Awesome. --------- Thank you. Um sorry that it's late, but we're going to get started now. Um we have a lot of people here um and a lot to get through which is exciting. Um we are going to start with introductions. I think it's important especially for new
folks um to know the people who are here. But because we have so many people, we'll just do name and neighborhood if that's okay. Um we'll try to figure out online people. Um Tommy will continue promoting to
panelists if desired. Um but I'll go first. I'm James Van Franken. I'm one of the co-chairs and live in the Ridge Street neighborhood. >> Hello, I'm Sarf. I live in Georgetown Green Albam. >> I'm Cypress Smith. I also live in
Georgetown Green. >> My name is Seth and I live on radio. >> My name is Peter Olms. I live in Belmont. Uh Josh Carp and Sfield, >> Meredith McCra, Fried Spring, >> Peter Krebs, Spell Belmont,
>> Herb Ley, North downtown Smith, city traffic engineer, Bren Dunham, city engineer. >> Um Tommy Sranic, Bip Coordinator, Martha Jefferson neighborhood. >> Uh Mike Borhabad, Belmont neighborhood,
>> the Mac transit planner. >> Awesome. Quite a bit. Did you want to start us off? >> Um, Gwennneir Higgins. I'm the BPAC co-chair. Sorry I can't be with you. I'm not feeling 100%. Don't want you all to not feel 100%. Um, I live in Belmont.
I'll pass it to Jen. >> Sorry, G. Jen Fleer. I live in Belmont. Josh >> Josh Locust Grove Plun County Transportation Planner Downtown Mall.
>> Why don't you tell them to pass it? >> Yes. >> If you want to introduce yourself, um, do so now. But no pressure to if you do not want to, if you just want to watch. I'll give a little pregnant pause for
anyone to lovely. Um, next order of business, approval of the agenda for this meeting and meeting minutes for um, last meeting that was our September meeting. Does anyone have any comments or objections to either of
those? >> So moved. Thank you. So what I appreciate my election. Um okay, next public comment. Um hey, welcome back.
Um does anyone have any comment they would like to make to the committee about anything that's not on tonight's agenda? If you're on Zoom, raise your hand if you would like to speak. If you're not
to raise your hand if you would like to speak. >> I want to call people's attention again to the um slip lane on from High Street onto Long Street. It makes it impossible to safely cross with a bicycle. Uh makes
it pretty tenuous to be a pedestrian as well if you're walking from u the south of well from high to river road. Uh and there's a there's a much stronger desire line now that free bridge lane is
a bicycle pedestrian way to uh encourage people or to interest people coming off the river trail to cross at that point to cross the river to get onto free bridge line. But um while that's a a desire line, it's uh I have a stronger
desire to stay alive and not be stuck by the not just the hot right, but the the barrier to to cross that's been added on that hot right. And that that hot right lane affects two lanes whether you're heading east or um
north. So it's it's very dangerous and it needs to be uh deal with. >> Thank you. That will be added to the record, but thank you for bringing it up and continuing to bring it up. Um does anyone else have any public comment
>> with no indications? Oh, >> I have one for the county. Um just uh announcing that our comp plan was adopted uh AC44 on October 15th. Uh so if you can read that, you can go ahead and read that. and then implementation of it will be on January 1. Right now
the the whole process of educating people and making sure that everyone in the county knows kind of the changes coming in. So that's that's exciting. And right now we are just starting to talk about our plan to do a multimodal plan for the county. So that's that's in
its very very very early infancy. >> Albert, can I ask a a follow-on question? >> Yes. Is there any movement within the county to create a a BPAC? >> Um, not right now. We have a lot of
stuff going on. So, we're we have like four VOTE studies and things. So, we're a little bit busy. Um, but that's something that as we do a transportation multimodal plan. I think that's maybe we do want to talk about in there. >> Cool. Thank you. >> Awesome. Um that brings us swiftly on to
our first of um two main agenda items tonight. First of which is traffic engineering. We've invited Brendan Duncan, city engineer, and Caleb Smith, um, city traffic engineer, to come and speak to us about the this year's quick
build program, the quick builds that have gone in. Um, and hopefully about the future of the quick builds, what what's in store. Um, thank you for coming. Do you have a presentation? So pseudo
just just before you do um >> we have 40 minutes a loted to this. I anticipate people have a lot of questions about the quick builds. We'd like to keep it on topic to the quick builds um and the quick build program and the future of the quick build
program. I know a lot of what we do touches on a lot of what you do but I just want to say before we start we want to keep the questions on topic please. So, I'll I'll start and then I'll turn it over. >> I'm gonna have Caleb do that one, but I'm just gonna kind of lay the
groundwork for a lot of the background on this. Um, so I mean, you all were kind of, um, instrumental in a lot of this, getting it started. Um, uh, you know, we asked you, I think you guys even had a subcommittee that did a lot
of the the quick build suggestions. Um, so that was a several month, you know, going through that list of yours, combining it with our own staff, you know, looking at stuff, um, coming up with it. And it's I think there may have been some
not miscommunication, but just, you know, I'm not sure how best to put it, but expectations, I guess, the mis expectations or of what this program was or has been. um when city council kind
of came to us um they wanted the and they coined it or Sam coined it urgent infrastructure um so that was a subset of this larger quick build program so that's that's really um they gave us until the end of this year um so
basically from June until you know December of this year um were the urgent infrastructure and that was a a defined set of projects um forget exactly how many were in there there's like 30ome some but some of them were like multiple projects in there as well. Um so you
know that was kind of what we've been focusing on um for these first six months were through the majority of those. Um some of them after we started looking at them um were less feasible than we originally thought. So they've they've dropped off. um a couple of them
like on the Rose Hill, we were trying to we wanted to do some mini roundabout um stuff there that after we started looking at it, we realized it was on the the paving plan. Um and it was also part of the Rose Hill uh like or that small
area plan that they wanted to do. Um so I know Oay and her group is kind of reaching out trying to do maybe some public feedback there about what that whole street is going to look like. So, we've kind of delayed these mini roundabouts because we didn't want to
repave the road and restriped it for the mini roundabouts if there were going to be other changes that happened as part of that. So, there have been, you know, a few um here or there that um have either gotten p pulled off completely or just delayed. Um but that's kind of
where we've been up to this point. Um we've really been, you know, full speed ahead and just getting them implemented. Um there have been a couple of them that we've heard feedback um negative feedback from the the community uh more
around just not having the input on the front end. Um which we acknowledge you know the again these were coined by city management as urgent and so it was more these are paint and plastic so they can be removed in the future. So we were
just moving forward with them and it was it was much more a change from what we've done in the past where we've garnered a lot of community support around these projects and then implemented something in a very permanent state and then that's the end of it. Um so this is a change for the
community and we're kind of out there trying to get stuff on the ground and then we're asking for feedback after the fact. um as well as we have new software that allows us to kind of do pre and post analytics of those implementations.
So we'll be presenting that um over the next several months as well as we're now that they're most of them are in place. You now we can actually kind of analyze you know how effective they are um as well as get feedback from our public service folks as to you know how are
they throughout the winter like are they holding up? Um, so some of this stuff, you know, we're we're holding off on doing more implementation, especially as it revolves around the the speed tables and that kind of stuff. It's not that there aren't other applicable places we
could do it, but we want to make sure one, you know, what kind of efficacy are they having on the where we're putting them? Um, and also, you know, the materials that we're using, is that something that we are actually, you know, wanting to do and use going forward? So that may not say we excuse
excuse um that we wouldn't do them but we might go with a completely different material um or a different bender or something like that that we think might hold up better. So, um, I'll stop there for a second because I want to give it over to Caleb, um, and
let him run through kind of a a a quick demo of one of these, um, which is the oakleaf green leaf that, you know, and kind of run you guys through what we did and also a snippet of, you know, like one to two months of, um, the data that
we're starting to get back um, and how we're kind of using the the speed data to kind of determine the efficacy and that kind of stuff. Great. So, if you want to pull up the presentation, >> I speak better when I'm standing up.
Never mind. Yeah, go for it. >> Uh, you have the ability. >> Yeah. But I say that's changing the settings >> more. Click share. Yeah. and then hit screen. Or you can Yeah, you just bottom.
>> What's bottom left? Bottom left. >> Oh, there. There you go. >> Yeah. All right. Cool. All right. Do you you want the mouse, Caleb, or >> No, I'll just ask you to scroll. All right. Um, one sec.
You might have to click the enable something there. Oh, probably need to do that. Oh my goodness gracious. Just hit the button in the top just
hit the top left of that box. >> There we go. >> All right. This uh presentation was shared late in August with the community. Uh Tommy slide please.
So you look at this intersection. There's nothing uh standard about it. >> Intersection there. >> I want to make sure everyone on people can hear Caleb. Can everyone hear? >> I can run into those. >> Okay. All right. Yeah. Perfect. That's
what I'm trying to do. >> All right. Cool. Go ahead. Uh it's an existing four-way There was an existing four-way stop. It did not meet volume warrants for a four-way stop condition, which led to a whole lot of people running stop signs, which is not an ideal condition. A lot of people would
come down here and make this right at a high rate of speed, and it made folks in the neighborhood feel unsafe, especially if they happen to be backing out of their driveway. Next slide, please. Part of this problem was as as a four-way stop, couldn't see everybody,
right? So that made it kind of awkward and also uh lended itself to folks running the stop signs. Next, uh that's that high-speed movement I was talking about. Go next. Uh our solution
was to try to tighten up this uh intersection by redefining who had the rightway. Right? So, because we didn't have the volumes for a four-way stop, nor did we have the sight distance, we had to come up with something where we had sight
distance and we had a very clear assignment of rightway. So, in order to do this, we made this southbound to eastbound approach uh kind of the mainline if you would, making both northbound approaches uh stop control.
And we did this with paint plastic, the ballards um hence paint. Next slide please. Uh so here we just have the primary movements. Uh keep going. This again looking at our site
distances. Now you can actually see where people are so that you know not to pull out in front of them which is helpful. Uh, next. Now, part of the intent was to slow folks down going through
this this curve. Uh, because as residents said, people fly. Uh, our first month, it looked like folks were still kind of flying a little bit. Uh, we compared September 2024 to September 2025. Uh,
just the whole month. So, it's 247, seven days a week. Uh, if I took all the night time out, speeds would probably go down. Um, and then October, we noticed that it's starting to come down a little bit. Uh, there are still areas,
particularly uh down here, it looks like folks might be going a little bit faster. Um, particularly in September, but in October, it It wasn't great, but it was more in line with what it was in October
of the year before. These are two months uh pre and post install. It's not necessarily enough for us to make any sort of assertion that that this is the way to go. out moving forward. We're going to have another meeting with this community uh this
neighborhood uh in January where we're going to make listen listen to their feedback and make enhancements to this according to that. I know that there are some desires for additional uh like
pedestrian area and you know we want to have enough data in our pocket to go yeah that's a great idea or maybe you don't want to be out on the street here. Uh, I do have one question. How many of you think speed bumps work?
Like they're a good thing. >> Yeah. >> Sometimes it will work at what? It depends. >> Well, yeah. Well, I mean, how or think they're effective at slowing people down. So far, our preliminary data looking at several of the locations
where we have the pulled down, they slow the people down who obey the law down by about a mile or two an hour. So, your 85th percentile speeds, which 85% of everybody over goes down one or
two miles an hour. Uh the maximum speeds negligible effect. Um, and to add on to what Brennan was saying, uh, one other thing or condition we have on where we can put these is we have to get the fire marshals in.
>> And even though we are using some of the more lower profile ones, the temporary ones, uh, even at 5 miles an hour is 60,000 lb vehicle. Uh, apparently it gives your kidneys a pretty good beating and they
want to have a say so. So whenever we propose one, they have to sign off on it. And right now, all the ones we have installed only have interim approval from them. So we have to demonstrate that they're worth, you know, getting rattled every time we go over one in
addition to actually performing the way that we want them to. So any questions? Do you think the 81 and 87 max speeds on there are real numbers or it's some kind
of >> I think it might be a data thing. Um again these are >> hard to get that it is >> the the software that we have like we can we can do just a quick month snapshot.
