're not just squandering the money but withholding payment until the conditions were met.
That was something we could do back then. Is that something that's is that a right that's available to you? It isn't because it would be us stepping into the middle of that relationship and saying tenant you can pay us and we'll hold the money for the landlord. We don't really have authority to >> I'm not talking about us.
I'm just talking does it is does that fall within the rights of a tenant >> just on their own to just with their own attorney or they can't do that. >> We are not aware that that right exists. >> Okay. That's all right.
Um thank you. And I think your explanation was was very very helpful. Um Council Member Cook, you wanted to back in. >> Yeah.
I just want to address some of those things. Um, and I want to thank you for your research on this. Um, I I take these cases and I've been taking
these cases for years. So, I want to be really clear about what this ordinate does ordinance can do. Um, and you heard from people in Charlotte that have been able to use it. What you didn't hear is folks from Durham saying that they have been successful using it because though these lists are already in state statute about what makes a place habitable or inhabitable, the unfair and deceptive trade practices statute does not allow for this.
writing of power imbalance that you heard and it also really doesn't allow for folks to be able to stay stably housed while they're getting these issues addressed. So, I want to be I want to just like walk you through what happens in Durham right now if you have a um place that is uninhabitable. So, if you are a tenant, you have a right to call a city code enforcement out. We all know that the city code enforcers come and they provide notice and they put people there is a lot of notice worked into the system. So, if you've ever sat sat on this board, you would see um sometimes it's months, but sometimes it's even years where there's back and forth with the land owners. Um and so, at some point in time, if they can't get a hold of the land owners, uh
then they will recommend to the board to address fines. Meanwhile, you've got all this time going on where there has been a finding of an uninhabitable situation and a tenant is still responsible for paying rent. Their only remedy, their only remedy is to go before a court and say, "Hi, I have this issue. My ceiling is caving in.
My floor is falling in. " And then have a judge make a determination about what's that what that is worth. The barriers to entry of this, y'all, are so high. They are so high.
So, you have to go to court. You have to file correctly. You have to bring your landlord to court correctly. I don't think that people just like know how to do this.
It's often hard for me to do it and I'm an attorney. I've been practicing for a really long time. Then you have to get a judge to make a value statement. What is it worth to your safety that you have wires that exposed? What this does is it tells you it's worth my entire rent. The
value is done. The value statement is made. So, this is a powerful tool. It allows tenants to then go before a judge and say, "I'm on notice.
My landlord's on notice. I have this response from the city code enforcement. The notice piece is already done. Um and it shows that there are failing statuses in these few imminently dangerous conditions.
And I want to push back on the windows thing because the windows is actually really closely defined. It's um operational windows with locks on a ground floor accessible to the unit. Um and that is defined really really closely in state law. So we've got only a few.
We've got 11 items that make these conditions imminently dangerous already defined already already done by state law. But North Durham then would say we've made a value statement and we know that this is worth your entire tenency. You are unsafe if you are living with any of these conditions and we value that at the entirety of your rent. This is a huge reduction in barriers for folks and it's been used in Charlotte and it's been used successfully. And I know that a court of appeals case that's
unpublished doesn't mean that there's any holding about whether it's good or not good law. But what it does mean is that it's it's open to public inspection. Those cases are public and you heard from attorney Holtzman earlier that's not the first time that it's been used and it's not the first time that it's been used on a higher court level either. And so what we're saying is that yes, like there has been we've been trumpeting this.
Charlotte has been using this. People the people use this all the time and nobody has come to preempt it. And so it's not it's not good enough to just like define these tools as imminently dangerous. We've already done that.
The state's already done that for us. This is taking the extra step that says Durham agrees and we've given a value to that and we are going to assist tenants in equating the power balance or slightly bettering the power balance when you sign a lease to allow you the power to be able to find if you need abatement and be able to to get that abatement in a way that's like accessible to you and quick. Um what we see if we don't have that is that folks
have to pay for a hotel room in the meantime. they have to uh use the they have to go elsewhere to use the bathroom because their facilities aren't being able to be used, whatever the case is, or they just leave because their conditions are that unsafe. And so this leads to housing insecurity and it leads to homelessness. And I want to say that it's particularly particularly for the most the most vulnerable of our tenants.
That's who we're doing it for. It's not for the folks who have access to resources and can move because Yeah. Um, and this is also not against all landlords, right? " And you fix it, all good. But it's for these landlords that are not present landlords or who are slumlords and don't care and leave those conditions over and over and over again and let these families suffer major consequences and including and not
limited to like major health consequences. That's who we're targeting here. So this is a value statement to me. I think it's pretty clear.
Um it's been used over and over and over again. You've heard from both attorneys and also tenants advocates how it can be useful immediately in Durham. So, I hope you'll support it. >> Attorney Rayberg, you wanted to respond.
>> I just wanted to make um make clear for the public that it a couple of statements have been made that Charlotte has been doing this. I want to make it very clear that the city of Charlotte hasn't been doing anything. They do have an ordinance on their books, but they don't enforce it. Neither does the city of Pittsburgh, town of Pittsboro, which was also referenced in the memo in your agenda.
And I think that's a very important distinction. So they have ordinances on the books that the municipalities themselves are not willing to enforce. Whether that creates a tool for the private bar is a completely separate issue. I just want the public to understand that what's being asked is that the city adopt an ordinance that we do not believe municipal governments have the ability to enforce in the state of North Carolina.
is uh I I definitely see and I support this. Um I also understand the practice of it. Is there um council member Cook I guess like maybe resolution versus ordinance? Is that something I mean if we're talking about a value statement?
Um >> I don't think practically that that would achieve the same thing in court. >> Okay. So So that's So is is it not is it a matter of not necessarily being enforcable for XYZ but yet still making like giving it some meat uh for for use in case there is litigation. >> That's correct.
>> That's that's okay. That's your goal. All right. >> So it's not code enforcement then. It's just if somebody sues their landlord like I'm just trying to understand what the >> Yeah, I think it's an entry point for litigants. So tenants have the right to sue probably or I don't even know that
they would agree that the city of Charlotte would agree that they've created third party rights. But um that that is apparently what's happening is what you're hearing from the advocates is that they are getting into court and they are at least arguing that there's a violation of this code provision, but the city is not in the middle of that argument. >> Okay. So it's not the city of Charlotte's code enforcement doing anything.
>> Absolutely not. >> And it's not the city of Pittsburgh's >> Absolutely not. So, it's not going to be our neighborhood or whatever it's called now. Um, housing and neighborhood >> housing and neighborhood services clear >> um it wouldn't it wouldn't be >> it would not be housing and neighborhood services not if we are following the model that Charlotte has in place.
>> Okay, I'm gonna let other folks I still have lots of questions. >> Well, just one more clarifying question. Sorry. Um, is it Damn.
Let me dang. Um, let me come back. So, it's getting wonky and I'm trying to
I'm I'm trying to get to It's like Oh, yes. That's what I was going to ask. Um, I hope that doesn't go on the news. Um, >> so let's say we did put this forward and we officially have an ordinance on the book on the books and you know a tenant sues their landlord because Durham City Council or the city of Durham has this ordinance.
Is there a case where it's overridden because we put something in place that is uninforcable? >> I don't apparently that hasn't happened to date in the city of Charlotte. Um, you know, there was a comment made that, well, Charlotte's had this ordinance on the books for a number of years and it's never been struck down. Well, the reason it's not been struck down is because Charlotte's not attempting to enforce it most likely. Um, and whether the issue
of the validity of the ordinance, the ability of the municipality to enforce it has ever come up in the precise dispute between a tenant and a landlord of you're charging me rent for a dangerous and uninhabitable dwelling. I don't know. We can't say, right? Like the only the only case that we've seen has been the most recent the Danzy opinion that council member Cook brought forward which was looked at and was not decided on the basis of the Charlotte section 11-45 at all.
It was decided on other grounds was my understanding. Um Sophia is the one who analyzed that opinion. But so we don't know the answer to that. We don't know if the court will ever reach that question when dealing with litigants that don't include the city itself. >> Right. And so and so council because your to your um concern here um I guess there if if if
it hasn't been challenged and I assume that we don't have enough information to determine what is uninhabitable, right? Like like a broken window versus I wrote it in the ordinance. I wrote it in the ordinance. Yeah, very very detailed.
Yeah, >> that is that is the point. It's just that we have detailed what makes it uninhabitable and we took that language directly from the state. And I will say to answer the earlier question, one thing that the city does do is is put the landlords on notice. So while we're not involved in litigation, um there is a there's a notice component of this uh that is done by the city.
So >> thank you M. So couple questions. So, just to be clear, so what what even though Charlotte and Pittsburgh aren't enforcing this, what they did is what we're being asked to do, which is pass an ordinance. Okay, just be clear about that. Um, the second thing is so what what council Cook is saying and I I hear your point that we're that this limit that the current ability to go to court and get a judge or whatever limits access, right? But just want to be want
to understand that what what you're suggesting is this ordinance that would give people more access. The concern of the city attorney is that in that case it may get preempted essentially that we may not have the legal authority to do that but that that's what you're saying is it would give someone more access. And what you're saying is that the the piece you've given in your memo that you think has more legal standing would be would be the kind of thing where you're you would have to go to court to get an abatement if your conditions were uninhabitable. Is that correct?