>> Um we can also drill down onto a more daily hourly snapshot. it's just more labor intensive to look at every hour of every day versus just a a monthly aggregate. Um, so where we see those types of numbers, we're going to drill
in and see like, okay, like is this a a speed that we're seeing regularly throughout that month or is this a one-time like possible just data glitch um type of thing? So, >> and if it happened frequently enough, it would show up in the rest of the data as
well. I mean, it would, but you know, if you have one that's 80 miles an hour every day versus, you know, another 500, it's still not going to move the needle that much on the 85th percentile. So, >> and so before we carry on with
questions, is that it for your presentation? >> Yeah, that's long and short. >> Just wanted to double check. >> Y we're brief. We have one one question sort of so far online but >> before we get to the I just wanted to after that um the next step like I said
you know we're going to take the next six months to kind of do this kind of analysis and get more data for all of the ones that we've implemented. Um, we are working with Tommy and Ben to, you know, going probably not, I mean, our
guys now are doing leaf pickup and they'll be hopefully doing or hopefully not doing snow removal, but um, there won't be a lot of movement over the next probably three or four months on doing any new quick builds. Um, but we're working with them to kind of help
prioritize what was left of the quick build list, not the urgent infrastructure, but the quick build list. so that come next spring, any of them that aren't putting down uh the speed tables and that kind of stuff, um we can maybe
start moving forward with some of those. Um but again, we we don't want to one, we don't have a whole lot more. We pretty much exceed or used all the 500k that council gave us for the urgent infrastructure stuff. Um we have some funds through the uh bike ped fund and
um >> neighborhood >> neighborhood. Yeah, neighborhood transportation fund that we could use for some stuff. So, like we have some money, but we don't want to again invest a whole bunch of money in speed tables that one, either maybe they don't survive the winter and we decide we
don't want to put these down anymore, or two, the fire marshall is like, "Yeah, like you know, we're not going to let you put these everywhere." So, we'll we'll have to work together on that to figure out what the prioritization of what's left of that list looks like um for the new year. But
that's kind of I guess the plan for the quick build the the greater quick build um program moving into next year. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Um do you mind if I just do Ethan Ethan's question? He he's commented it
so I'll just read it out. Um Ethan, feel free to jump in. Um but he said, "What are you doing to capture data on bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements on locations like this? Your speed limit is nice, but we care here about bicycle and
pedestrian safety and they're not synonymous. >> Well, they are. >> Yeah. I mean, >> they're not completely synonymous. >> They're not completely, but I mean, most of the places where we were doing these for bike ped safety >> was to lower the vehicle the speeds so
that it was safer for bicycles and pedestrians. Um, so he he's pointed out they're not synonymous because it's possible for speeds not to change, but people to feel a lot more comfortable and that is a a
win for a quick build. >> If that makes sense. >> It does. I mean, we're trying like feelings are hard to quantify. So feeling safe just like I mean people raise their hand they feel that speed
bumps are effective and it's almost a placebo effect >> but how do you know it's a placebo? >> Yeah. No it's not >> because feel that it's feel that it does something but the data doesn't like if if you're if the speeds the vehicles are traveling aren't actually going down
then that's then it's a placebo. >> But but a rumble strip might cause the driver to drive more carefully without reducing their speed. This is true. >> So I mean even even within the driver behavior but but yeah thinking about like a bumpout having the ability to
give a good like left right view for example that >> if anybody has any ideas as to how to quantify that I'm not >> I'm open to suggestions. Um, I would suggest that you don't need to
quantify that. The qualitative data is still data and that that's the sort of data that we've used to identify the locations to put these in. And so the city has heard the people say, I feel unsafe. And I get it that people don't
always um they're not always accurate in the causes of their discomfort and feelings aren't always right, but there are ways to hear.
We're hearing from all of the neighbors we speak to. I feel more comfortable here. I hope that would take be taken into consideration. >> Yeah. I mean, obviously, if we had you, but I mean, we've we've not heard that
much from the community. I mean, there's been some um especially when they first went in of like, hey, thank you for doing this, but it hasn't been a, you know, constant flood of like, you know, it it was an instantaneous thing and
then it it's just kind of fallen off. um we can probably you know try and do you know I think Jose's got her survey stuff now that we can um tap into to possibly do some stuff you know again closer toward the the intent of this was to
build it in the first six months and then kind of gather data in the the last six months of the year um fiscal year um here so um you know we we can definitely you know >> try and get more input anecdotal as to
how people feel about particular ones. Um, and and use that in our decision to either leave them, move forward, or change them, change locations, whatever. >> Sure. Thank you. Um, I'm seeing lots of hands, so I'm realizing belatedly to
that I should put an order on it to keep track. Um, so we'll do one here, two to Ethan, three to Josh if that's okay. Gen 4 Gwynovit 5 >> remember your number
>> um two comments going forward the first is with the numbers that we was shown I do want to just consider that it's nothing to sneeze at I do think that it does show that some speeds are decreasing and it's not effective for every cross-section but it is still
doing something and so I'd like to just voice uh approval or or um appre appreciation for the idea of a yes and approach of like this is still doing something. It is still improving the traffic in this area. It's still decreasing a good number of the speeds
that we're seeing. And so I do think that a yes and approach to any further developments does sound like something that I would consider effective. Um and also your comment on uh trying to accommodate for the idea of feelings if
we need to if nothing else add a a quantitative value. So just like ranking how you feel like do you feel safer? Can you put a number on that safety? Can you rank this as a five out of 10 going to a seven out of 10? And I think that like
as much data as we can pull from the neighborhood that's most affected by the change is going to be the one that I'm the most interested in. Not just because people who are walking in that neighborhood are often the people who live in that neighborhood, but also because you made the comment earlier of
like another big concern is, oh, I'm going to feel this when I'm trying to pull out my own driveway. Um, and if that's the if that's the target for a good deal of that feelings based data, then getting a number out of them isn't
an impossible task. I think it's rather achievable and something that I would I would be happy to see in the future. >> Thank you. Um, was it Ethan, too? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Thanks, James. Um, I guess first
of all, I would take issue with the idea of the placebo effect. Um I I agree that qualitative data on this kind of thing is every bit as valid as speed limits changing or not changing and if people feel safer uh their perception is the reality in the city and their their
feelings are what drive them to vote for things and support for things. So that really matters. Um, I guess, uh, my my main question is about kind of the the charge of traffic engineers and how much of
the work that y'all are tasked with doing is about moving motor vehicles through the city versus moving people through the city. And I think there's a real distinction there. And I'd like to see like whatever we can do as BPAC to encourage
everything in your office to be more focused on the ladder on how people move throughout the city in all of the different ways they do so and less about how motor vehicles move through the city and the speeds at which they do it. I feel like uh there's a lot of people on
this committee that will be happy to kind of shepherd that process and and encourage folks to continue thinking that way because like I said the the the feeling of safety is a valid feeling for a lot of folks and I'd really like to
see that incorporated into the data. >> Thank you Ethan Josh. Yeah. So, I think everyone knows this, but some of these projects are not meant primarily to reduce speeds. And I don't know why we're talking about except they are. So, RFBS are not meant to reduce car speeds,
right? They're meant to make visible crossings. I think uh we have on your several projects adding bike boxes, right? Bike lanes. These are about making people who are not in cars more visible and safer on the roads. >> Yeah. So, if you first of all, I hope
you actually want to do these things at the spring because they're on the list and they're not the contentious speed cushions or uh shook hands or whatever. They're just paint. Um, but if you put in a striped bike land, say speeds didn't drop, you wouldn't call it a
failure. The RFBs, I think, I don't know how you measure it because hopefully there are very few deaths to measure. Um, but we have an RFB at Elliot and sorry, >> let's RFB first. >> Okay, thanks.
>> Um, but I think if you asked me to guess what that's worth, not a whole lot, I think we wouldn't have had a fatality on Elliot last year if that had been there at the time. I can't prove it, but I think those are if you say speeds didn't drop because usually no one's pressing the button,
that's not I think the right evaluation. So I get I get more time and more data on things like the speed questions. Everything else I hope can continue on the list. >> Yes. So the there and I'm sorry I didn't make that distinction. There are there are several items on the urgent
infrastructure like the RFBs like the no rate turn on red like the stop signs on the slip lanes. Like those aren't going away. Like we're not testing those, right? Those were just we put those in. So like even within the urgent infrastructure there was there were
things that we wanted to do because they needed to go in and then there were things that we wanted to test, >> right? >> And so th those are two very different things. >> Yeah. Let me just add in there real quick. Um we wanted to test because in part we had to get approval through the
fire department. So we wanted to make sure that those were new to the city of Charlottesville. So, but there are things that aren't new that like to Brendan's point could just go in. Um, but there was very much a testing element to some of this stuff. >> That's that's good to hear. All I would say for now is if there's a pause for
evaluation of the new things, I would hope we can keep building the not new things because we feel confident they work. I know your your team is busy through through spring with with snow and leaves, but um if we are stuck on some projects, we can generate more
ideas for things that are not novel and put them in in the meantime. I think it's worth noting particularly with RFPs is you know they are good counter
measures when they are appropriately applied and you know we can't I have people ask me to put them everywhere all the time you know at some point they become so saturated they become meaningless and
they are ignored And you know they because you're hitting a button and you think, "Oh, now everybody sees me. I have the right of way." Especially around UVA, I watch people hit the button and just they don't even look. They walk right out
into the right out into the crosswalk. I use the RFB across uh Ridge over by the McDonald's nearly every day walking from my office over here to city hall. And
every bit of once a week, you know, there's a bus and somebody on the far side upward lane might not see me. They don't stop even though the lights are flashing. They'll come by just as fast as practice. So, you know, it's
important that or to realize that those can engender a false sense of security on the pedestrians's part and that if they are overused, they become just part of background noise.
And we have and we just have to be very selective and it's not something that >> we can necessarily do because you know somebody goes I really feel like we need this here it you know because it could actually be more dangerous than not and
that's it's it's an engineering judgment call uh that we just need to consider. >> Do you think we're saturated on those? >> Do you mentioned a risk of saturation? Do you think we're close to that point? Depends on which corridor you're talking about.
>> Well, if I across the city, no. >> Okay. >> Yeah. No, again, we're not saying we're not doing what's on the quick build. Like, that's not what we're trying to say. We're just saying like we need to be selective as to where we put them. >> Oh, yeah. So, but
>> and would it uh I don't want I know people have so many questions, but wouldn't it be safe to say Caleb that you know RFB's working with other means like it's a tandem thing like it's a yes and situation? I think a good example of
that RFB on um on Ridge combined with the a stop sign and the slip lane off Preston might work well together, right? like multiple different >> it's more effective because there's pedestrian refuge in the media >> right or or that I mean I guess what I'm
trying to say is there's it's not the only thing we should be looking at we should be looking at like all all different >> it should be evaluated in conjunction with their immediate surrounds and with other appropriate counter measures.
>> Thank you. Um Jen, >> thanks James. Um, I had two questions. Let me lower this hand. um kind of we started the discussion talking about managing expectations and
I appreciate that all of these quick builds are in a list on the website but is there any um discussion or thoughts about making it more clear as to where or when those
might get completed. >> Yes, definitely. Um part again part of this is the the disconnect I guess between NDS and public works. Um you know this was NDS is has the website
that has the you know the list up there and it included more than just our um urgent infrastructure projects. Um, so I mean really when when we got the green light to to move forward with the infrastru urgent infrastructure, it was,
you know, full steam ahead, all hands on deck to get them all done as quickly as possible. And so there was less focus on the community outreach part. I think definitely going forward with the quick builds. Um, I think once we were able to
meet with Tommy and Ben and kind of get that priority list and figure out, you know, start putting up add additional columns to that um that have like, you know, what what the number is on the priority list when the, you know, expected completion is and then, you
know, work better um to to fill those out as they're actually completed. So, there is more transparency that we've we've definitely talked about that. that's something we will be doing um for the kind of next stage of this going forward. Um so it was more wanted to get
it out there, let people know where stuff was going to be happening. Um but it was, you know, again, it was we're we're trying to we were out in front of our skis, I guess, is the best way to to put it. >> Got it. Thank you for clarifying that. Oh, sorry. I don't Did someone want to
throw something? >> Did you Did you have a second question, Jen? >> I did. if it's possible, but I can I can put it. >> Go for it. >> Um the So, thanks for that, Brandon. The um because it is a little disconcerning to see that safe routes to school are not urgent like from a layman
perspective, right? Well, and my intersection is there, but the uh but Tommy's scrunching right now. Um but so I look forward to that being updated. Um, and then the second question was
when you talk about qualitative data and capturing this, I'm wondering what that mechanism or process or what that looks like to you and your team, how that's captured >> for the qualitative part of it.
>> Yeah. So, if you're going to try and really find out how people perceive the quick builds, what does it mean to you? What do what do you mean when you say to me we'll go to the neighborhood and find out like what does that look like? What are Yeah,
>> I mean for the the green leaf oak leaf one in particular, I mean that is we have a actual community meeting set up um because they were very vocal about not wanting those improvements. So um
after the fact, but um so that one will be a very defined way of doing that. It's going to be a formal meeting. Um, we're going to have a couple of different variations of how, you know, after looking at the data, how we might be able to change stuff um there, you
know, whether we widen out, you know, some of the um radiuses because there were concerns at the meeting we had with them back um when was it? >> August. uh to you know as far as it's on a bus route and how does that you know
work with the the people coming through there and stuff. So um you know that one will be maybe a little bit different than you know just doing a survey type of thing for the rest of these. Um, you know, I'll again I think we'll work with
Ben's team and um possibly even solicit you all to help come up with some, you know, questions that you think would be, you know, good to include in that survey. Um, and again, probably do that, you know, more towards the end of it so that we've had, you know, several months
of people experience experiencing it and they've gotten used to it, cars have gotten used to it, bikes have gotten used to it, pedestrians have gotten used to it. How is it working? You know, because again, we we could do a survey the day after we put it in and you know, people are like, "Oh, this is awful."
Or, you know, or they could be like, "Hey, it's great. You know, cars are slowing down, but six, eight months from then, cars have figured out, oh, well, you know, I slowed down because it was new, but you know, now I can speed through here again." So, you know, we want to give it time to actually kind of level out and everyone be able to
experience it um before we go out and do that survey. So, um I would in anticipate that'll be sometime in like Aprilish um that we would shoot to do that. Um so that we've got, you know, a good chunk
of data that or a good chunk of time that people have experienced it and that gives us time then to kind of synthesize both the qualitative and the quantitative um before the next fiscal year um in July.
>> Okay. So, one meeting and a survey is what you're saying >> probably. Oh, we have Were you thinking more like what what what's your thought, Jen? I mean, >> I mean, I'm a >> You're You're
going to be on counsel here in another couple months. So, you have a little bit more say than maybe other people. Well, no, I don't want to hog the floor, but I would say maybe we should learn from our Fville situation that's going on right now about how about a failure of engagement and and again go back to the
managing expectations. And if you really want true qualitative data that is from a broad breath of folks that's accurate, like statistically sound, we got to do better than one meeting and a survey that's online
that, you know, people who are already engaged would get in. Now you're the same guys doing all the engagement. So I think it is a good idea to say and Tommy again will roll eyes at me like let's bring in other folks as we can if I was
operationalizing that but and so I know that uh logistics and resources might be an issue but I don't know that that's going to get you less push back from responses if that was all that we could
do to capture the data. So to be continued, but I'm a little concerned. >> We can talk later. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> And then Natalie and then Well, does anyone then Natalie, does anyone else have
questions that they would like to ask? Not promising that we'll have time for them. >> If there's time. >> Okay. Natalie and then Josh. >> Thank you. So, um, thank you for the presentation. Thank you. I want to like plus one all the comments. Um, I've been nodding along. Um, my question is around
how do we go from, and this is kind of like building on Jen's questions, like how do we go from I I guess what I'm concerned about is that we're like, oh, the speed limit only dropped by one or two miles hour, so like we're just going to scrap all these things. And I think
we are here to say we want like robot. We want hardened infrastructure. We want these quick builds as test cases to see what we can do to slow things down, to make things safer for bikes and pedestrians, but the end goal is like overwhelming improvements in our
infrastructure. Obviously, big price tags involved with that. um and a lot of planning and and other resources. But I'm just I'm curious like how do we move from like okay this speed cushion yes these flex post how do we move from okay these are working and now
we're going to make them permanent like what beyond we've got qual we're going to do quantitative where we can we're going to do surveys and Jen's we're going to get on the doors but like how do we move from like what I don't want to have happen is that these things just start to disintegrate over time because
indeed they are quick builds they're not meant to be permanent infrastructure ructure and then like nothing happens and we are right back where we started. Um and then the other thing I'll just add is that um Back has a survey. We did a survey. The QuickBook committee did a survey. We have not like published it.
James and I put a lot of time into putting it into a Google form. So we can give you that if you want to start someplace and we can work with you on how to harvest the right kind of intelligence from the folks who are experiencing these uh these quick
builds. Thank you. >> Yeah, love to have it. Um as far as the the main part of that question, the hardening of these um I mean ultimately that's going to be a council funding decision. So, um, you know, we'll take this data back to council and it will go
in as a CIP request of like, hey, these are the ones that, you know, we think we're successful and um, you know, either they fund a portion of them over time or they fund all of them being hardened in one year. I don't know. Um, but the intent is not for these just to
sit and disintegrate. That, you know, that's not our intent either. Um, you know, it was always the intent that these would be tested, refined, uh, you know, maybe moved, maybe, you know, maybe we find out. I mean, part of what
I'm looking at with with the speeds is because I mean, the we we talk about the 85th percentile, you know, not changing that much. But in my estimation, if we can greatly lower the max speed on a
road, like that is a a more quantifiable and like I would rather see, you know, this the average speed or 85th percentile speed stay the same and the max speed drop from 45 to 35. Like that's a that's a big change for the
people walking and biking on that street. Um so you know if we can show that hey like this this type of characteristic of road or whatever um or you know whe whether it's a speed table or it's you know the
the chicanees or something else like if we can show that that's actually having a very dramatic impact then we we might say hey like yeah you know rather than doing a speed table on this road we actually think if we do a chicane on this road we're going to have more efficacy.
And so like what might have been a speed table before might change and we might try a new chicane on that road and compare the two and before we harden it. So you know some of this might it's going to be some of it might be able to get hardened in the first year. Some of
it might be a more iterative process over a two or three year period um until we kind of finalize how we want to harden that. I don't know if that fully answered your question or not. Yeah, that's helpful. I guess I just want to like put it on the record that
these are like BPAC is very interested in ensuring that these are not temporary and that we don't like go back to a place that's like, you know, that that it was all just like a waste of time and money. I think that's where I'm coming from. And I think we can be helpful um in, you know, like I'm I'm reminded
there were flex posts that went down in Johnson Village. Gosh, this was like years ago now where the curbs have now become hardened and the the intersections gotten a lot narrower, the crosswalks are narrow are shorter and like people I know who I I kind of maybe thought maybe would know better were
like, "What are these ugly flex posts? Like what's going on here? This is like BS." And I think there's like beback there's a lot of like hate out in the world for flex posts. But I think we can actually be helpful in helping people understand that this is part of a process that's going to get us to better
infrastructure. And it's anyway I >> Yeah. No, I I agree. I think the the quicker we can turn around from quick build to permanent infrastructure. I think we'll change that narrative going forward if people know it's not going to
be in place for 10 or 15 years. Um because we have had some I mean the the first round of say props to school stuff that we did was back in 2020 2021. Um and it's been there for some of it's
four or five years now and you know so you know we do some of it is we just need we need funding in order to to harden all of the projects all these quick builds that we're trying to do. So, um, we have we have a lot of priorities in the city and, you know,
it's not not easy to balance all of those and where those dollars go. So, I would love to be able to just do all those at the snap of a finger. Unfortunately, I don't have the money to do that. >> Well, I I think to add on to Brandon
thoughts, you know, Charlottesville wasn't built overnight, right? It's been a city for growing city over the course of the last 100 120 years. So these problems with the infrastructure didn't just show up overnight. They were built
over time. So you know it will take some time to dig back out of that hole. And hopefully we don't create problems for folks 100 years from now. And you know, some of these uh bumpouts and things that folks want, you know, they are
desirable and and you know, they might look deceptively easy to do, but then, you know, when you start getting into things like, oh, there's there's drainage here, there's a a drop inlet here, uh there's a pole that we that we
need to relocate. Uh, and then private property constraints, rightway constraints, you know, some of those things can add up very quickly and what looks like, oh, that should be a $50,000 project turns into a $300,000 project.
And that's just for like one corner on one intersection. So, you know, sometimes it's it's easy to ask, but then it's it's a lot >> a lot larger lift to do. >> We're well away. Yeah, we we've been asking and we've we've heard that a lot
and and we we believe it, >> but we we know. Um >> mine's a quite promise. >> Yeah, I'm I'm just thinking we can carry on for a little bit longer. I don't want to get to work plan. Um but that can expand into December if need be. Um
questions for staff can also be condensed and can be done via email. So, I think we have time for um I I I have one more question. Um Natalie, Josh, Herb, you've been wanting to say,
you know, we'll see. So, um I just briefly wanted to touch on the communication aspect, not just soliciting feedback, but also providing information because I know that was one of the just to add specificity to what Jen mentioned about Fville where we had
you've done the door knocking, did the presentation at Fville Neighborhood Association, but then knew about it for another year and when I was I was at both meetings and you know um a bunch of people were like, "Oh, I've never heard
about this before." I said, "Well, you weren't at the meeting last year, but they like shouldn't have to be at the meeting last year." And so, like having the landing pages on the website not only exist, but stay up to date. Um, and having uh like when the quick build goes in, I mean, this is not, you know, we
don't have I don't know who you would task this with exactly, but like here's a picture of what it looks like finished and add that to the thing so people kind of know what they're looking for. I think that's going to help with people being aware of what's going on and gives us a chance to help justify it a little more as well because infrastructure is
where people meet their government the most frequently and the most visibly. And so the the like communications side um I don't know if that means getting someone in public works NDS to do communications
adding that to admin's task list specifically but making sure that like the paving list had been updated since 2022 the you know sidewalk priorities list that the even now I just checked the fifth street um bike lane survey
says this will be up through April 30th and it's still up and it's like maybe if we are still collecting responses that's great but like >> I have a lot of thoughts on that I can share with you privately but >> but yeah that's something I think if whatever I can do to help push for that
I'm happy to to do so because I know that's not ne like your expertise but um you know helping be a voice to support whatever request you're making in that field like >> I know Jen and I have talked about that already too um
being more open gets people a chance to find out more information, but also we can help shape their opinions more because people aren't experts on these the way you are. >> I agree with everything you said. >> Great. >> Thank you. >> Josh, do you still have a question?
>> Yeah, I think I'm to be mindful of time. I want to ask a question and figure out how to hear back about it later. So, we don't won't get into it too much now. Um, as I understand it, this is wrong. The ultimate goal of the quick build projects like one of your
said is to become hardened to become permanent. But at at a bigger scale, the point is to reduce speed limits, right? We we reduce people's actual speeds and then we reduce legal speed requirements. And I know I've seen emails from your
office about planning on this. I would love to know where BPA can hear a plan, engage with a plan about lowering the speed limit citywide and that can be that's a for later question I want to figure out how can I talk about later. We can talk about it when this is done.
I can but we are working on that right and and those are these are actually separate like the speed limit discussion and these quick builds like most of these quick builds are on local lower speed roads that is probably just going
to be a statutory speed limit reduction on a lot of those roads um to 20 miles an hour. So the the design changes needed to reduce speeds on where we've got above 25 miles an hour and like 30
35 40 places that is a much larger discussion. Um but we can talk about it later. >> Okay. Thanks. >> My comment was also on speeds and it's a sensitizing comment. Um you fairly glibly said reducing speeds from 45 to
35. I was once struck on my bicycle at 10 miles an hour. Were I not wearing a helmet, I wouldn't be talking to you today. So, the speeds need to get way down to be safe for pedestrians and bicycles. And that means 25 being a maximum.
>> Well, that's I kind of like being alive. >> No, we hear you. And you know, uh, we we can hang the sign that says 5 miles an hour and people will still disobey it without robust
>> intervention. So that the the more you want to get the number of those maximum speeders, which are statistically generally outliers, right? Uh, you know, the more you try to drive them down to absolute zero, the more the higher the cost everybody
else is paying. So it it it it is a problem. I mean, if I could hang up a sign that said that thou shalt not kill and then all the murders in town go away, then I you know, that'd be awesome. >> They did that on a tablet years ago. They didn't work at that either. Right.
>> So >> So yeah, that I mean the goal is to work on reducing speeds and speed limits, >> right? >> Both. >> Understanding that people tend to drive 10 miles above whatever the postive limit is. That means bring in numbers
significantly down recognizing that there still will be um numbers that exceeded >> understood. Um I just want to say for the recording Peter K just want to read out Peter's comment that's okay that
communication should go out with the intervention the quick build then a followup at a set time say six months for evaluation purposes it should be a package with the quick build. That's good suggestion. Um, and Josh Crown says that driving slow is not to cost.