Am I getting that right? So the difference between like one that's stronger for tenants but maybe could be preemptive versus one that's maybe but maybe is like legally in good standing but may not be as accessible to folks. Is that the sort of am I am I correct >> if I may council member Rrist? Um so yes uh to echo Charlotte and Pittsburgh are not enforcing this ordinance and I think that they are not necessarily sure that
they can so they have something on the books that they can't take action. That's generally not something we advise in the city attorney's office. Um and additionally we we feel more on the it's likely >> in the case that we can't take action. You so you're you generally don't recommend an ordinance if we can't enforce it.
>> Correct. Right. Because the the idea is that we are acting under our police power but we have no intention of policing. And so um that is certainly something I I also think given the landscape of the unpublished opinion and that the court the court of appeals said hey the lower judge abated the rent by 15% because of the windows issue.
We found that that was unsupported by evidence and arbitrary. So, we are going to scratch that court's decision and send it back to that lower court. It looks like the Charlotte ordinance says you can't charge any rent at all if these conditions are present. I expect that if I'm the landlord in that situation and
that law says I can't charge any rent, I'm going to probably push back on that a bit because I'm going to say, you know, given that I mean, I think that that's pretty uh straightforward and and also as my memo pointed out that there is no time limit either on the existence of the violation. And so, for example, not having an operable fridge, if the fridge is unoperable for 24 hours, 48 hours a week, again, under the way that the Charlotte ordinance is written, there would not be any rent that can be charged during that time period. And so, I do expect that we'll see challenges. I would caution then, let's see what happens in a case that right now is dealing with this ordinance and see where that leads us. Um, that is again me as a municipal lawyer thinking about what's in the city's interest and what is in within our authority. Um, I certainly understand that other folks and advocates in the community who are
very concerned about tenants may feel differently. My opinion is based on the role that I have within the city. >> Can I say one more thing too? >> Actually, can I follow?
So, you suggested there's a case right now that we want to wait for. >> Yes. >> A specific case or >> Yes. So there is the case that council member Cook pointed to us um the case that I discussed in my memo a bit is the the court vacated what the lower court did and said send it back and let the lower court deal with it again based on the vi the guidance that we have provided meaning no rent charged meaning unfair and deceptive trade practices is a potential avenue.
So, um, >> that was sent back to the >> to the lower court, >> right? And the lower court then now is is going to >> that just happened. So, we assume that the lower court will take it back up because that's what the court of appeals told them to do. We just haven't seen what's coming out of that.
Right. These things can take months to come back. >> Question. It could take months for it to come back to that lower court. >> Yeah. Or for the lower court to make a
decision based on it. >> Okay. >> Right. because the the court of appeals was concerned about how we calculate what the abatement might be.
>> Correct. >> And so in other court of appeals opinions where they've used the unfair and deceptive trade practices statute, there's been some sort of expert testimony that says based on this, this, and this, they abated a certain percentage. >> Gotcha. Can I just I just want to clarify something to earlier your point.
This this ordinance would not mean that someone does not have to go before a judge and get abatement. Okay? We are not like waving that requirement. We cannot wave that requirement.
That is a that's a statutory issue. Um what it is giving tenants the power to do is to have evaluation before they even go through the court process. whether that helps them in negotiations with their landlord, whether that helps them once they get to court and takes away a barrier. Um that those are ways that this tool can be used, but it doesn't go away like it doesn't remove the requirement for a judge to make a determination of abatement. And also,
>> but you could like right away have some some legal basis for >> right. I mean, it's much stronger positioned, but to go in with a notice from the city that says like you have failed in this these regards and to know then that like the value of that is your full rent 100% of your rent as opposed to having to go before a judge and plead your case, right? Because you don't have any power before you go to the judge to have any sort of conversation or like settlement issue with your landlord. And also that case has been remanded back to the trial court which is not going to be a binding uh court of law.
So whatever is decided in Charlotte will not be binding on us. It will only be binding if something happens after that decision is made that brings it back up to the court of appeals and the court of appeals publishes an actual published decision and they have to decide to accept it. There would be like I mean we have no idea if that will ever become binding law. Um, so we're not like I I mean I don't want to take put words in your mouth, but there's no case to be like waiting on exactly. We know that this
case is moving through the courts, but we don't have any sense that it will come to a place where it will be binding on us. >> And if I actually Yeah, I have one one more question, but if you want to Yeah. do >> respond to that. Go ahead.
Yeah. >> No, I'm not responding. I just wanted to highlight something that Deputy City Attorney Sophia Hernandez said, which I think is really important for the public to understand. It's not that the city attorney's office um does not see that this could be an effective tool.
It's that in our position, we are charged with best advising the city as a corporate entity on how it can legally and efficiently and effectively do the things that it does or it's authorized to do under law. and our analysis again just to kind of put a fine point on it, we do not believe that the city has the authority to enforce the the ordinance as written and because it would be the city acting within its police power. We generally don't advise the city to adopt
ordinances under the police power that they cannot police and and enforce. Um that's solely where we're coming from. But yeah, my last question was and this goes back to your memo. You you suggested that um you uh you wanted to suggest that we be you're you're cautious about this because of issues of authority, preeemption, and enforcement.
So just to be clear, so on the question of of preeemption, this could get preempted and if it were get to be preempted, it would be preempted, right? But is there any is there any further potential risk to the city that like somehow we get sued or something or what's the what's the risk of preeemption just that it gets preempted? >> So can I jump in on the preeemption question and then I want you to answer this. So on on the preeemption question, council member wrist, we believe potentially that the city is already preempted, right? So the the part of the memo that talks about preeemption of the field um as attorney Hernandez said earlier because the North Carolina North Carolina landlord tenant act is so
comprehensive and so sweeping it evidences intent on the part of the state legislature for localities not to get in and legislate on those issues. Yeah. They're like we are defining how landlords and tenants are going to do business in this state which to us is some sort of signal that oh cities and counties don't have the ability to regulate on this question. So that's the preeemption issue.
We believe that cities are probably already preempted from regulating in the area of landlord tenant behavior and business practices. Is that fair? And then can you give the second part of your question again because I wanted >> that was it. Yeah.
No, thank you. Yeah, >> this is more a question for council member Cook because I'm just trying to understand the mechanics of under the unfair and deceptive trade or whatever it's called, folks are having to go to court and in this one they're having to go to court. So, walk me through
because I understand the power, you know, difference there and who has power and who doesn't tenants versus uh attorneys, but I'm just trying to understand like the strength of the tool because if you're having to go, we don't have enforcement and tenants are still going to have to go through court. What's what's the difference? And it's just because I don't understand it. I I've luckily not been in the situation.
>> Yeah. So this is what I was just trying to explain which is that um I do think that it's right that we are preempted from uh I mean we know that a judge has to decide if there is going to be abatement. The way that the I'm just going to go back to like very basic landlord tenant law but the way that North Carolina is set up which is uh weird and not very tenant friendly is that a tenant owns owes rent regardless >> and a landlord has a duty to keep their place habitable regardless. But these two things are not connected.
So if you are not paying rent, you are still supposed to have a habitable environment. And if you don't have a habitable environment, you're still supposed to be paying rent. So we
already have a major inequity here. And this is a North Carolina as a whole issue. >> I'm sorry. I'm I I guess what I would like to understand is I'm a person >> and based on what is current law, the thing I can use is this unfair, deceptive, whatever trade thing.
That is what I'm allowed to use. " So, I would actually like I would like a I'm tenant and I'm tenant. Walk me through what that process looks like. >> Yes.
So, um, what it looks like is that if you have this tool and and you heard from some folks who've used it in Charlotte and other places, if you have this tool, you are immediately able to have negotiating power with your landlord because what you have instead of a I might go to court eventually and get this thing done and maybe a court is going to value it as highly as I do, what instead you have is the city has already made a value statement about what this is. it's worth 100% of my rent. Instead of me going to court, let's talk about what we can do to get this fixed immediately. And then if you
go to court, one of your barriers is removed because you don't have to prove the value of the issue. It's already been proven at 100% of your rent. So it's it's not perfect. It's not a silver bullet.
This is not like going to be like the end- all beall for empowerment of tenants because that's a state law issue. But this is a significant tool and it is used by advocates across Charlotte and it is extremely extremely helpful for them. So and and for unrepresented tenants as well because you then have you have something that's known before you go to court which is as of right now like you do not have that. >> Then how does the unfair deceptive >> Yeah.
So if you use an unfair and deceptive trade practices argument you have to go before court. You have to get a judge to decide how much your issues are worth. Once a court decides that, then you get the difference in how much you paid versus how much your apartment would have been worth. So, the abatement amount.
And then, yes, and you would have already had to have paid it. So, then you get it ostensibly back. And unfair that chapter 75 allows for
trouble damages, which is talked about in our memo. So what that means is if you can show that your landlord knew and they also like did it on purpose and they didn't try and settle with you um then you can also ask the court to trouble or times three those damages. But that that whole pro and and you can still do that process with this but what it allows you to do is that you would already have a valuation so you wouldn't have to worry about >> saying you get to argue about different amounts of money so it's incentivizes landlords to negotiate on the front end. Thank you.