>> I I agree with Josh. That's exactly what I was thinking. >> Cost the lower that goes down, the more the people in the town have benefits. >> But but there is a cost to that. So like I I've said like you can get 85% of safety pretty cheaply. That last 10 to
15% gets more and more expensive to do. So yeah, we could have cops out there 247 ticketing people. It's going to lower limit, but there's a cost to do that. So, yes, there is a benefit to it, but there is a cost as well. >> The financial cost.
>> There's well, there's a financial time. Yeah. I mean, there's >> have speed cameras and have big brother watching you all the time on your street. Yeah. I mean, you know that >> people don't want flot cameras or like there's there's there's ways to do that, but there's a cost whether financial or
like you said, security, societal, like >> it, >> you know, there there's a certain, you know, you have freedom to do some things. So like the the less freedom you get to do it, it may get safer, but you have less freedom as well. So >> you're exchanging your freedom for the
perception of safety. >> Well, freedom to walk down the street is awesome. Right. Not just freedom to drive at a high speed. >> And we're we're not advocating for people to drive at a high speed. That's that's not what we're trying to accomplish. >> Yeah. I I think the comment was that um
it sounded like Caleb was saying if 85% of people are obeying the law and we set the law to be 10 miles an hour, then 85% of people are going at 10 miles an hour and that's a cost to them. is that we we would challenge that,
>> right? And the and the data that we have seen thus far is by and large on local streets, people travel below the posted speed limit. Uh well below it in the 85th percentile, particularly in Field, you
know, the 85th percentile speeds between 16 and 19 miles an hour when the post speed is 25. So when we lower the speed limit, people are just going to be driving the speed limit and I don't know that that will really, you know, take that one person who decides they want to
tear up the road at 45 miles an hour in the middle of the night. That's going to take them off the tape. >> Yeah. And when we're not getting >> I have an extra like methodological question for you. So when we say average speed, does that average take into account the amount of time you spend
like decelerating and then sitting perfectly still at a stop sign? Because you know it goes without saying that they're going to be very slow then. >> I mean there's very slow and very fast and both of those are removed from the 85th percentile equation and and if
there were >> higher instances of either they would show up in the deviation of the 95th percentile >> and it's a point anyway. It's not it's a point in space measure. It's not a like over the course of your day sometimes you go fast
sometimes you go slow and that averages to the medium >> you have a defined point in space where these are measured right >> well it's you no I mean it's using the it's using the travel path >> the corridor >> right you know so um
>> so there is some of that but again the the average is averaged out because the the time where they're slowing going down is is usually less time than where they're traveling. So point in space, you could get this same exact thing. If we have if we have a speed counter out there, you could get somebody that's
pulling out of their drive lane >> and they're going 5 miles an hour. It's going to count that data >> versus this. We're we're getting all of it. So we're we're getting more data points >> which would give you theoretically it averages out to about the same. That
makes sense. because you get more average of the high traffic or the normal traffic and more of the low and so it's it's equal in that stance. So would this data show that 29 north
has a low average speed? >> No. >> Okay. >> Through the corridors with the >> we can we can provide some snapshots of kind of what we're looking at. Um I think that would be helpful. >> Yeah. to people to to see. Um but yeah,
I mean it again and I'm not just looking at the 8 and 5th percentile either. We're looking at those max speeds as well, which completely takes out the the person who's coming to a stop, be it for their driveway or stop sign or whatever. So,
>> okay, thank you very much. Thank you for answering those questions. That was very helpful. Um I think I'm going to end it there. Um, but these folks are available by email. They may not thank me for saying so, but um, feel free to follow
up with them, with us. Thank you. >> Um, please feel free to stay, feel free to leave. We might be um offended. I've waited. Um, we are at
>> it is 6:07. Um, so I think we've we've pretty good >> good time. >> Thank you for that, Tommy. >> Now I know what my middle school teaching life goes through every day. My mom, my grandpa that just before we went
to my teacher cousin's wedding and it was wonderful watching my grandfather. >> Excellent. >> Um, >> okay. We're not going to go we're not going to go into this or explain it.
>> That that would take the 23 minutes. Um, I think I want to move the order of the agenda slightly and just say the important announcements we had before we go to the work plan just to make sure we cover them. If we need to then discuss
the work plan through to the end, I think we're fine to do so. Um, so those announcements are that we will have officer elections in January. Um we'll remind you again next month but please
be thinking about if you are interested in standing the three officer positions at chair, vice chair or two co-chairs and secretary. Um the meeting schedule the first Thursday of January is New Year's Day. So we want
to propose that our January meeting move to January 8th to accommodate it and propose cancellation of April's meeting. Can I make a point of order to that? Of >> course. >> So, and so this this could be a discussion item, but we could leave it
as a point of order for now. So, the preferred date for the mobility summit again coincides with DPAC. So, uh it would be um March 5th and March 6th. So,
that's a Thursday the 5th. Um, and uh, as a separate discussion item, I would love permission to combine the two like we did last year. But to this point you're raising here, you may want to think twice about merging with the
summit one month and then full-on cancelling the next month. >> Yeah. >> Which would suggest a postponement in April in that scenario. >> Let me let me tag on to that. I I truly appreciate the sensitivity to Passover, but the first night of Passover is
actually April 1st. Uh Jewish days begin in the evening. So the first night precedes the first day. >> I see. So it would second evening of Passover would be the meeting. >> The Back meeting would fall on the second evening of Passover.
>> The seder that some people have would be April 1st. >> Okay. >> Okay. Great. Can I just >> if you want to have a sad girl on April 2nd, >> let's do it. Um, can I just also offer that that is also school vacation week
um for public schools. So, I just want to note that >> that's the second week of April. >> It's the second week of Oh my god. Sorry, James. I know I can't keep these things straight. Okay. >> Well, if there is no conflict with Passover, then yay. We can
continue this discussion if needed and clarify in December. Um, okay. Now we'll move on to the second agenda item which is the proposed BPAC work plan. Um, we
suggested this at our last meeting in September. um that BPAC has um built up a lot of momentum and in the past has often been quite reactive and we wanted to get to a
situation where being we're being more proactive. Um so a small group of us formed a subcommittee to talk about what such a work plan might look like. um what sort of goals we might like to have
in the work plan um as things to focus on. And um as part of that first discussion, we identified the need to um become more comfortable with voting on official EPAC
opinions such that we can represent them to council and planning commission, which then prompted us to look at the charter and decide that it needed a rewrite and a refresh to make it easier for us to do that sort of official
business. Um so we sent out before this meeting the draft proposed work plan and the draft revisions to the chapter. Um this is an opportunity to discuss those. Um they're not asking for a vote to
adopt this meeting. We think depending on how the discussion goes, we might be ready to vote to adopt next meeting in December. Um, it would be nice if we could have those on screen. Tommy, are you able to make
a co-host? So, can >> it look like I can share without you? >> She's If you're a panelist, you might be able to share already. >> Y'all seeing this? >> Yeah. Make it bigger.
>> I will make it bigger. Here we go. Okay. >> So, the draft work plan includes five strategic goals which are not
intended to be exclusive. Not limiting us to only these but these are things that we would try to organize around. Some of them, maybe all of them would have subcommittees that would um kind of dive into them. We would keep coming
back to them to try to make sure that we're we're making progress and we're getting updates and they they don't drop off. Um and we also have three operational goals which we think will help um help us
achieve the the strategic goals. So just brief summary to highlight the strategic goals that the subcommittee came up with to propose. The first one is to um >> who was on the subcommittee?
>> Good question. The subcommittee was um myself, Gwyn Herb, Kevin Winell, Kevin Z, um Josh Karp, Josh Kron, and Ethan Tate. Thank you. Um
so the first goal would be to look at how we can intertwine um bike lane and pedestrian improvements with repaving schedule and advocating for um perhaps a
more formalized process. um better way that when streets are repaved, perhaps there's already a restriping plan in place um that can go down when the when the crew repaves the street. The second
one is to be involved in the transportation master plan process. That's a process that Ben hopes to get started in this spring. Is that right? Soon. Any >> council gave us months. Um, and there'll be a lot of opportunity for feedback to
weigh in on what a transportation master plan looks like. Three, we've started it tonight in in some ways hearing about the quick build process and and trying to help the city to figure out how it's going to be formalized. How can
it keep moving as is? How can we um make it operate in a way that that serves the city's residents? Um >> four is to be more active advocates especially around budget season. We've
heard the importance of city council allocating money for these things. Um and fifth is to continue our efforts to um be present and available in the community at community events um and to
do more outreach. You can read the operational goals. I won't go into them. Um does anyone have any comments, thoughts, ideas, suggestions on the work plan? Yeah.
>> Um why are the um priorities around the um upcoming transportation plan so narrow >> in number two? Yeah. Advocating for non-car transit at lowest speed limits. >> Yeah. I mean is is it Yeah. Like it it
it seems to me like having notwithstanding this conversation like vehicle speeds is is one piece of like a really large pie like you know do we have off road infrastructure that
connects meaningful destinations and meaningful origins. >> Um that's what our transportation master plan should should really definitively say. We should come out saying yes, we have a roadmap for that. I I would be
fine if if we had a city where every car drove way faster and I felt way safer. Right. That would be that'd be a win. I'm not trying to make people drive slow, but I'm trying to get around without a car. >> Does that not fall under meaningfully
centers non-car transit? >> Like we've got one very broad goal and then one specific. >> Yeah. What do you mean by transit? >> Yeah, transportation. I guess >> just want to make sure >> that's where I got like we're doing and
we're doing speed limits, right? But if it's non >> No, it wasn't meant to be narrow and this is a good point. >> No, we should expand. >> No, it's very broad with transportation. >> And if I could just interject like part of the reason we're bringing this to you
all is to is to like add more bullets here. >> Yeah. So, by all means, >> yeah, >> lay them on us. >> I mean, not in this conversation necessarily, but just like >> I'm No, it's more if you want to have
the lower speed limits as a go like but we're already we're doing it like we're going to be coming coming to council with something like >> no later than you know probably March of next year. So, if you want it on there, that's fine.
We're happy to have things on here that get >> if you want to take credit for something that's already happening. Great. >> Well, and I think another piece of this is like you like I think we all have like a somewhat high degree of confidence in in staff that they're
going to put forward a draft plan that is not like add more car lanes and like increase like we know we're going to get something that's pretty good. I think it's this is really almost like a placeholder to say this is going to be a piece of the work next year. We don't know exactly what's going in that plan
right now. We want to ensure that we are a part of how the plan gets developed. um that we're taking the plan into the community, that we're getting feedback on the plan, like so it's sort of intentionally vague, Peter, because
>> yeah, I I agree you would suggest though that the um speed limit would be a um advocacy tank in number four. Probably it would be better there. Like have have number two be just like top of level,
right? Like it's all about like getting around without a car. That's that's all we're trying to do. Like and and then specific items you're advocating for might be, you know, like citywide speed limit reduction, you know, things we're already working on. None of this is
probably all that. >> Yeah, we we're aware that a lot of this is in the pipeline and it's just something that we we want to >> kind of >> be advocating for, but it seems like it needs a Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. But no one should ever walk
in here surprised that we're talking about speeds when they've seen this thing. It's It's right there. It's like 4B or whatever. >> Yeah. Wouldn't >> Yeah. >> Wouldn't you I mean, wouldn't this be a bullet point under that? And then also it can still fall under number four and
advocacy. >> Um and then there's a couple other bullet points, you know, just to kind of highlight as examples of things that fall under the non-car transportation. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Yeah. I >> I can think of a couple other, but I don't think that's what we're trying to
do right now. It's like >> I I think we wanted this document to be a kind of um wayfinding for us through the year to come back to to remind ourselves of things. It's not meant to be
is all the things we >> Well, it's a it's kind of an umbrella of like the stuff that we've been talking about and the stuff that we we look when we look ahead. where does all that stuff fit into? >> Um, so we've been talking about outreach.
>> We have been talking about the master plan to some extent, you know, here and there. We've talked about quick build quite a bit. Um, but we're trying to like, how you say it, formalize processes and hear,
>> you know, this group's advice. That's what it's it's meant to do >> on on on these things. And I think to Brena's point, like you know, nothing really gets nothing ever really is going to get done just by one entity coming to city council to get something. We're going to need
>> right >> the community support. We're going to need staff support. We're going to need everybody involved to make it happen. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Peta, >> I would I I think this is good. I think it's good to focus things in. I would wonder if there might be somewhere we
could mention the University of Virginia as the elephant in the room that keeps not working with the city or working in some ways with the city. I don't know what it is we would want to say but >> is that a bullet point underneath plan?