>> That's a great summary. Thank you. >> Thank you. Council, were you getting ready to say something or I I I have I I have a question.
I um >> First off, I'm I'm deeply resonant with what uh Council Member Cook and what our um neighbors have come and and and said to us. I um here here's here's here's my question. Here's my dilemma. are can can the city can can the city's voice be used to um issue a statement of evaluation short of
it being wrapped in ordinance? I mean, can can we can the city make a determination that a place is uninhabitable and arm tenants with that short of ordinance? Is is can we just issue an opinion? because I as a as a lawmaker I I don't and the school of government cautions us against us.
I I there's a very very um slippery slope to passing a law that I know I'm not going to enforce and it even calls us some ethical questions and and although this issue resonates with us, we as citizens, we as residents, I don't think we want we don't want to go there. We we don't want to cross a threshold where we're passing laws we know we have no intention of passing. I think >> because because it it it opens us up to some other things and and when you use the police there's no greater power of the government than to coersse to use violence or force to get you to do something to take your money or take
your liberty that's not to be trifled with. Um, I think so when we cross that threshold of using that power, I think it's important for the preservation of the rest of our democracy and the rest of the institution to that for that to be taken seriously. With that said, I want to lean in on this issue. I mean everything that's been said here.
So I guess to my original question, are there ways that we can lend a tool to tenants, the city's voice certifying that this place no human being should be living there without it being an ordinance or does it have to be an ordinance? >> U thanks Mayor Prom. So, I think one of my recommendations was that we could pass an ordinance that specifically identifies which conditions we feel are unsafe for human habitation. Um, and I will lean on my uh code enforcement colleagues here, but certainly we could come up with if those conditions are present, we do an expedited code enforcement process. Precedent's already
there for that. For example, we do an expedited process for lack of heat in the wintertime. and those cases come to the table within 30 days, sometimes 14 days. We have special meetings of the housing appeals board to get those cases moved forward and to get code enforcement to act more quickly.
So that to me does fall squarely within our code enforcement authority and creating a list that not is only in statute but also in local laws may get more buyin for magistrates when they are looking at eviction proceedings and other things. So again, I do think that there are things we can do within our code enforcement authority, within our police authority that would move us in that direction. >> Would that also buttress the position of tenants to get in court? Would that strengthen their hand as well having that u that that declaration from the city? >> And so how I have seen this uh used a lot is in eviction proceedings as a defense from the tenant. And so they're
already there. That's how I've seen it. and and certainly I don't do this for a living on on this particular area of law but um being there already they could use no look this was an unhabitable dwelling and we do see tenants using that when they come to for example file a complaint in fair housing right we have that oh they've already done an eviction proceeding and this place was terrible and because they brought that defense the landlord decided to kick them out for xyz reasons and so I do think there's already some tools in place colleagues, council member question about that. So, um the way that we do emergency situations now is that we have a modified notice period um and and uh and no right to a hearing because these things are emergent. And so, would you then propose that all of the things on this list be accepted from our norm our normal like notice requirement? And would you also then have it be that the city because if we have for example no heat in the winter time, what we see is
that we have an emergency meeting and um and then the city actually does the repair on that if the landlord does not or the owner does not do that repair um and then puts a lean on the property later on to recoup the costs unless they're paid outright by the land owner. So would under this alternative suggestion, are you saying that all of these items then could go into that emergency category and we would use that we would then have a modified notice period? I mean to me it feels that feels sketchier because I'm like oh anytime that we're like lessening the notice period and lessening the right to be heard uh that feels uh more like of an issue that that land owners will have. But um maybe I do. and then and then the enforcement piece like that the city would go in and and address those things and then and follow the regular pathway and put a lean on it. >> I certainly think that there are things from that list that I to me feel like very reasonable to put in there, but again, I would rely on code enforcement as the subject matter experts to make a determination of what they want to
include and what they don't or what needs to be included based on the housing stock in Durham and what they're seeing. Um, but I do think that a list could be created and again I trust your judgment on why you made the list. I just know I haven't talked to code enforcement staff about that list and whether they themselves have identified those or maybe more items that they would like to add. And so I just want to be cautious in answering yes 100% everything on that list is something I could see in an expedited process.
Um, I do think we could create an expedited process. We already have that based on a list that we decide that is, you know, supported by our subject matter experts here that would still give us due process, but because of the heightened concerns for safety, we could make that due process notice shorter and the city to act. I can't I'm not the money person, so I can't speak to whether there would be money for the city to go and remediate all of these conditions. That would be on the city manager. Um
but I do think the authority exists and already some of that um in structure exists. >> Uh Councilman Kabir. >> Yeah, this is a great I mean this is my s several of ours is this is our third cycle on this thing y'all. Like we've seen this every three to four years people get real you know because it it sucks.
We all know that tenant law I mean we go to conferences and we hear what California is doing around tenant law and we want to cry and then we talk about our community safety department so then I feel a little bit better. Um and um so you know this is like a cyclical thing 2020 20 I think it was Charlie Council member Ree who brought it several years ago also an attorney uh with a group of advocates. Then there was another group of advocates I think during the pandemic when um uh yeah in Thank you. Yes. Uh when uh I think evictions were no longer >> Yeah. Um
so I understand why we're here again. The other thing that's mentioned in the in the attorney's memo is the to to funding. I mean that there was the earlier thing that basically the district attorney's office doesn't have the subsequent re or the necessary resources to to prosecute a thing we've already done. So back to that enforcement thing.
I mean to me I feel like there's lots of paths that we already have clear legal authority to do that we might have to like put some I mean we already fund eviction. Yeah. like let's let's think of a a package like we we did we did some of this with the tenant um the the work that council member Freeman brought forward that's where I think we bolstered bilingual enforcement we put a little bit more money there we did some of this expedited thing and so I guess that's where I'm at because I'm also looking at the time is like I think that this I think we're on the right path I really appreciate the work that the students and council member Cook did and advocates did um what is there what are the things is it also ensuring because there's already things that we've done that we're not able able to fully we're
not funding and it's a tool that's like not really being utilized because I get it the district attorney's office doesn't have the money. Um there's other anyway that's where I'm at. >> Thank you council member council member Morris. So on this issue of like sort of legal like being on like sound legal footing, right?
So are you open to the to staff drafting this ordinance as recommended the memo that would do exactly what you're describing here and have that piece that would have you're saying would have greater legal standing? Would would you be open to that? >> I have a I have a few issues with it. Um the first is that like I sit on this I sit on this board, right?
So I see the not only the like regular complaints that come in front but also the emergency complaints that come in front and and how long it takes and how slow it is and um also like talking about enforcement. Um we don't we don't go after people for their fines and fees that we assess. So we're not
really enforcing anything on our board. we're assessing fees uh to landlords and they absolutely or land owners and they absolutely know that that no one's coming after them for that money. Um so to me it doesn't feel like a powerful tool. Um and also we have the example of literally this language is taken it's identical to Charlotte's.
We have the example of how it's been used in Charlotte and and the good work that it's done there. And so, um, I guess I'm I feel a little bit confused because I feel like we are hearing that it is, um, that it's the problem is that we can't enforce it and we're not going to use our police power on something that we can't enforce, but then we're also hearing that, um, it's not under the police power and we're actually preempted from using it at all. Um, and so I understand that you can argue in the alternative, but like we already have this ordinance. We know that it works in Charlotte and folks have come and told you about its efficacy and I can just tell you that its efficacy goes far beyond what you've heard today. Um,
and so my my thought in like rewriting it to something that like has very little leg to stand on does not feel like a doesn't feel like a good um middle ground for me. >> May I ask a question to to to be fair when because I hear our our very trusted city attorneys saying when we say it's worked in Charlotte, what what are the what actually are the victories? I've heard one case alluded to. What who who's won?
What what's an example of a of a victory in Charlotte that we can when we say it's worked, what does work mean? Does it mean they got into court and used it? Does it mean that ultimately they got their apartment fixed and didn't have to pay their rent? What what does it mean when we say it's worked in Charlotte?
>> Yeah, I think it's all the above. I mean, I'm happy to have attorney Holtzman come talk in a little bit more detail about his case. And >> um and I can also tell you that, uh several of the nonprofit lawyers have restrictions on what they can and can't say in terms of public, uh uh lobbying. And so, uh you're not going to hear
probably from those folks, but it happens at all levels. It happens before going to court. Um it happens as a defense for eviction uh where folks are able to stay in their h home and it happens in an affirmative sense where folks are able to recover money from uh living in unsafe conditions. So all all of the ones that you mentioned and >> I absolutely believe you.
I'm just wondering are there can I Google a case where some or is there even anecdotally? Yeah, come please if you would. >> Feel like I'm in law school. So, hello again, uh, Councilman Middleton.
So, the the case that I was referring to is called the Lake Arbor case. That was the name of the property. Uh, you can Google that and you can see, uh, press reports from Charlotte, uh, about that case. Um uh there was not a specific legal claim that uh was a uh
11-45E legal claim. That that was the ordinance uh that we've been talking about. But the unfair and deceptive trade practices claim, the unfair debt collection claim, both of those were based upon the fact that the city had determined that there were uh these dangerous, imminently dangerous violations in the unit and had already made that determination and that the value of the unit was zero. And that made us and made it a lot easier for tenants to make that argument.