>> I don't know. >> Is there a specific way in which you want them to work with us? just you know coordinate coordinating is >> we because I will say we do coordinate with them. So like for for me even I know this is your word plan but like
>> maybe specifying how that court like what what is it you're trying to actually cut like >> you coordinate you can talk about a lot of things >> right your level is like you should know if they're about to put green on the street you're about to repave our level is more like we want the university to
allow for the community to have input on its plans. >> Yeah. instead of you know making a decision without any process. So, as an example potentially, Peter, that um what's number one again, uh James?
It's uh the bike lane uh infrastructure, >> brick paving. >> Um West Main's going to get torn up. Utilities are going to go in there and then at some point that project's going to go by UVA and Browns and there should be some coordination with UVA and
grounds and what what gets put back in afterwards. They don't it's not going on grounds. >> It's not going on grounds, but I think there's a level of like communication that should be happening with VBA. >> We don't talk about our roots. We don't give them permission for the million.
>> Peter, is this something you want us to kind of focus in on in 2026? >> Everything. We can't do everything. >> We can't. >> I just wonder if it could be mentioned under one of the one or more of the existing five. >> Sure. kind of focus areas.
>> Is there a problem that UVA is causing for us? >> Specific. >> Well, I'm about to talk to students on >> Oh, sorry. I just was like, what's the example you can give us that'll help us understand?
It's not really I to me there's not like examples that come to mind per se, but it's just um you know I think what Peter's trying to say is it's it's an it when when I look at the Ryana Trail for example and Loop Deville, we had to work with all the
land managers. UVA is a land manager that's not fully engaged with that event. It really should be. It it owns a third of the trail, right? So, they should be engaged in the event and the whole process of the network of trails throughout Charlottesville. We've had areas where um we want to
improve bike ped infrastructure um that a lot of the residents are transient. They're they live there for a year, maybe two years. They're not people like us that have lived in our neighborhoods for 10, 20 years. Um I
think there's just a level of communication. I go back to communication that could be had with UVA um its students, its faculty um on bike ped projects. >> And I think I think of it also in terms
of UVA prioritizing connectivity within and across grounds because it's part of a larger community. It should never just look like its own little bubble because people cross it.
And the more you know things like Shame Hall go in and you can't bike through anymore. And there are other improvements that are that are nice about that. But it has blocked a bike link that was a low stress connection.
>> Yeah. >> And now you have to get off your bike and >> Yeah. That's a great I think that's a really good example. Especially if we're looking at our quiet routes. Um, Peter Crips, you know, if you look at our quiet routes, there are places where I would love to be able to show low stress bike routes, you know, on either side of
grounds, you know, and getting through grounds is a critical link. And I would love to be able to make that a formalized thing within their their network. So, as I don't have to worry about them ever potentially removing it, right? And if they do, they have to like
make it up somehow. >> Yeah. I think this might follow a conversation that we had a couple months ago about engagement with commu comm engagement outreach to community versus being part of community and having community part. Um I'm curious if you guys have
conceptualized what audience you want VPAC to speak to the interests of and where cyclists and pedestrians who use transit are in that audience. There are shared interests and people who bike exclusively and people who walk
exclusively and people who walk to transit and there's also particular interests of the connectivity to bus stops >> uh for folks who are transit dependent or who choose to use transit. So that making its way into the audience of of how this work plan is seeking to serve
Charlottesville. And you know something I'm gonna I'm gonna put on your agenda for next month is um I think I'm gonna have a draft uh parking plan from VO um that you all are going to have the
opportunity to review and um this you know conversation seems to fit right in with our relationship with EVA. Um, yeah. Okay, we're getting close to the end, which is why I'm interjecting here.
Um, that was helpful. I think we'll, um, Quinn has been taking notes, so I think we'll try to make a second draft. Um, talk about it again in December. Um,
we didn't get to the charter which I don't think is a >> issue. Um, I just want to give people we we can do that as well in December. Does anyone have any big concerns or questions about the charter that you
want to perhaps say now to inform a second draft in December? Yes. Um the singular comment I wanted to make was that it seems like the amount of work that was put into this charter is
um thorough to an extreme point where the amount of effort and work that's put in has made it almost unrecognizable to what it was before. >> And I think that's a good thing. I think that the idea of like just operating as is because it hasn't hurt anything
without the ability to like take risk and like try to enforce a group that can and will make change is >> a a small and slow death um to progress. So I just want to give a recommendation
to the people who put that work. >> Thank you. Okay, awesome. Um, we didn't get to questions for staff. Tommy sent out a um staff updates. If you have questions about it, um, please
email him or whoever the relevant staff person is. Use my, um, government ID or email, please. >> Sorry. Um, actually, and James, can I just can I can I offer actually an alter like if people could actually use the Google group, I think that would be
better because the benefit of having questions from staff in this forum is that we all get to hear Tommy's response. But, >> um, yeah. So, let's let's do that. If we're going to send Tommy a lot of email, let's make sure everyone can read it. >> I think it's a great point. Um, and
other people might be able to chime in to answer instead of me if they see it first or if I don't have the the answer because it's not just me, by the way. Um, filling out this these staff updates. It's Kyle, it's Zoe, and it's Ben. And we get updates now from folks
over at public works as well. >> Thank you so much for making sure that we get these every month. And thank you to all the staff who prioritize it. Thank you. Um, it's 6:13 and time to go home. Thank you very much. >> I have an update real quick.
>> Just uh say it was the first day of ebike voucher pickup and eight people picked up their voucher. So >> Oh, yeah. And and real quick, >> I issued 37 vouchers this um round um because the previous rounds some
vouchers were not redeemed. So there were more vouchers to issue out for the last round. Um so >> neighborhood walk >> we and I just came back from NBC 29 promoting our neighborhood walk on Sunday uh Trailblazer Elementary School
1 o'clock and we had the bike rides. All right, we good. >> Thanks y'all. Good night. >> Thank you guys. Have a good one. Um, >> November 19th. Uh, Roby Shar juice paddle ribbon cutting. >> Oh, we have a ribbon cutting.
>> Yeah, they just set the date today. being the one going to McIntyre Park Part: 2
loud. >> Sounds like I did it. >> All right, I'm gonna call to order this meeting of the Charlottesville Human Rights Commission. Um, let's start. Uh, Todd, would you uh are you ready to take the role? Would you like to say the
role? >> Sure, I will do that. Um, Heather, >> I'm here. >> And we're waiting for Don. Elizabeth, >> I'm here. Jason >> here.
>> Aldi is not here. Marian is not here. Suzanne, we know couldn't make it. Okay, so no quorum yet, but we are hopeful. Okay, thank you so much. Um, how about we go ahead and recite the mission,
which I'm not sure if everybody has in front of them. is on the agenda. Okay, I'll just start. Maybe it'll just be me. Um, our mission is to act as a strong advocate to justice and equal opportunity
>> by providing citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights. >> Forgot how awkward that I do where you're like, uh, dear blue.
>> Yeah, right. the agenda. >> I didn't know it. >> Well, I I also I read it every single time, which it's sort of like using Google Maps for directions. It's like, well, I'm just so used to relying on this thing like on the placard. Um, uh,
okay. For members of the public who are participating virtually, if we have any um if you experience any diff technical difficulties, you can call 434-9703115 and a staff member will assist you. Um I'll open for public comment. I don't
think we have any uh public comment. I don't see anyone else. Um so we can move on. >> We do have attendees. Let me take a look. >> Do we have attendees? Okay. the view and now I cannot find them. So, >> oh, I do see eight. We have eight participants. Okay. >> Uh, three attendees. You you you five
are the we we five are >> Oh, and then we have attendees. Okay. >> Yeah. Um, >> Katrina. Oh, wait. No, I don't need to read everyone's names. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Hi, attendees. >> Just use the raise hand function or if you're on a phone, you can use star9. Yeah.
>> Okay. Great. Well, welcome. Uh yes, if you'd like to raise your hand um to make any sort of comment. Um okay, I don't see any hands raised. Uh we will come back to member to matters of the public after we get
through our work session. So you'll have a second chance if you would like to say anything. Um okay, I'm closing that section, but if anyone sees anything, let me know. Um, okay. So, I say we go ahead and start talking about the local
policy recommendations. Um, even if we don't end up with quorum, you know, I I think we could possibly call another um either emergency meeting or it's not an emergency meeting, but like a special
meeting or um we could just do the regular meeting on the 20th and make it really brief. I I can certainly get on. I just would have to be online to do it. Um so that's that's all. Um so we could do that, but uh I have the SharePoint doc here.
Todd, do you think it's best if you share it because then I can be taking notes. >> Yeah, of notes in that doc or if I should take them. >> Let's do that. Let me let me go ahead and get that up. I'm going to make sure it's the thing that's on the screen and
not something else that I have open. Looks like it is. Um, here we go. Let's see. I got to pick which screen it is. Looks like this one. And here we go.
How's that looking? >> Nope. That's the wrong one. Please don't look at that. Oh my. >> Is that Did I actually share that? >> I think that is it. Oh, is that right? Okay. >> It has comments from you that I hadn't seen. >> Okay, good. I'm I I'm so sorry. I have so many things open that I thought and
it minimized your screen and I thought it was uh showing you something that you should not be seeing. >> No, no, I don't think so. >> No, I think it's right. Yeah. >> Can you guys see it? >> Okay, >> everybody's good.
>> Okay, cool. Yeah, I had a brief moment of panic there, but I feel much better. >> Would you like share your email box or something? >> Here it is. >> Okay. So I really um extrapolated like all of
this from our meeting. I don't think there's very much at all that isn't just like us talking and put into recommendations form or you know note form and then we can you know we can do something um
consolidated obviously like there's a part of me that thinks after um after looking at the city level recommendations that the city actually put up that um I was like you know maybe fewer recommendations are good because
a lot of our recommendations ended up as positions for the city instead of actual recommendations. And I was like, okay, maybe we're like we don't want to dilute things too much. We want to make sure that we really like instead of having 10, maybe we have four or something like that. But I don't
know. Um I'm What do you guys think? I agree that keeping it pretty tight is a good idea. Um, I would also just say, I don't know if folks had a chance to read the update that I shared from Shayla at Brock, um, but they, you know, they're they're already kind of
identifying a lot of the stuff that we talked about as essential. Um, so I do feel like, uh, we would just actually be reiterating a lot of stuff that's already on the wish list, already on the radar. Um, so we I think we can't keep
it pretty tight. I think I think that's a good idea. I mean, I think we should still recommend those things because it would be like if we didn't, it would be kind of not great if it looked like we, you know, we didn't think those things were important, but I think you're right. We don't have to maybe explain every last
bullet point. >> Exactly. Yeah, I totally agree. Like we could we can list out the things we recommend, but with an understanding that they they fully grasp the background and probably are hearing this from multiple sources. Um Jason or Todd or Lily, what do you
what do you guys think? Um I I think I agree with like yeah being succinct and I can also tell you that I have some kind of follow-ups both on the things that Elizabeth presented in her email
and on some of the items in the draft as well. So when you're ready for those to get into details, I can share that. >> I think we should hear them. I think it's a great idea. Yeah, I agree. And I did I did read your document, Elizabeth.
I I imagine Jason did, too, but if not >> Yeah, he did. >> Okay. >> Yeah, it sounds great. >> Cool. I just say go whenever you're ready, Todd. We'll we'll be happy to >> My apologies. I know you were waiting for me. Um >> No, no, no. We're talking.
>> So, just And when you said Elizabeth's document, you were referring to the email, correct? Or was it something else? >> Yes. Sorry, not the document, but like it was >> um so one of the things about transportation. Um, so there's been some
discussion about a door-to-door service um and or um just making sure that the the bus shelter and the access from the bus shelter, which I believe is about 8 I
think it's 800 feet from the front door of the um the new uh proposed shelter And so making sure that the corridor there is ADA accessible. Um uh there because
there may be some discussion about, you know, if there's a specific shuttle to that facility, why do we not have specific shuttles to other facilities that serve people who may um have different needs as well? And so just like maybe something to consider is is
there going to be any kind of concern like why are we prioritizing creating a shuttle for this place and not maybe other places that have people um who who could also use a doortodoor service. And so just just food for thought um with
regard to the elevator apparently um there's there's a lot of discussion about I think the renovations themselves are actually going to cost like more than the property on the inside like almost double and um there is still
discussion on whether or not they'll build a separate building on the property with an elevator that accommodates um and then use that building for something else. So there's there's a lot there. Um so the elevator is definitely um being thought about and
yeah, in two different ways like they have two different kind of drawings for the site. So just something for you to know. Um yeah, the kitchen plan is is in the works. And um
what else was in there? I I was going to say really quick like um the the notion that they're going to serve three meals a day there. >> Yeah. >> Is could in in my mind really affect transportation needs for one thing. And
and like I mentioned at the last meeting, I think if folks are also receiving their mail at this place, um that's also big like a big reason why you need to get down to the Haven.