We did not have to go through several more hoops of having a court determine what the value of the unit was. That was already determined. Uh we didn't have to go through a determination as to whether it was habitable or uninhabitable. Uh code enforcement had already done that and they had gone through the notice and hearing process and had enforced those sections but not the rent prohibition section. They had uh they had enforced
the conditions those conditions that were uh violative of uh uh that section of 11-45E and in fact were assessing fines against uh the uh the landlord for those violations. We were able to use that. >> Why not the rent prohibitive part? >> Uh why why not?
Just because I I I can't I can't tell you Oh, you're talking about for us. I can't tell you why this why the city did or did not do anything. I can tell you that for us >> ideas I I you'll your your council will need to speak with Charlotte's council. I can't tell you what what their thinking was on that. Uh I can just say that the stronger cases, the stronger claims for us which allowed for treble damages uh uh were the unfair and deceptive trade practices claims, but they were based upon the fact that there were uh violations determined by the city of
those imminently dangerous code violations. So it was part of it, right? The fact that those determinations had already been made it easier for the tenants to assert their abatement claims, to assert their unfair and deceptive trade practices claims. It took us two years.
We started in state court. It got removed to federal court. We went back down to state court. After that two-year time period, we were able to settle on behalf of our clients.
>> Lake Harbor. >> Lake Arbor. >> Arbor. >> Arbor.
A RB O R >> O R. Thank you. Appreciate you. And to >> answer your other question, there is like literally no record of eviction cases.
This is like a real problem that we have wherein we we don't have records of this. So they're starting in small claims court across the state. Uh which is not a court of record. Um so you will you will not be able to to Google that.
Unfortunately, we can't even Google the the sheer numbers although I think we would like to >> take y'all's word for it. >> All right. So, uh, just as we kind of
close out here and, um, welcome to intense, you know, public policy work. Uh, I just the crossroad that I'm at right now, uh, is, uh, and Council Member Cook, you're deep in this, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Um, we are looking to pass an ordinance. I I think what what would mean for I'm thinking about an ordinance versus a package that could be utilized versus well a package that could be utilized that's coupled with a resolution that states our values versus an actual ordinance.
the ordinance. It sounds like it's either uninforceable or it's being placed on the books to be utilized as a tool for material uh as a tool to materialize support for litigation. Um, and I'm and I'm wondering if we could find a way to meet that just so we don't get in the practice of generating
ordinances that we may not be able to enforce. But I but then again there's no real cases. So there that's not to say that this may not come to fruition one day. Um but what I am interested in is I'm I'm interested in trying to find a way to provide some tenant support because we just don't have it and they're vulnerable.
So I have no idea. This has gotten really deep and wonky, but I think it's important. Um I am going to I don't know whose lead I'm going to follow. Uh, I it's like I I I don't know where I am. I I I just know I want support for our tenants and I also want to make sure that we're we're practicing good governance. Um and unfortunately I think we're placed in a disadvantage to where you know uh you know I mean we can be defined and say hey you know we're just going to do it or we could you know just make sure we stay you know to being able to enforce
what we put into ordinance and didn't find a way to package and provide a resource uh even in an expedited fashion. You know, if a tenant runs into a situation, they can call dur one call or whoever and say, "Listen, this is the situation. I need to execute the city's resource on tenants rights or tenants support and utilize whatever uh resources we have in place already that was referred to earlier. But I do I based on just listening to everything we talked about today, I do believe that we can we can provide some type of support or resource uh to tenants.
Um but I'm I'm >> yeah I'll just say that this is not novel. Um but uh and we we have a city well we have two cities that actually have codified it but one city that you know that where it's being used but I um I'm I'm going to push for it to move forward and I think it's going to be on GBA because clearly uh there's going to be more discussion on that. Um but I think that you've seen it to council
member Cabierro's point. It's been coming up over time and time again. um it is you're hearing from the community and I can speak on behalf because I am an advocate in that community of the efficacy that this tool allows um and the power balance that it just does the minimal to help shift to tenants. So um I'm I'm ready to move forward on it.
Um and and then we also have for everyone's public knowledge like we have a extra week this week in between our cycle. So u we have three weeks until our um council meeting. So, I think that that'll give us plenty of time to to get the answers that we need and be prepared to take a vote on. >> Is this one of the things you needed to talk to me about?
>> Uh, no. >> All right. Well, can we talk about this a little more outside? Absolutely.
All right. Thank you. >> I appreciate it. Um, >> all right.
>> GBA. >> Yeah. My brain is tired. >> All right. Mr. >> Would we be would we be interested in having this another discussion on on
this? I mean, at least I picked up some questions. >> Some Yeah, rather than move forward if we would be open to putting this over to uh one more. I got some more questions.
I I know we're at we're at time. Um, >> but it's Yeah. Yeah. It's important enough, I think, to to um I really want to get this right.
I I really do. And and I want to take seriously also what what our what our um what our uh city attorney's office said. But again, full disclosure, I am I'm I mean, I want to vote for this. I I'm deeply resonant with it, but I do have some more questions and I think others of us just listening to the flow of the conversation.
So, will we be open I'd like to recommend at least one more conversation about it, but that's just >> I'm not open to that. I do think that it's come before the council several times. Um you've had the advocates that have been here. you've also had the memo from the city attorney for quite some time at this point and um and we've got this long period in between now and the meeting and we can have a conversation again at the meeting. Um I think that we
the work has been put into this ordinance as it is. Um and so to honor that and to honor addressing it in a timely manner, I think we should move forward on this. If it fails at the meeting and we want to bring up something different, then I think that we go from there. >> I don't think it my point is I don't want it to fail.
I and and and in fairness, we've never gotten this close before. It has come before the council before, but we've never had a conversation this in depth. We've never had a treatment of it with this much nuance. And, you know, I don't want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Um I I think that there's a path for us. I would just like to have some more conversation. So, >> I I agree because I'm leaning towards supporting it. I just want to make sure that we can make it work.
Um, I just want to get it right. I'm I'm definitely actually I'm definitely going to support it. I just want to make sure that we can um uh just kind of, you know, just just meet all sides of it. So, >> and I I just want to offer some clarification before between uh tenants
tenants both city tenants united and previous things. It was a menu of things, right? It wasn't just the one thing. " There has never been model ordinance language provided to us.
Um, nor has there been uh there's been analysis because in that case, there were many items listed. So, there was lots of analysis done, but we've not ever had um this specific of an example in front of us. So, I'm a fan of of also um how about this? It's a thing to, you know, there there's a really clear legal memo in front of us from our city attorneys and that's who we hire. And so, at least for this council member, I need some real time about uh whether I'm I'm how I'm moving forward. I'll just say that the three weeks seems like reasonable time and because it's been it's been very obstructionist kind of moving it forward from 2020 and 2019
like it's just felt really like a lot of push back. I'm not sure why but it feels vaguely similar. And um I do think that folks have been I I think what what comes to mind specifically for me is that you know Howie has passed and he's been working on this for a long time um and just trying to get some tenant provisions in place and if we can't you know I I don't know what you're going to hear even after the three weeks like another two weeks five weeks I don't know what you're going to hear that's going to be different and um than the the city attorney's memo. So, I'm not sure what the the the delay will do other than delay it, but >> no, I I think that personally speaking, I think there's more substance in this than it's been before that I remember. Uh, and I and I I'd rather delay to where we can bring it back before this body and we continue the liberation and come up with something that works. Um uh for me it's
not about Tik Tok, it's about truly just >> when you say something that works works. >> So So right now I think closer than ever we have a a city attorney's memo and we have an actual um ordinance. I mean uh what council uh uh yeah an ordinance that council member Cook has bought together. They're not totally aligned just yet, you know.
So there's some question around. So, you would be working towards aligning the ordinance and the >> I would work I would like to work again with you guys >> and three weeks is not enough time. >> I I don't have time in three weeks. I'm kind of going through some things right now.
Uh but I I would like to formally do that in this body and and I'm just being honest. I don't have the time. >> And I just want to be really clear like there's always a lot of eviction like concerns rising up over time. And I and I hear you completely. I rarely have the time, but I do think that this is a much more pressing issue knowing that prices are going up like and knowing that people are facing these evictions like it's it's pressing enough when we talk
about housing being a strategic goal. Like I just want to make sure that we're not just pushing it off to push it off. That's all. >> I and I don't think that's the case in this.
I I I really don't. I'd rather get it right. I don't think that I mean Yeah, you're right. You're right.
Everything you just said is exactly right. I do not think three weeks is was if we if we do this within three weeks versus five weeks. I don't think that's going to be much of a difference. Yeah.
I I don't think that's going to be much of a difference. I I just want to make sure that I come back after I spend more time reading this and understanding it better, spending time with council member Cook and and better understanding her and then looking at what's out there. I do think we can find a way forward. When I say wait for it, the options that I talked about, is it an operationalized resource that residents can use that will have the same effect?
Pros and cons of that. Is it passing an ordinance? Is it stating uh you know uh we know it may we know based on preeemption or whatever it may or may not be utilized or it may not be able to hold water or whatever, hold weight, but
we're going to put this in place anyway. There are just some some some loose ends that I'd like to tie up. Um, to me it's not about delaying as a tactic. I really want to make this work.
>> Yeah. >> I really appreciate this conversation and I want to I want to thank all of you for asking really good questions. Every single person up here, I think you've asked amazing questions. I've had the the pleasure of sitting back and and listening and benefiting from from your questions and all of the work that the city attorney's office has done.
Um, this is an area where we won't want to proceed with caution. Uh, caution is important and necessary. We don't want to rush to anything. Um, I appreciate the heartache uh that I've heard um explained by the the city attorney's office and from fellow colleagues. Um, I'm also familiar with dancing on the line of uh preeemption in the state of North Carolina and writing uh
legislation, writing local ordinances and and laws that um that that dance on that that dance on that line. Um, I think this provides an important tool. That's how I see this as a an important tool for attorneys uh to be able to to use to protect uh tenants. Uh, and I also see uh potential, it sounds like, for making up ground on additional work that we can enforce, that we can do and and focused on intentionally and comprehensively to better address the needs of uh Durham's Durham's tenants.
Um, and so I I think that we need to to also do that in addition to uh adding a tool to the toolbox like this. I understand the slippery slope argument as well. I completely hear that. Um I also see this as an unusual case. Um not one that I think that we frequently
bring up a a case where we'd adopt an ordinance that isn't necessar, you know, using the police powers that wouldn't necessarily be uh that wouldn't necessarily be enforced by by the city. I think that's that's rare. I don't think that this would be some become something that would be normal for for us to do. I've never heard of us doing something like this before.
Um I'm not worried about us uh seeing this case play out and then continuing to repeat it over and over um and kind of erode the value of of our police powers. Um and so I I I support I support this. Um I understand if if colleagues are are hesitant and need need some extra time. Um, I personally am comfortable with it.
Um, after hearing all of the conversation, recognizing the the heartburn and and where we are on that. Um, and so I I hope that we're able to to proceed with this um once once colleagues are have been able to answer all of their questions. Thank you. >> I think we have an opportunity to be a
model city in this and and not only in the state, but you know, in Dillian states. >> And Mr. May if I might I it's at no to time when this has come up before has anyone there's not a person on this council who doesn't want to uh bolster the right of tenants and no one's obstructing anything or has obstructed anything. Um it's called due diligence.
Um we there was nothing to obstruct because we've never had an ordinance before. It's been a list and menu of ideas. It was very abstract. I remember I was there.
There were abstracted conversations. We've never had this much meat on the bone. I'm at I'm absolutely committed to to do I to to doing this. Um I am also uh committed to the other things that we're committed to as as council members, as fiduciaries of the city, as protectors of our brand, as guardians of our of our empada. Um, if we can help folk uh put them in a better position, as I've already stated, put them in a
better position in going to court and not cross a threshold of passing laws we know we're not going to enforce and telegraphing that we're passing we're not going to enforce and fine. If we have to do that, then I'm with it. I'm saying on record, I'm with it. I just would like some more time to explore it and some more time to uh treat it again with our attorneys, our city attorney's office.
Um and and our colleagues. I'm asking that we take yes for an answer. Um but let us do the due diligence around it. >> I just want to make sure it's clear.
We have passed ordinances. We actually did move things forward from that list, that menu, and this council did, well, not this exact council, but the council did approve a number of those items. So, >> we didn't approve this ordinance, >> not this ordinance. What I'm saying wasn't >> what I'm saying is there was an ordinance that came there were ordinance that came forward.
>> Okay. >> Yeah, we're on the same page. Thank you guys. >> I just want to say that I appreciate that everyone is trying to reach a yes on this and I I see that that is happening and and I do appreciate that.
I just want to express my frustration that when I ask for additional times on things, what I get told by this board is that the buck stops here and we have to make a decision. So, I'm happy to push this off to one more work session, but I just really want people to think about that because like literally this happened not the past meeting, but the meeting before um when I asked to send something back to or we asked to send something back to planning commission because we I was like we have a different project in front of us and I want to use those tools and I was told like the buck stops here. We we make a decision tonight. Um I you know it is what it is. I just like I just want to call it out because it is frustrating to sit on this council and like bring something that like yes, we may have had a long conversation about it today and I know that it's worrisome but like these folks from Riverside have been working on this for a really really long time. Community advocates have been working on this for years and so I just want to voice that it is frustrating but I understand and I'm like happy to put it off one more but I I don't want to I don't want to delay it any further.
>> Totally. and and every case is treated differently. Uh, council member, I I wouldn't I wouldn't oversimplify that. I get your point.
Uh, but every every things are every case is differently and I don't want to project to the community that we're being uh overly subjective about what's serious and what's not, what we're prioritizing or not. um you know it may be another situation tomorrow where you know this and that's why we're a deliberative body of seven and you guys may feel differently about a policy that I do and vice versa you know so um it is it it if we all voted the same on everything then we wouldn't need to be here so um all right uh we have a presentation I quit All right, I'm going to use the restroom. I'll be right back. >> Yeah, let's take a >> We'll take a fiveminut hour break. We're back in session at 407 >> and we won't be mad if you talk fast.
Ezra and uh Milo
Friends, it's 407. If we can come back together. >> If y'all can hear me in the building, it's 407. If colleagues would return, >> we get to other matters. just real quick. Okay.
All right, friends. We're back in session. It's 408. Item number six, amendment to amendment number four, the South Ellerby wetland and stream restoration design services contract.
This is a presentation uh slated to go 10 minutes. Good afternoon. Good to see you. >> Good to see you.
Good afternoon, uh, Mayor Prom Middleton and council members. Uh, my name is Sandy Wilbur. I'm with the environmental and street services department. And so, uh, today I'm going to do a short presentation, um, on the update for the South Elev restoration project.
There is an agenda item number six that this is attached to, um, that is amendment four to a professional services contract that provides construction, administration, outreach, and permitting for the project. I wanted to give you just a little bit of a background on the project, uh, the progress we've made and some of the next steps. So, um, this project, uh, started off, um, you know, a few years ago when
we bought the the property. Um, it was a very unique, um, location to the city for a couple of reasons. Uh it's a 9 acre site uh very large site for uh storm water retrofit. It's located in the low point of the watershed which is also um what is needed to do storm water treatment.
It gets runoff from the downtown area and nearby neighborhoods um conveyed through the site um and most of that upstream area is um in pipes and not open channels. So it was a very um great location for treating storm water. Um almost the entire site was in the flood plane or the flood way. And historically the site itself had two streams on it that um had a confluence there. Um also I think this site's very unique because the community was very involved in the project. We've been um speaking with uh members of the
community, different groups um through our outreach and engagement and they are very encouraging for the um positive environmental improvements that will come along with this project as well as the amenities um and uh enjoyment that they'll be able to um have with this uh urban green space. 3 acre wetland with about 200 linear feet of stream that's restored and that all that runoff from downtown uh drainage about 500 acres is running through this site and being treated. Um it will improve the water quality locally as well as benefiting um Falls Lake which is a local um water supply and uh will help us with the Falls Lake rules and I'll I'll speak a little bit more about that later. Um looking at this slide you can see that that is the drainage area for
Ellerby Creek. Uh the star in the middle is the location of the project. The two smaller pink and green um areas there are the drainage area that goes into the site. Um up around the right hand corner you see Falls Lake.
And so that as I spoke before is a um is a water supply for the area and has some associated nutrient management rules associated with that. Um the rule the rules that are in place now do um require that the city treat uh developed areas that have not uh do not have storm water quality provided for them right now. Um that's sort of in contrast with you if you look at new development, right? They go through the process and they have to build storm water quality facilities into their plans. But we certainly have older development that were was not um those facilities were not uh built on. So this project you know was very unique
in that we were able to treat quite a bit of area that um you know was built you know decades ago where before there was any kind of storm water rules. So, the project goals and benefits, as I talked about before, there's an improvement in the local water quality of Ellerby Creek. Um, making some reductions that are required by the Falls Lake rules. Um, creating, um, a natural area in, you know, right near downtown Durham and, uh, being able to also improve flood control.
Um this project uh takes out of the flood plane four multifamily structures and 24 single family structures. Um as well as reducing the flood elevations to um other homeowners downstream of the project. So that's a real improvement for them. We have done uh along the way quite a
bit of uh a variety of public outreach including um interactive workshops um videos on how the wetland will be treating the storm water and working with local schools to provide um fence art. So just looking at the project a little bit um close up um you can see there's like two arrows on the um right hand side. Those are the arrows where the water comes into the project. It will travel through some pre-treatment and then through the center of the project with meandering streams and wetland areas providing natural filtration to reduce the pollutants. uh the the water exits the site on the left hand side you can see the the other arrow um where it flows to South Elerby Creek. Uh I also on this uh slide I've got the halfmile loop trail that's highlighted that's also going to serve
as a maintenance path for uh the facility itself and some of Duke Energy's um facilities. Uh we also have uh that loop trail will be connecting to the uh rail trail. So we've been working closely with them to make sure that you know we get all the grades um lined up and are able to um have some connection to that trail which I think will help both of our projects. Um, if you look along Trinity Avenue, we are going to have a demonstration rain garden, which I think will help uh the community um get close-up looks to some of the the wetland type plants and seeing how um those uh rain gardens work. Um and we'll also have like a plaza area there. And in that plaza um we have uh contracted with a artist through general services um to
um put in a few art installations. Uh one is called the sound and sun basins which is uh they're roughly like a half sphere with some animals on top in kind of a sundial um orientation. There'll be creature comforts which uh are some animal sculptures that you could climb coming out of the ground and some historical and ecological facts that are going to be on the benches. Um and of course we'll have other educational and seating areas around the project.