So, like a bus stop might be enough if if we're if we're like going at the main reasons that folks need to go downtown. But, yep.
Just trying to see what else. And the one of the things that I heard was that if you know we with our ADA transition plan, if it looks like there needs to be significant work on the sidewalk or anything like that between the the bus
stop, which is a covered bus stop, which is good, um, and it serves kind of that little grouping of hotels there, um, then that could potentially be prioritized, um, on the list. So, that might be a thing to to note in your recommendations
that if if the shelter, I'm sorry, if the bus is the primary um transportation service, just doing a a thorough evaluation of accessibility between the bus stop and the shelter um
before it's uh you know, put into action. Um what else was it uh in the document? What were some other things that I learned? Um
there is some discussion about um whether or not there will be a full complement of services on site. I think there's there's kind of differing views on that right now. Um in terms of like detox beds or um other service provision
like that. Um they're they are talking about um spaces that are private for telealth appointments also. So just kind of being aware that those things were in there. Um, another uh thing that I learned about
was um I know in here we talk about making sure that there's a adequate permanent supportive housing going forward, but there's another thing to think about, which is that not everybody
will qualify for that. Um, and so it may also be good to give some specificity to other types of housing. um that may be missing that that that may that may
serve people that would be otherwise excluded from permanent supportive housing. And this is like housing for people basically from zero to say 20% AMI. Um and I don't know I have some resources too that were shared that of of some
developments that are kind of modeled in that regard down in in Savannah, Georgia. There's a place called Dundee Cottages. I don't know if you're familiar with that, but if you're interested, I can drop those links um to you to take a look at. Um and
what else? Yeah, we're with regard to the benefits cliff um stuff there. It's it's not clear whether the economic mobility person which is still um in the process that's an open
position so it's still in the hiring process um there may be some specific requirements for that position under the Gates Foundation grant which is paying for it but um it may be still good to to advocate that that be looked at as as to whether or not that's within the scope
of that position. Um and just generally he you know this idea of what else can be done um under the sort of economic mobility umbrella that might serve this
population and how can we tie that back to council's larger economic prosperity goal. So like if we look at council strategic goals, if you make a reference to what work you might want to see done around economic development, just link it back to the fact that they have that
as a strategic pillar in their plan. Um, and what else? I think that's mostly the stuff that I I heard when um folks were taking a look at this letter
in city management. Um, yeah, I don't think there's much else. The CISRAP question is also still a big uncertainty. Like advocating for a specific dollar amount to serve a specific number of people like I put in my notes is pretty tough right now
because you can't really make that calculation per se, but um maybe just general advocacy for its continuation would be helpful. Anyway, there's that. Um, >> yeah.
>> I mean, I'm really curious what everyone else thinks. There's a part of me that thinks we should stay really focused on um well, I mean, I would say the cyrap stuff sounds like it's like, well, of course we should double the amount of money in cisp. That sounds like a really, you know, that sounds like a
no-brainer. But um you know just figuring out like what to say about the homeless shelters the and you know and something about I mean you I feel like you guys are so much more on a day-to-day basis like involved with
what is happening but you know there's this concern of how long it's going to take to get this place built and so what is going to happen in the next 2 years? How are we going to get people housed? How are we going to get families
housed, more families housed, you know? So, I don't know if we want to say something about these other these other sites that the city owns or um you know, what could happen there. I mean, I think we do need to say something at least general that's like we want them, you
know, we want to make every effort to to have housing, you know, very very soon or additional housing and uh shelters very very soon. >> But what what do you guys think, Elizabeth? What what's >> Yeah, I agree. I mean, the timeline for
this um is just obviously, you know, Todd, thank you so much for sharing that information. Um I think it's really helpful and it shows that just a lot of things like are on the wish list but are in flux and will be because there's all these mitigating factors. Um for me, you
know, I just remember I've now been in my role as an eviction case manager um for almost two years and right before I started the family the family shelter that Salvation Army had closed. Um, and it closed because they were supposed to
be like renovating it to bring a new one online, but it's like there is no family shelter being built yet. There is no there's nothing happening. So, it's like it's been closed for 2 years, but it's not because an alternative is like
coming online. So, I wonder if we could just say something about um short-term solutions um especially um especially regarding like you know maybe ones that like address that you
know the winter isn't the only time there's weather related need for shelter like the summer is a time and then also that just some some option for family shelter is just we've got to have it it's it's
just so brutal out there. So, um that's sorry, that's kind of expanding what we're asking for though, but maybe, you know, maybe we can have a tight paragraph about, you know, the city's plans for the holiday in or the holiday
drive um building and then kind of say however like in the short in the need exists now in the short term as they well know um and just emphasize possible solutions for that. I think that's a good idea, too.
Um, it is I think you're right. It's kind of stating the obvious, but um but yeah, it's we have less less shelter, not more so far. And yeah, um,
>> but a lot of a lot of efforts to get us a new shelter, but but less shelter so far. And I don't I actually started to put in the notes, but now I don't think I did, but I was like, could we get an update on what's happening with the Salvation Army and like just to know,
but it's not like they're really accountable to us in the way that the city is. You know, >> Heather, one thing I do know is that they they had family units before um and now the new major is
talking about opening reopening some of the existing ones. I don't know how many um or how soon. Um, and then when the new Center of Hope opens, they're supposed to be additional family units, but they're traditionally
been for women and children and maybe not fathers and children, which may be a thing to to think about. Um, and they're not low barrier. Um, so that's just like another thing. Um it's uncertain like
you Cherry like the Cherry Avenue site may still be one option to advocate for but it you know again that has to be built out too. So um just those those are the things I know about kind of where the Salvation Army is at right
now. So, >> can can we ask that someone from the Salvation Army though come to a meeting and just kind of give us an update of some sort? Yeah, I certainly can. You that's there's no no harm in asking and we've
we've done that before. We've had them uh the previous major come and speak. Uh so that was back when they were soliciting council for funding. So yeah, if you want to arrange something like that, that's that's we can help with that.
>> I think it's a great idea, too. Um, I don't know if we can do it before our recommendations, but I think it's like it's a huge question to just find out, okay, what's, you know, what's going on with with a renovation and how soon are
they going to have some family housing? And also uh what you know if it's it's it's not low barrier what are the barriers you know like what are are do they have to like
worship do they have to do chores is it you know breathalyzer tests like it I I don't know enough about what the um >> the big one is the the substance abuse testing >> yeah you can't be like patchum you can
be using or under the influence of substances or alcohol. Um, but you can't use at PCHAM, right? So, you can show up to Patchchum like intoxicated. Um, and they'll let you in, but Salvation Army, I think they do like breathalyze you.
They may even do I don't know if they do a drug screen. I'm not sure exactly what that is, but I also just I do want to flag like for a children's shelter that has children in it. I think that a higher barrier to entry is probably just
going to be kind of par for the course and and they're going to have to walk a line between making sure the children are safe um along with all the residents. So, it's a difficult it's a difficult thing. >> That's the other thing is Patchchum
takes sex offenders. So, >> I I also think that Salvation Army I I don't I'm throwing this out there. I I believe I'm correct that they're a smokefree campus.
Does that sound has anybody else heard that? >> I think that you can smoke outside because I've had a client that wasn't wasn't able to go there because of smoke outside, but that's my only point of reference. So I don't I can't speak to that with like from a point of knowledge
just a point of like hearsay. >> Okay. >> Just a thought you you know you mentioned not being able to get uh the major to or representative from the Salvation Army to come to a commission meeting in time for your
recommendations. But you could always reach out via email or a letter and ask, you know, explain kind of what you're trying to do. Um, and maybe get get your responses that way or arrange like a one-on-one if you wanted to. So maybe we
can talk after about that if you'd like to figure out a way to expedite it to get the information you're looking for. I I think I mean I'm up for that if if other people are up for it just to see what we can learn. Um, I think it's a great idea cuz it is I it's easy to like
there are all of these different sites and all these different possibilities and now we're sort of focusing on this idea of uh the holiday drive site which you know would be great to have another site but it's like well what is happening with these places that
are already uh like that we have already had kind of this understanding that there will be a shelter there or you know a shelter reopened with a with Uh, could I just ask like with the Cherry Avenue site
is like what is what is happening? Is there just betrays me as being like so completely out of the loop like is there any possibility? >> It so it's still it's still a
possibility. I think the focus has just become holiday drive now because it's so much of a bigger project. I think um I don't know that there's been any talk of doing anything simultaneously, but I mean that's another question that could
be raised to management. I don't know that they have an answer yet. I don't that that seems like something that uh that's maybe further down the road because I think they're just pretty wrapped up in figuring out what to do with the new purchase. But I don't it's not off the table. I
guess I I know that much. >> Okay. Well, Elizabeth and Jason, what do you guys think? Like how how do you think we should tackle this? And I guess okay, here's a question. Here's anotherformational question. Like say that
we were going to provide a shelter. Like it's like we've got all these people, they've got to go somewhere. We've got to get a place for them. It needs to be done 6 weeks from now. H what would that be? Like is there any like you know say you're just going to
try to house 40 people somewhere. What would it be? Like is there any site, you know, where like that that zero east high site like there, you know, could there be something there? Could there be tiny homes or pallet
built, you know, pallets houses like on the Holiday Drive site before construction even begins? Like could there be something that is a stop gap effort that gets people, you know, access to services and a place to check their mail and all this stuff? Because
like even if say we're going to do this holiday drive site, there's this whole there's a long period of you know engineering studies and uh you know architectural drawings and like all of the you know the community's got to give feedback on what kind of services are going to be offered there. There's just
so much stuff that will like probably make it take even longer. So is there something that can be done in the meantime? I mean, >> homeless shelter. >> I mean, the one thing that like we're
not thinking of either just on that side of it is like who would staff it even if there was if there was the space. Does that make sense? >> Mhm. Yeah.
I mean, I'm I'm also interested in what happened to the Cherry Avenue. I I I understand the the neighborhoods reservations about it, but in terms of it, yeah, there's there's a lot of things
that are are really, you know, borderline ideal about it in terms of location and even layout and yeah, accessibility. But >> my understanding is they're still looking at the Cherry Avenue site for a
family shelter. Um so that it's not in any way off the table. Um and they think that the neighborhood would be most amendable to that site having like families. Um so it's just though that
right like you know Shayla Washington said, "Oh, we think the holiday drive will be two years." it's probably going to be three, you know, it's like all of this is like like 2030. Um, so so yeah. So I think I think like
what I would recommend is if we like um sort of um really, you know, succinctly put our recommendations about the holiday drive building and the factors that we've, you know, outlined that we want them to consider. Then, you
know, I really like that par or that part that we have about looking into these other options um um in the other locations, including the pallet homes at Zero East High. Um and then I think maybe we add something
in that just talks about um a stop gap and short-term planning for the needs of the homeless population. Now, And what do you think we could say about the short-term planning and like the attending? Hi, Don by the way. Hi. It's
good to have you here. >> Hey, Don. >> Um, like what kinds of things do you think we could put in about, you know, short-term planning like for for the population now? >> Yeah. I mean, you know, it's tough
because I, you know, I don't think it's necessarily our role to like envision the solution. Um, and I think because especially that solution involves like so much money. Um, but just emphasizing that while we appreciate these efforts,
the need the and that they know this, but that the need is ongoing and probably getting worse. Um and so we need also while we're bringing these longer term options online, we do need
to continue to explore short shorter term um solutions. And and I guess I would ask like when we're talking about this, are are we talking about homeless individuals or or are we getting back to just having like
no options for families at all? like what? >> Yeah, I think we should say one for you know low barrier and families experiencing homelessness. Um because you know now like now like
the patchum season kicked off um I think a couple days ago. So now Patchchum is a is a place you know a low barrier place for folks who may you know who may typically sleep unsheltered in the warmer months. Um, but as the weather
gets worse, you know, it it just becomes a total crunch. With all the beds at Salvation Army full, they have something called a warm room, which I think are just chairs that people can be in for the night so that they're not out on the street in the freezing cold. Um, but
there just remains no option for families. So, you know, finding a short-term solution for families, whether that's just, you know, a space with some partitions that people can literally just have
somewhere to go. Um, I think, um, I think we can keep pressuring the city and I think they've probably thought of it. you know, do we know or do we have any sort of approximate number of how many families we think are unhoused in Charlottesville
and Albamaral? Todd or Lily, I don't know if you have it or Don, I think it's somewhere around three or 400 families. >> And it and it's also uh whatever is reported is assumed to be a lot lower
because a lot of families are like doubling and tripling up together and houses and wherever they're living. But >> and there's a huge fear that if you let like social services know and just to say that's in Charlottesville and
Abomaral. Um I think it's 150 to 200 in each locality. Um but there's just a huge stigma and people are afraid if social services finds out that they're unhoused um that they'll take the children away. So they try to fly under the radar
however possible. I I would say too like hearing the vastest of those numbers like there's no way you're ever going to be >> with like there's no way you're ever going to be able to provide enough. But even
something like like there's one in Rono that serves like two to four ham families at a time that's similar to Patchum. Um but like even serving in my mind like having a space for four, five,
six families is is a lot better than nothing. But I don't know. >> It is better than nothing. I mean, I just am like, "Oh my god, I cannot believe it's that many. That is just
absolutely just gut-wrenching." Um, >> I have a question like what about like some of the mercy funds that sometimes they use for like hotel vouch or like ticket to get hotel especially for the families that are out. Could any
be used for that? Especially for the families that's out on the street. Yeah, my understanding is that the city's the city's hotel stay program is for a maximum of two weeks period.