We were able to get some grant funding for this project through so through the ARPA Lassie program which is local assistance for storm water infrastructure investment programs. We got three million from them. Uh North Carolina land and water fund. We got two different um grants from them. A flood reduction grant for 1 million and a restoration grant for 750,000.
And also the city of Raleigh has a program um for uh land within their water supply wershed and so they gave us a grant for $265,000 also. So that's uh all in total about 5 million for the project. Uh the overall budget which uh comes from the storm water utility budget is about 41 million and that would include the grants. um it does not include the art, but it will include the the grants and um I'll go into a little more detail on the different um phases and and costs.
So on this slide, I'm going to show a little bit about the progress and the next steps that we've had on the project. So we started this as I talked about before in acquiring the land. We acquired it from uh Duke University. Um after you know extensive outreach with the community to ensure that they were
um encouraging of the project. Um after we acquired it eventually there was some issues with some vandalism. So we um decided to go through with a building demolition project um so that um to try to eliminate that. Uh we had a few surprises with that.
There was like a 10,000galon underground storage tank and certainly uh you know lead and asbestous and all those kind of fun things inside the building since it was from 19 uh 1950s uh when it was built. So we were able to um remediate those things. Then um when we were moving forward to do phase two, which is the excavation of soils, um we ran into some issues with um the state's soil testing requirements. Uh they were kind of in the process of like changing um how they were going to evaluate soils and where they needed to be disposed of. So, we
ended up doing a um gridding out basically the the site and taking geotechnical borings to try to um comply with those regulations and see where those different grids needed to be disposed of. We also were working with uh both water management and general services to try to um have some beneficial reuse of the soils as they were appropriate. Um, so we were able to use some of that for the um land the old landfill cover and um some with the Miss Lake project. Uh, next we uh moved on to phase three. And so um in the process of uh doing those construction drawings, we were working with Duke Energy. Of course, they um have a parcel that's just north of the project that has two um two stations up there that are the oldest
well I guess at least one of them is the oldest one in uh the city. So they were very interested the interested in having access to those substations and also uh you know all the utility lines that were going to those stations. So we worked through some issues with them. Um and then also uh in the abandonment of the right of way um between the two properties so that we could use part of that property for our embankment for our project.
Um so the there was an abandonment of alongation avenue for that. Um then u we did move forward with trying to bid that project as three uh just phase three. Um and we got one bid on our first bid and then the second bid we we did get three bids but it was about twice what we anticipated that it would be. So we went back and talked to the contractors and we talked to our consultants to try to come up with a new plan to see what how we could do this
moving forward. And so it was decided to um split these into phase 3A and 3B so we could get some more favorable bids um splitting out the utility relocation then the drainage items so that uh you know those those type of contractors could bid for this project. So, um that kind of brings us up to um pretty much today, this week. Um we did put out the bid for the 3A um and got we did get two bids.
Um so, so that's good. So, we're going to rebid it. Um and then we actually talked to another contractor and we think that they're going to give us a um bid also. So, hopefully those will be favorable. So, we should know about those very soon um on what those costs will be. And then, um as that project is, uh being we're we're anticipating to start that um hopefully by the um in the winter, this winter.
And then, uh as soon as that project is getting towards the end, we want to go ahead and like bid out the um 3B so we can start the 3B project um right after that. Um, as far as the construction cost of all phases, we're looking at about um 32 million for all of those um different phases put together. So, with that, I will leave you with uh this this photo with the fence art um for the local schools. This was we worked with a local artist Lee Crawford and um the schools were Durham School of the Arts, George Watts, and Central Park School. Um the project has hit a few bumps, but I'm really grateful for all the support that we've gotten from the community. I still, you know, talk to people really almost on a weekly basis about about the project and about, you know, what how they might be able to be um interacting with it and where we are
on it. And I'm very excited to, you know, get to the end of this project so that people can enjoy all of the amenities and that, you know, Durham can um benefit from the environmental cleanup of it. >> That's all I have. >> Thank you so much for a great presentation, colleagues, council member wrist and council member Cook.
>> Uh so first of all, I want to thank the city manager for bringing this back to us. This is one of the big public projects we've been talking about that's been people ask about a lot. So I'm glad to have a conversation here at the work session. So thank you for putting on the agenda.
Miss Wilbur, thanks for the presentation here. At least for me, you don't have to sell me on the benefits of this. This is like a hugely important for Durham terms of open space um in terms of water quality. I mean I just sat yesterday for three hours at the UNRBA meeting talking about falls lake rules. Anything we can do to reduce nutrients in falls lakes and I know especially one of our biggest challenges um is like is storm water in our where we have existing development is one of the biggest problems to remediate that. So this is a big huge benefit for water
quality. So thanks for all that. Um my only question is um is about is about completing this project. So we've I know the first contract was issued back in 2017 >> and so you're saying here in the progress that we're going to complete this by 2028.
So it's going to take us more than 10 years to complete this. And I know that there as you described there's unexpected things always happen. the underground tanks you discovered or the the challenges with the with the third phase sort of getting contractors. So, we're like what I want to ask and I've asked this for other projects in the past is like what because I know things there are always delays, but what can we do now to speed this thing up a year?
What's possible? >> Oh, from here forward. >> Yeah. To deliver this thing in 2027.
So, we can tell the residents like y'all been asking about this. We know it's been 10 years. We've actually and we've had some delays, but now we're doing some stuff to make so we can deliver deliver this a little faster because we've delayed it a bunch of times because I'll be honest with you, like the picture's great there, but it doesn't look like that anymore. It doesn't look like that anymore. It's
looks dilapidated. So, people are asking what's going on. So, can we deliver this a year sooner? And what would it take to get there?
>> Yeah. So, I think um at this point to try to um quicken things up, it's really just, you know, getting the contracting through and also, you know, making sure that that second phase follows along on that first phase. So, you know, kind of squeezing those two phases in um as close as possible um and being able to have them start, you know, as early as possible after the first phase um gets finished. So, for example, here it says that that um and that's just so we're clear.
So, so you mentioned RFP, but we what we're approving today is a contract with a a contractor to do phase 3A, right? We're not going >> to do the construction administration. It's professional services. >> Oh, not the So, you still have to do the So, we're doing bids, >> right? Yeah. We I we decided to go ahead and you know do this but we you will be getting the you know once we get bids open in and and that sort of thing
you'll be getting the contract for the construction but we have not issued that yet. Can we even start the like I know we're going to like can we start the RFP for phase 3B while we're doing 3A so we can kind of like >> that's that's exactly what we anticipate doing is like as soon as we are um you know out the appropriate you know month or two to couple months we will go ahead and get that phase started so that they can start immediately >> for once 3A ends. >> Correct. >> Yeah.
Could they do like start start 3B while 3A is still completing? >> I don't think so. Just the nature of the work of of how the how it's lined up. I'm not I'm not sure.
I could look at it. I could look at it, but I think >> they would have to be pretty finished, right? >> But you're saying do you think there's a chance we can do this a little faster? Maybe completed by 27.
Do I hear you saying that? >> I don't know if I could promise that. I will say I mean I will do it as we'll be
doing it as fast as we can but there's a certain amount of construction time that um it will take so >> because I also you know when projects go on longer then it's also like opportunity cost for staff I'd rather have I'd love to finish this up and have staff get on to other stuff too >> yeah I mean I think we're at the point where it takes a certain amount of time to construct it so I don't know how much faster we can do on the construction part of it like once we're at the construction phase >> just yeah whatever ever you can do to like move this thing faster. People will be happy. We can >> because we pushed the the timeline back multiple times. >> Certainly thematically consistent comments with the last work session.
Uh you know, I think uh we and we we had conversations after that that work session. I think you know, we understand we're hearing a strong sense of urgency from council. You know, I just want to affirm and support staff that you know, if we had simple simple switches, we'd flip them. uh and if we thought that there were you know really uh high return investments we could make uh we would make them. So I I don't think I I
don't want to set expectations high. Uh I think this is more of a looking for the small efficiencies in the couch cushions kind of exercise which we are very intent on doing. So I think I think council message received clearly you want to see these moving as quickly as possible. I think one of the things that we communicated just as as quickly as last work session is down to all of our project managers that if there are any delays that they believe that either managers office uh assistance or council assistance could be at play, please let us know.
So we we are doing the things I think you want us to do, but I also want to support that. I don't want to set expectations high or say yes because we want to say yes. I think we need to give you realistic expectations. So, we're going to keep doing both things, doing everything we can to accelerate, but also giving you as as realistic expectations as possible.
>> Thanks, Copier. >> Oh, it's a cook. >> Okay, sure. Forgive me, Council Member Cook. >> Thank you. Um,
this might not be a specific question for you, but maybe for the manager. Um this is this is the second time that we've heard about bids coming back being extraordinarily high and the result being then to bifurcate out parts of the bid. Um is this not something that we're now that we're seeing it that we're able to to like more readily predict so that we don't have to waste the time of like getting back those high bids and then rebidding out after separating some of that stuff. Um, I don't want to put DCM on Propes on the spot, but I think given her exposure to the market, uh, in, you know, a lot of these different scenarios, I think she's probably better suited to answer that than me.
>> Uh, thank you, Gina Propes, deputy city manager. Um I would say we're experiencing very similarly what you've seen happen in Raleigh with BRT and um along with budgeting and some of these budgeted budgets were produced many years ago and along that time you know we were able to advance things. We're able to um bid them. You have we have cost estimates from engineers at the
time that we go to bid but the market does what the market does and sometimes there are surprises on bid day. You definitely don't want it to be a two times the amount. Then you have to restrategize where where is the labor force if this is too big or not the right size for a large general contractor. Do we break it out into um segments for direct utility contractors and then for the wetland stream contractor because we have a very tight construction market when it comes to availability of contractors to do our work and we're competing with others.
So, I think that we we have learned a lot and we see what's happening in our other communities with with rebids and even this one, you know, um as Sandy just explained, they open bids on Monday. I only got two bids. You can't award with two bids. They have to rebid it.
And they're I'm hoping to have another bid to make sure we have, you know, the ability to move this project forward. >> But we can use all of that to be very um surgical in the future. And I think just
to the spirit of the question, I I think you know really the heart of your question is are we paying attention when these things happen and do we pivot when we need to? And I I feel pretty comfortable the answer is yes. In the 12 years I've been with the city, I think I've seen our contracting uh and bidding procedures morph with the market. And when the market is changing, we try and adop adapt our procedures.
And I agree, we are seeing that more now. And as as DCM proves indicated, you I think we're we will continue to try and find the best strategy to move projects as quickly and efficiently in that environment. >> Yeah. I mean, I I'm just hearing you say that there's cost predictions, but we know uh the time frame of this project, right? And so I mean I I do feel like it's at least like it's at least predictable that those cost um predictions are not going to be accurate that we had made originally. Um and so I'm just like wondering I mean and bifurcation of course is a tool um and uh but I'm just wondering if there's like other things that we can think this is not this is just like a broad question not to be answered like right
now but I'm just this just something that I'm thinking about as we hear it happening frequently. So I think that's it. >> Thank you. I appreciate the com uh presentation and conversation and I'm glad we are moving forward.
I mean it looks I mean it's almost double what we thought it was going to be. Um which is a lot of money. I think my question is more around the CIP. I I feel I feel like we're getting better around the idea like we we pack too many things in there.
And so I think that for me if if it's clear that things are moving I would rather take things off the list like every year you know it's a fiveyear thing. construction costs, whatever. I think there needs to be a strategy around we already moving forward that this thing that that's where we gota throw the money at it to get it done. And if that means that there's things that that don't get put in the CIP because we've already we've already put our eggs in a certain basket, I would rather do that than and deliver the project in a timely way or quicker. Um, yeah, we couldn't, you know, the state's process around asbestos and lead is what it is, right? But I think that and
that's not necess that's not just this project. That's just a general approach and I just want to be able to have that conversation when we talk about the budget this coming year. I think that residents will feel better having a like a thing that's delivered and seeing it versus oh a big old list that you know this thing great that's a that's a thing that's never going to happen because this thing that's been here in front of me for 10 years and I live around the corner. I've looked at this thing for a long time.
Um, so that that's just where I'm at. And I we all know what happened and it's still weird. It has, you know, construction has never been the same since CO. Like we all thought, oh, it's the lumber.
Oh, it's this. It has not been the same since CO. So, we're five years in of that wonkiness. Um, and I think that the market's even wonkier today. Um, so that's all. So, uh, question I, um, and this is just out of curiosity.
Are we, um, and not this project specifically, but could be, I guess, um, we, we have some pretty top tier universities in the area, and no, they don't have the heavy equipment, but they do have the, uh, a lot of intellectual capacity. Um, how realistic is it to partner with uh our local universities in some of these major projects in whatever capacity that would be deemed appropriate? And I only ask uh my son goes to Duke, you know, he's a sophomore, but he went halfway around the world to Swasilland Esini to build bridges because they didn't have the infrastructure. and they partner with a nonprofit that that build bridges. " I never thought about I mean, I've thought about it before, but I never really acted on it. And I'm looking at these major projects and I'm thinking about having worldclass
institutions in our in our backyard like right in here right in the city. Um, have we ever entertained that? >> I I can answer a little bit. I mean just uh in my group of course we do storm water retrofits.
So um we have we do partner a lot in like grant projects um with like NC State and we also have done some stuff with Duke. Um they provided us some information on this project. Um they did a study, one of the classes did a study um about uh equity and how it could be used um in this project. And so we um like all of uh a lot of different projects we go to the university.
We have had um there there was a project where we were doing residential rain gardens and we got uh the university was a part of one of the teams. Of course you know as far as construction you know we have to go through you know a formal bid process. So if they were partners it's more I see it more on the
professional services side. A lot of times there's some university involvement. I don't see it as much on the construction side because as you said they don't have the the big equipment and things but certainly um I have seen them be on teams. >> Yeah, I I appreciate that.
Um and and I also ask because I think about the homes that were built between NCCU and Hillside. They were built by high school students of Hillside High School and those are actually homes that people still live in today. I think about Wake Tech who has a heavy machinery uh course uh and they are starting to do some you know um not I mean it's it's like practicums uh they're doing some of that work so it's good to hear that that we are engaging them and I hope that we can do that more uh there is value to that hands-on experience and it's it's mutually beneficial uh if we could you know not necessarily pay millions to a contractor but also could give some real hands-on learning any experiences to young people that are learning here in
the city? Um, I had another question, but I I'll pass and if it comes back, I'll ask. >> Council member Freeman. >> And thank you and the benefit of following a strategic plan with presentations like this.
Uh, you're thinking about it in that big picture. But um I just wanted to ask um knowing that we now have a vision and zero coordinator um is there any conversations between transportation on this project. I will say that I was um the president of INC when Duke D well no I think it was a yeah >> when Duke Diet and Fitness first came up and and we were having these conversations about transport or at least what the corridors could look like in connection and so I don't know if that conversation is continued or but I didn't see anything in the report so I'm a little yeah we are definitely we're uh adjacent to the rail trail so um most of that conversation goes with the rail trail and the connection to our project, right?
>> Through that plan. >> I was just ask if you could just make sure to keep that included >> in these presentations so that you know future councils, however long, if it's 28 or 32, whenever it happens, that they understand that this there's been a lot of forethought put into this this um >> project. >> We'll do. >> And then also um I think >> Yeah.
No, I think I'm good. Thank you. The um one other thing I have was how uh one of the biggest issues we deal with in in contracting uh and bidding out is uh we have a lot of contractors but we don't have a lot that can take on a big chunk of the project. How how many pieces can we break these down can we break this down into? Um >> I mean I think at this point we are in sort of the logical um breakdown um because it's more of the structural and storm water uh facilities for the first phase and more of the um people who do
stream restorations and things like that in the second phase. So to me that that in this particular case I think those are the logical I mean I think once you start breaking it down too many then you got you run into the like trying to line it up to make sure they move across. So I think >> um at this point I feel comfortable with the two breaking it down into two and it does look like you know we at least got the two bids on this so and and potentially talk to a contractor to see if they would bid as as a third bidder too. So >> cool.
Well, I know I know some goats that can do some clear cutting, >> you know, did it for paper streets. But lastly, I say one of the comments I put on a strategic plan um sticky note earlier this morning was >> diversifying our land use and purpose. I love seeing that we can have a park that is multi-use uh that's an active space. Um, yeah. I mean, it's a beautiful park that does a real, you know, it's storm water storm
water facility, but it's a park and I I just love being able to see that that that multi-use. So, thank you. >> Thanks. And I would just like to ask um in addition to the storm water restoration the I'm sure there's conversation and I'm I'm sure it's just not in the presentation but around how you'll be using solar powered what have you on site.
I think those are those are pieces that could build into our um uh oh my gosh it just went right out of my head. It's been too long. Um, but our our carbon footprint reduction conversation and I know and I'm looking at Stacy back there and and I know that this this is part of the conversation, but I think making sure that those things are in the update presentations are helpful to make sure we see the see across the board how things are moving. We'll do Thank you. >> Thank you, Councilman. Counc, were you did you uh >> I think most of what uh everybody else
has said is is in line with what I want to say. Um just it's a it's a mammoth project. It's expensive. The costs have gone up.
It's been around for really long time, over a decade now. Um and appreciate your work on this highly anticipated project. People talk about this one all the time partially because people have been fed a beautiful rendering. Um and uh this reminds me a lot of the um I forgot the name of the park in in Atlanta that is the the park pond.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Right. Fourth word.