So, if you have a family that's experiencing homelessness, you know, >> they can get in, but there's it's not a you know, it's such a short-term solution. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> But I do think expanding that is is I mean, it's option,
>> right? That's what I was wanting to know like if that's something because I knew there's a time limit but is it possible to expand that to give them enough time to maybe look for you know some other options while um
>> I don't know is that is something that's possible? I mean, I think it's definitely possible. It just costs money, >> right? >> And is it it's less cost effective? Like building something is is more cost
effective, I'm guessing. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> It's very tough. Like, so those hotel stays are for people um experiencing homelessness. Um, they're for people that have like a
thing like it used to be a little more flexible in my experience, but now it's like you literally have to be like this person will die if they go into a congregate setting like you know, but then you can't be so sick that you can't care for yourself either. It's just like
I don't know. It it's for me and Don, I don't know if you've experienced this, but it's just gotten harder and harder to get people into those hotel stays. But then even once they're in, it's so shortterm and especially for families experiencing homelessness, they really need like long-term count counseling and
case management to to get back into housing >> because it's usually because of a huge eviction and there's a huge judgment. Like, so if you owe $8,000, no one's going to rent to you. Has
anybody um I'm just trying to think of like how to how to do these things. Like has anyone asked for a timeline? Like I know that um Sam Sanders submitted a timeline of everything he has done and it's you know
obviously immense everything he's done to try and you know find spaces and um and you know obviously there's a lot of working with different communities to get their buy in but but like is there a
okay you know could there be a timeline of like 6 months from now somehow we will have added 100 beds. Okay. A year from now, we will have added 100 more somehow. Like I don't know where, but like let's make a goal that we're
expanding uh you know expanding by you know in in whatever six or yearly increments. Just something to underscore the short-term goals. I mean, I guess we're just we're already saying
it in the in the recommendations probably that we need to fill this short-term gap. It's just there's a part of me that wants to say, "Hey, could you do it this way? Could you like actually make a timeline that make some commitments?" And then
if you haven't done it, then then you didn't like you I don't want to say failed, but like then you didn't do the thing you were supposed to do. like instead of us, you know, keeping keeping going and not actually getting more more
uh places for people to stay. >> Yeah. I mean, I think for these recommendations um >> Sorry, I'm getting all worked up. I'm just like thinking about, you know, >> listen, >> you families. >> Listen, it's
I feel you. Um, but what I would say is like let's get these recommendations with, you know, I mean, funding more hotel stays for families or finding other kinds of stays, you know, for families. I mean, a huge another solution. I mean, I think I added it
somewhere in there, but creating an a program to incentivize incentivize landlords to rent to families who are experiencing homelessness who have dodgy credit, you know, would go a huge because most families like something happened that caused them to
get behind like job loss or illness, but many of those families are working now or you know what I mean? Like so I think we could wipe out like a third a large percentage of people if we just could have like a block of homes that the city
is like we have these homes you can rent there. Um so that rental protection for landlords. Um, but the other thing I was going to say is maybe we, you know, it's interesting because other boards and commissions like have a sitting counselor
um, who's always just there and in conversation. Um, we don't have that, but maybe we should invite, you know, Sam Sanders, the person from Salvation Army, maybe, you know, um, someone from Patchum to just come talk to us and have
kind of a round table about homelessness and what we can do in the very short term. I you know I know those are all really busy people right now. So um it's just something to think about. I think it's a great idea. I think it's great and having having uh council
members, you know, one or two is is a good idea. um just so we can get an idea of like you know there could be some piece of information we don't we don't possess but okay could I ask a question about this thing that you just said right before that um this idea of wiping out a
large percentage of people if we have a block of homes that the city has said people can rent because they're doing something to incentivize the landlords what could that be that would incentivize the landlord >> so so there can be things like they're
called like I don't know Todd and Lily. Let me know if you remember exactly the terminology for this. Um but it's like it's like they're like funds that incentivize landlords. So you say like okay we'll like backs stop this like
questionable tenant like if this tenant damages your property if they go over their security deposit if they get evicted again like will pay. we have this pot of money set aside to like
reimburse you and make you whole for taking the like chance on this tenant. Um, and those are things that exist. So, I have it like I'm sorry under under help in accessing housing. Um, I
left a comment um with some like proposed language um that says kind of like what that could look like and it's something that's been explored. I think the county maybe even went as far to have a program like this that they like pass
legislation over, but it never has. It's never happened. Um, but it it's something that could happen and it's a like it's a it's like a bureaucratic solution. I mean, yes, it would take money, but my understanding is when these funds exist, like they're not used
nearly as much as you think they are. So, it just creates that cushion. It's like insurance, you know, it's an insurance policy. And and it could be a pilot program, like if if we want to use the surplus, we can, you know, it could be like, okay, we want a year-long, you know,
pilot program where we're just testing to see. I mean, I hate to think about like testing to see how people do, but like okay, um we want to see if we can get people into stable housing and if uh
you know, yeah, I incentivize the landlords and maybe there's some way of like I don't know extending help in some other way to these people who are like we're we're trying to get transitioned into permanent housing or stable housing
and then you know see if see if that can be a solution that isn't a shelter, you know, cuz if somebody has just experienced like, you know, their car broke down or like there, you know, just some some horrible thing. Someone had a, you know, catastrophic medical bill, but it's not like
that doesn't So, I realize that's a lot of people. That's like, you know, many many people that's their their situation, but I don't know. Maybe there's some way to to have a pilot program like that. Yeah, I I mean I think I think you know
uh I think that would be great. And also it just it's a housing first solution, right? Like people need housing. Oh, what if the solution was getting them housing actually and not >> that we're not build we don't have to build it right now. We're like talk about building it. We can actually like
let's take this pot of money and put it into trying to like make them not >> the city. I'm sorry. Oh, and this might be a crazy idea. I don't know. But the city owns some certain houses, right, in in in the city
in the town. So, couldn't that be like some like houses that could be they could or open up to like homelessness until they able to transition >> if possible? >> Yeah, there's lots of vacancies at CRA um houses, but they won't like they
won't rent to you if you have a big eviction judgment. I think if you have like a felony or an eviction judgement, a felony in the last 10 years and an eviction judgment. >> Well, I'm talking about making some of these houses homes or like even in the city like something like Maca, you know, where home to like, you know, where
they're coming in, they're homeless, they have these families, they go in there, they help them transition and but they're using these homes that the city owns, but using them for that purpose. So they can help these families get off the street and then maybe transit, you know, to something else after they, you
know, the parents work on goals, whatever that might be or get a little financial stable and then, you know, be able to transition into, you know, something else. Does that make sense? These are these home, you know, that they're out there, they're vacant. So yeah. >> Do we know how have any idea how many
CRA or MKA homes are vacant? And are they are there like two bedrooms, three bedrooms? Do those exist? >> The Ma Hope House homes are usually full when I've heard um is it Nancy Kid that
usually reports on that. Um those are generally full. They're not owned I don't believe they're owned by the city. I think they're owned by Macka. Um >> any homes that the housing authority owns, that's not city-owned property. that would be owned by the
Charlottesville Redevelopment Housing Authority, which right >> gets confused a lot as being a city department, but it's not. It's its own thing. Um, but I don't know I don't know what the vacancy rate of the the single family homes are. They do own some. I
think generally they use those for people um to rent with vouchers as I understand it. I think they own um there is another place called the Dogwood Properties that I know has been talked about as another option. I'm not sure what the current status of that property
is, but that's a an apartment complex that CRA bought and I don't know how how they're administering that. So, that could be something to inquire about. I think the other thing that I wanted to mention too was that the old housing advisory committee kicked around that
landlord incentive program a number of times. They brought it to council a number of times. Um, but it never it never got off the ground because they believe there was some disagreement between what the housing advisory committee was proposing and staff felt
was reasonable. And so it really never made it into an actionable policy. But it would be interesting to find out what where that got left. And I don't know if I honestly don't even know if the housing advisory committee is currently meeting. Um, I don't know who's on it or any of that. I haven't checked that out
in a while, but it might be good to figure that out. We could look that up and see who's current chair and if there is any draft in the works for that because might be good to know just what is the status of that and is it still being considered. So I did not realize the housing
advisory committee was okay. It >> I believe they do still meet. >> Yeah, it looks like they're meeting. Yeah, they're having a meeting in December. But I do think >> I used to go to their meetings. Um, but
they're always in some weird space and it's always during the workday and like every time I try to go via Zoom like something catastrophic happens where you can see them but not hear them or there's just no feed or um so I kind of
gave up. Uh but they are a really powerful um committee um that would be good to to like kind of coordinate with and talk to too. I feel like the um I feel like CEDA just
had some sort of joint meeting with another commission. I can't remember. Maybe I'm I'm misremembering that. That might be an impossible thing to pull off. But if it weren't, it would be really interesting if
a couple of different commissions could meet like Yeah, actually if we could meet with CEDA, um the Charlottesville Economic Development Authority or or with Housing Advisory Committee. Um
uh yeah. So I guess yeah, we should we should try to find out about that landlord incentive program and just see like just how much how much could we do and how much would make a difference. Um it sounds like it could make a really big difference if we could get something off
the ground and it doesn't have to be forever. It was I mean it sounds like with the surplus it it shouldn't be something that is forever. It's a onetime expense. So, it needs to be some kind of like six-month program or something like that. Or actually, how long could it be? Could
it be going to be a two-year pilot program while they're sorting out all these facilities that building? So maybe if we add something that's like, you know, use the surplus um and you know, use funding from the
surplus to explore shortterm resol, you know, shortterm solutions um for uh folks experiencing homelessness, especially families and those in need of low barrier shelter, including an expansion of hotel stay,
city- funded hotel stays. um an exploration of like partnering with CRA to expand um you know supportive programming in CRA housing and a landlord incentive program to um
incentivize people to rent to like credit uh people with poor credit. Sorry, I muted myself so you wouldn't have to hear me typing. But I think that all sounds that sounds very good. Um, do you guys think we're missing anything
or does anybody think like, oh no, we we can't do this yet? I mean, because we're not Yeah. So, let's just What do you guys uh should I call on people and be like, "Okay, Jason, what do you think? Does that sound do you do you think that
those are good things to add in terms of like a short-term solution? I mean, we would also add in like make sure that you know stay on this Cherry Avenue site and um >> yeah, I mean I I like the idea of us
waiting into this and and pushing the city, you know, to at least be thinking about this. I'm I've just kind of been thinking about like are there any tangible ways for it to happen sooner
than later? Um, and I was even thinking that that parcel on Avon is perhaps more palatable to folks if it's based around families rather than just individuals because I
know the NIMI thing was huge there. But um but no, I I I like putting that in. >> Yeah, we didn't >> go back. Yeah, I agree. >> We we didn't say anything about um Avon.
>> Yeah, and maybe that that's I mean that that's not going to be a shortterm thing anyway, but Sorry, I'm eating. I think Levy Avenue is Avon is the Avon property. Okay. Oh, and that is in there. Okay.