It's a beautiful park um and super accessible and just has completely revitalized the area. So um yeah, thank thank you so much for the work you're doing. >> All right. Thank you so much.
Wonderful presentation. Much anticipated project. Mr. Mr.
Mander, I think you had a matter that you wanted to bring up under other matters. >> So, I had uh three quick updates. The first is that uh I wanted to revisit the discussion on the housing ordinance. Uh,
attorney Rabberg and I had a sidebar just to confer and we want to make sure uh we have clear direction from council on uh what level if any of staff's support or attorney's office support is expected and what the nature of the work would be between where the item sits now as council member Cook has submitted it on the agenda today and how it would come back. So, uh, we just want to make sure if there are expectations of staff or the attorney's office that we get those clearly. Uh so we wanted to put that on the table and then I have two items after that. >> Yeah. I since I I my specific question was is there some way we can empower tenants to exploit the voice of the city certifying um that list that makes uh a residence uninhabitable either through ordinance or through some other instrument that does not cross the threshold of saying you you don't have to pay your rent which we cannot enforce
by per uh uh our council's um reading, but is there anything short of that where we can still achieve the the end of is there language we can craft that doesn't cross the threshold of rent um prohibition, but gives uh it still has the same impact and effect of tenants being able to say there's an ordinance by the city that says this this place is uninhabitable. And that's that's what we're standing on here in the court. That's >> so it sounds so Sophia had in the memo made two potential alternatives. >> It sounds like you want us to expound on the first one.
>> Yeah, that would be helpful to me. >> Okay. >> And to then to explore with my colleagues the the viability of the palatability of it. Does it still meet our end of wanting to empower attendance without putting us in in a position of passing a law that we know we're going in knowing it's uninforceable?
>> That's my ask. >> And is it acceptable to the council if that comes in the form of a memo or and draft ordinance provisions? >> Is that what you're asking for in the interim? >> Yeah.
Yeah. And and that's he just articulated what I was going to request. >> Okay. Um, I just want to be able to lay all the options out based on um, what was presented and what our options are where we can most empower our tenants without, you know, um, you know, crossing over into that line of um, uninforcable >> um, laws.
>> Okay, we'll do what we can. >> And I want to be clear that the ordinance as written is still going to be on the agenda. when we come back for the work session. >> Oh yeah, absolutely. No, absolutely. No, and and and my my my my expectation is that that we would juxtapose that with the uh with the ordinance, right?
And and may I just say it's it's Council Member Cook's leadership and passion that have brought me to this point. I just want to, you know, I want to make a distinction between sending something back to an advisory body and keeping it before us. So, I don't want you to feel in any way that, you know, that >> we don't we're not honoring your requ I I just see a substantive difference between this is us doing our due diligence as the last final arbiter as opposed to shopping it out to someone else. So, I just wanted to be very clear, but it is your passion and leadership that I think that has caused this and brought this and I hope you'll see this as honoring it.
Thank you. And uh do you envision that being on the next work session or do you have a request that council give you more time? I >> I mean I think we can it's not that heavy a lift just to expand on that. I think my question is do you want that as just a standalone that I send to the council or do you want it incorporated with council member Cook's materials for
consideration? >> Could we have both? >> Sure. Yes.
Yes. Let's have it stand alone because I'm going to leave mine as I wrote it. >> Okay. >> So, is that what what date is that?
What's >> the next night? >> Okay. Yeah. So, we would have basically an additional attachment to what's already on our >> What I just heard council member say, council member Cook say is that she doesn't want us to incorporate it as an attachment.
You want it as a separate >> informationational item. Correct. >> Like not attached to your item. I don't want it meshed with my correct work, but as an attachment is fine.
>> Okay. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
No, I wasn't talking about incorporating it. >> Okay. So, yes, an attachment is fine like with the same agenda item that we just have those all the information in front of us. >> I didn't clear clearly understand that to be what you said, but thank you.
>> Yeah. >> So, there will be language that we got. I Okay. Yeah, we got >> great. Thank you for that clarification and uh that serves as a good example for
for the the next uh just brief update I wanted to do. Um I wanted to admit that I don't think the the staff has been following a perfectly consistent process in handling requests that come up at council meetings for agenda items. Uh, and as I was discussing this with the council member yesterday and some, uh, different expectations, uh, I mentioned it to the city attorney who thankfully reminded me that council's recent rules of procedure very specifically describe what's going to happen. So, I just wanted to, uh, tell the council that going forward, it is my intention to default to your rules of procedure, which specifically lay out how council members add items to the agenda.
uh it is uh begins at number four on page seven. Uh that will be my default. It is obviously the council's rules of procedure. So you can direct us to do it differently at the time, but short of that, that'll be my expectation. My apologies to any council members who uh have who've not felt well served by the process that we've followed. I think this direction makes
it very clear to me. So if anyone has any questions about that, uh we'll we'll follow that process going forward. >> Can you state what that is? >> Yes.
So the the process in short is that the council member who intends to request an item be added first consult with the mayor prior to a work session uh with the mayor's uh consultation is is what it says. Then the requesting council member uh will uh bring it up at a work session for placement at a future work session. If any council member objects, it has to be voted on and a majority of the council place it on the agenda. If a council member does not object, then it is automatically placed on the agenda.
The item then goes to the city manager for scheduling only and the rules say that the city manager has the discretion to determine the appropriate meeting agenda to include the item. It then calls on the council member and the council member only to prepare the materials for that first discussion. So it says it is the requesting council members responsibility to prepare a
concise report and provide this report along with any relevant attachments for inclusion in the agenda packet. Uh so then that that discussion after it is scheduled takes place and presumably is led by that council member. When that is complete uh the council uh the rules of procedure say that the council may choose to do one of three things. It can discuss the issue and take action at the meeting if no information is required from staff and if council does not seek public input or it can refer the request to a future council meeting at which time a staff report with staff recommendation will be prepared or decide not to pursue the council initiated request.
So at minimum it sounds like a two meeting process one to request and then the next meeting is where the item would be heard. Um, and then if there's a desire for staff work to be followed on, it would be a third meeting at which time staff work would be added to that. So, uh, I wanted to clarify that. I appreciate the council's
thoughtfulness in preparing those guidelines and regret if staff hasn't been following those to the letter. We will going forward. Any questions on that? >> Yeah, just real quick.
Um, Council Member Cook, I'm going to use you an as an example. Um, Council Member Cook reached out. She said, "Hey, I have two things to talk to you about. and I said, "Hey, I'm going to call you right back.
" That was uh yesterday in a different time zone. I've yet to speak with her. And uh so I would request that if there is an item uh just make sure you email me so Cam can facilitate the process without me having to actually like basically she's going to make sure it's in front of my face and it's also going to be on the mayor mayor manager meeting agenda as well. and we'll just move that along.
Um, just, you know, and also just let me know as well. But I I just want to make sure we don't uh I don't drop the ball. Uh, so we can follow that process. >> And how often is the mayor manager meeting? >> Every Monday.
So we have a standing meeting and we kind of talk just about every day also. So with that guidance just for reference uh with council member wrist's uh suggestion of the biophilic cities my presumption would mean then that assuming council has not objected that means it will go to me to schedule I've gotten guidance from you all about when you would like that uh and so then you will prepare that item we will make sure that item gets submitted our staff will will handle the submitting of the item it will be council member wrist's uh obligation to present that item at council and then should council want further work from staff it would come at an end of a discussion there or they may move forward uh at their desire. So as long as we all are clear on that that is what we will follow and if you want to modify that at any time please just let us know. The last update I wanted to provide is that we were not successful uh in our attempt to find an alternate arrangement for your organizational meeting. And so this would revert back to our normal calendar which would be
the organizational meeting would take place uh on the first meeting in December. Uh and that uh under normal procedures would still be a business meeting. I think the one option that's been dis discussed that I don't recommend but I will implement at council's direction is to eliminate a business cycle whereby there would not be business items uh the evening of of the organizational meeting. We would therefore uh the meetings before and after that would would probably have a pretty significant business load.
Uh wanted to provide you that update. We and we're welcome to entertain other ideas. We we've put a lot out there and just you have very complicated calendars as you know. Well, thank you so much.
Um, >> I'll yield to you to settle, Mr. Mayor. >> All right. Uh, just, uh, you want to go ahead and settle up?
>> All right. Go ahead. >> I have a little brief announcement after you do that. >> Uh, to settle the agenda, I have on consent items 1 through 8, items 10
through 12, items 14- 16, item 19, and item 21. On general business agenda, we have item nine. And on general business agenda, public hearings, items 17 and 18. >> All right.
Um, thanks for settling in the agenda. I will, um, entertain a motion to >> move to settle. >> Second. >> All right.
All in favor? >> I >> I All oppose. All right. Thank you guys for a very uh, rich meeting today.
Um, I'll be hosting a reception at the Durham Hotel. You're all invited. Uh, it starts at in 6 minutes. It'll go to 7:30 and I'll be hosting another reception uh tomorrow evening at the same time at at my restaurant.
Um, you're all welcome to please come. And special guest tomorrow is the uh the DNC chair. Uh, so I'll be at the convention
center. All right. Thank you all. Meeting adjourn at 454.