Let's see. And Okay. I think so. Well, we still have this document and we can all like look at it and refine it. Um, what what do you guys think? Like should we I mean I realize maybe this seems
really premature how to do this cuz I'm like I'm I'm not in the SharePoint. I guess actually if I get in the SharePoint document, it'll update where where Todd is instead of me just like looking at it online. But like I don't know actually if Elizabeth
already wrote in her language. Um but it seems like the first thing is it's like we've got um we've got our statement on the holiday drive site. Um
and then we have you know the more the urgent need for shortterm solutions. we don't have to use this language. This is just like what I'm putting here. Um, and then the language that Elizabeth
just like spouted off the top of her head that I actually wrote down that um I can put in here. Um, what do and and to actually reference the specific place places as well
like do you Nice. Um. Um. And then we would have we want we'd want to refer to like the specific sites I
would think. Um I'm just looking through here. Okay. Sorry. I'm like talking as I'm looking through the document which is maybe a little bit annoying. Um if anybody else wants to say something that's that's good but what I was going to do is like try to consolidate what we
kind of have been talking about. >> Yeah. And we do list the sites. We say we recommend further that the city move forward to develop housing and shelter options at additional sites such as Cherry Avenue and Zero East High. >> Yes. So I put those there. Like
is is there anything additional we want to say about those sites or do we just say like we sort of trust that they they know what could be done at those sites? I mean we already say that we want to prioritize people um a low barrier shelter and a shelter for families in
the short term and then um yeah. Do you think that's enough? >> Uh okay providing >> Yeah, I think it covers Yeah. Okay. Then I have things like um like I think the benefits cliff issue
is really important but I I almost think we could wait on that. Um we also had uh providing post eviction resources uh realizing the right to counsel and eviction proceedings. you know, we could
save those for our like for a separate letter and just like keep it really focused on the need for um for shelter and you know also emphasizing housing for solutions as Elizabeth was saying what do you what do
you guys think? I think it's a start. I mean I feel like you got to start somewhere. So I mean homelessness is definitely issue. So yeah, I mean I agree. >> Okay, I've got some comments here, too. >> I added some suggestions for language on both those. I think we should flush
those out. I think they're essential part of preventing homelessness from starting in the first place. >> Okay. So, I have some sample language for those sections. >> I see that. Okay. Oh, perfect. All right. Sorry, I didn't see that before. Here.
Um, >> but I have a question for >> I'm sorry. >> No, go ahead. Sorry. Go ahead, Don. >> No. So, for post eviction resources and like you know we going to write the letter for that like when will that take place? Is that going to be soon or is that will that be within before January
or did you hear me? I don't I think I'm sorry. It's just like a regular meeting except I had to buy this food. Um >> well, I ate mine. I turned off my camera and I ate a lot of cereal. That was what
I was doing at the beginning of >> So, I think these would be things that the city would consider as it's creating its budget and going through the budget cycle process, which would be enacted um uh on July 1st.
So the timeline for these recommendations is pretty long, but the idea, I think, is to get it in so that they can think of these things as they're crafting their priorities for budget season, which somehow stretches from November to like March or April.
>> Yeah. Just to give you context, departments right now are presenting their budgets to management like on a weekly basis. like I go I go next week. Um and you know there's I think they're going to finish those departmental hearings in November and then then they
start doing public hearings on all the different aspects of the budget and then they it they generally pass it in April. Um and then it doesn't get go into effect until July 1. But yeah, this is the moment. This is the moment if you have a financial ask.
Because I feel like the the post eviction stuff is is is equally important also is that yeah um okay >> this just going to be like a full circle
people will be back you know it's just Let me see. How do I All right. I mean, I hope it's okay if I I'm like putting in a lot of Elizabeth's language and then is it okay if I just delete these comments just to keep my keep track?
>> Yes. >> Of it. Okay. And that way I know that I've like gotten everything. Um Okay. the stuff about the what about cisrap?
Sorry, I'm just going through this to like try and consolidate everything. Um should we just leave that aside from now or um that's the Charlottesville Supplemental
Housing Rental Assistance Program. Uh which yeah >> wait when when you say >> we >> what were you recommending sorry >> well this just came up in the meeting and now I don't even remember who said
it so but it was just this idea of of increasing the funding of the Charlottesville supplemental housing rental assistance program that is currently thought to be something like 900,000 per Um, and it was said in the meeting that
this has allowed it to maintain a steady number of people with new vouchers, but we don't know like it it doesn't sound like it's able to add new people. And so I don't have like I can't verify these numbers right now. It's like these are
the numbers that kind of came out of, you know, like people's mouths in the meeting. And so we need to verify all of it. And like I don't think we could necessarily say like Todd has some qu some comments here that it's like you know we can't say a million.5 is going to get us this many more people with vouchers cuz we don't know what the
dollar amount would be. But um I don't know like is this a good thing to recommend still you know it did it go from 900,000 to 1.5 or something like that. >> I think we can just generally recommend that they increase funding to Crap.
>> Okay. whatever level it's at and however many people have it, it's not enough and we need >> we easily need more. So, I just think we we can keep it pretty big. That's my feeling. >> So, we could just say increase the funding of CESAP.
>> Yes. >> Uh and we don't have to tell them what it is. >> Increase the funding. Yeah. And the number of voucher recipients through the CERP program. H uh to pride uh okay obviously we'll make this language
better but um okay now the stuff on I had said something about how okay we had this issue of the benefits cliff which is something that Don has brought up is like when people like are able to come up a bit in income, they could lose their benefits.
And Todd had said there is the city is hiring somebody to look at issues like that. Um and so we could suggest that that person look at this issue to understand it better. Um but that they have not hired that person yet. So there is a part of me that wonders if we
should, you know, just like keep it totally on housing since that's our area of focus and then we'll learn more about, you know, >> the benefits clip. But I'm sort of curious, does anybody have thoughts on this?
Um, I know that like whatever that role is called, you know, is also supposed to look at that acronym Alice. Um, which I don't know what it stands for, but it's like people who are working but still like can't afford really their
housing. They're like somehow income burdened. Um, so I think that like um I think we could just again have like a bullet point that
has that that's like um sorry let me make it bigger so I can read it. Um like my like as as the council um you know refineses the role of the
economic mobility officer consider you know pay special attention to um or I don't know something about like including that in the role of the economic mobility officer to address issues um such as like Alice I'll have
to look up what that acronym is. And then people who may experience a benefits cliff like by like raising their income, something like that. >> Okay, that sounds good. Um, I guess we
need to find out what the Well, okay. Do we want to put it in the recommendations even if we do not yet have this economic mobility officer? Do we just we can still put it in there and say you know we understand that we will have this
kind of position. >> Yeah. So it's asset limited income constrained employed. >> So it's just a way of kind of you know what many of us already know is that many folks don't make enough money. They
have a job but it's not a living wage and so they're unable to survive even though they have a full-time job. So, you know, I think exploring those I think it does correlate really closely to housing accessibility. >> Okay. >> Um, and we want
Okay, give me give me the language again if you can like what what you think it should what it should say. Maybe we could say we understand or the commission understands that the city recently hired an economic mobility officer. Uh we recommend that that
officer um particularly explore um the way that residents experience benefits cliffs when increasing income and struggling to
survive as um you know I don't know what like how to kind of say like Alice households um and the constraints Alice households experience
>> and I don't know if this could be like how this would fall under it makes sense but like even for the vouchers I think when Todd was saying last time about the city voucher like for instance and I think I mentioned it it doesn't always work for everyone cuz even for inance I
have somebody on my case who the the housing sorry the barking dog um they don't make enough. I mean they make pretty much it's not going to help them regardless if they get the housing vouch
or not, but they still can't make ends meet. Like they're still struggling just because of the cost of living. So I don't know if there any way like a housing voucher or certain like even the city voucher could they bend a little bit or could they explore like just the cost of living with the income like because even if somebody makes like
let's say I don't know someone makes like 30 or 40,000 it's still it's still going to be so harder for them living in Charle with the cost of living with ch children and they most like even if they get that city voucher or whatever it's still not going to like change the rent or anything. Does that make sense or
>> Well, the city vouchers I mean they if they have a a house any kind of voucher either through sea strap or uh other means I think that they their their rent should always be 30% of
their income. >> Right. It it is. But I'm saying like some of them it's not going to like that that's the case. It's still not going to make a a dent anything. Does that make sense? Like they're still >> Yeah. They don't there's no other option for them. That voucher is not even going to do anything for them. But they're
still strugg >> if if your income is $1,500 and you're paying $500 a month for rent. That's great. Except you can't live on $1,000. >> Yeah. Right. Right. So that's what I'm saying. Like it's just it's like a no
waste situation kind of thing. So >> yeah, I hear you. And especially if you have like, you know, god forbid if you have to car that's like a6 or $700 undertaking every month, >> right?
>> So maybe we just >> Oh, go ahead. You go ahead. No, go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Um, I was just going to say, um, and you know, maybe we could just have a sentence that's like something about, um,
and consider, you know, uh, experienced by asset uh, benefits, cliffs, and the constraints experienced by asset limited income households. Um, and then just say something like affordability
remains like something about like just affordability like cuz that's I think what you're speaking to and that's what we're seeing is just like >> affordability or that's my issue with like that I brought up about the crossings right like yeah they're at this supportive housing but it's not no
one can afford that rent based on like um yeah I don't know I don't know that doesn't maybe yeah for those seeking housing even voucher holders maybe saying like even voucher holders or something
is that including including housing okay and to be clear I I think we'll work on the language for all of these things like I for sure but if we can just have the list then and have the have it in here then and I'll put that on a
separate line. Then we can know like okay >> if we pass these recommendations tonight like what is it that we're passing you know? >> Yeah. And I can I'm happy to help with the language. I just I didn't want to go in with all the open comments. It was like I was like ah that's why I was like
I'll just suggest that we say this here. Um >> and it's so helpful. It's so helpful to like have the actual language suggestion because in so many it was it was just a crazy like month and just to get like
the you know the thoughts like spilled out onto the page was >> was an effort. I was like oh my god hopefully someone has the brain to do real language here. Um okay I think these are all really really helpful. Um,
okay. There's Oh, do we want to have something in there about um there is something in there right now about helping people who remain unhoused
like that? Uh >> oh. People that are kind of like um like that don't that don't care to seek shelter, >> right? >> Is that what you're talking about? Yeah. Um and I mean and people who will remain unhoused because there just isn't the
shelter anyway, but like just what what can we do for people in in in the interim? I mean, obviously we've talked about all of these different sites, but like you know, could there be more warming centers? Could there I'm I'm just like spitting out ideas. Is there anything else we want to say just
because it was on the list of >> Yeah, >> I mean we could we could stop. We don't have to do that. I mean we have I mean the sense that you have um I think is okay to me like
>> um I mean I will say that the haven provides showers, food, laundry services and social support to that population. Um,
and a lot of those folks do access Haven services. >> But I think with the laundry with a haven, I think it's kind of like first come first serve. So sometime I feel like, you know, even talk to people, it can be very hard to even get some time to laundry like clothes wash. Is that >> okay?
>> Do we can I ask a process question? Like do and since I'm fairly new to this, do we use like a kitchen sink approach when we're building this? Do you know what I mean? Like is is the goal to provide as many suggestions as
possible or by like narrowing it does it give more power to fewer recommendations? Do you know what I mean? >> Uh I think maybe narrowing it is not a
bad idea. Um, not having everything on there is a good, you know, I think everything we've talked about having and said yes, we should have it is is a good thing to have, but um, but I do think like, you know, having 20 different things could be a
lot. Um, and we can always write separate letters too, you know, make different, you know, resolve something or and do that too. um >> with the legislative recommendations,
you know, they they did you there were a lot more there because they were receiving them from three different departments, but um it it was helpful for them. They said, "What what are your top five?" Right? Even we went through that exercise of rating them. So, I
think that if that's an example of how council's thinking about these kinds of things, I think being being targeted in your approach is useful and and being specific. If you know details that you really want them to consider, making
sure that those are there um so they know what you're really asking for. But I know sometimes that's very difficult. So, um but narrowing it down might be helpful. So maybe with the folks that are like
um not interested in um shelter options, maybe we could I mean I understand what Don what Don is saying. Um maybe though we could just tack on a sentence. Um hold on. Um
I'm just looking at the main dock to see where we said that. um um you know uh where we talk about um short-term
solutions like I mean we say that we want like uh hold on sorry sorry um yeah um maybe we just say something for
the population who may prefer prefer not to reside in a shelter. Um cuz I actually think like I I know that the that what is provided right now isn't super adequate, but I actually think like kind of what they those folks
might need more than that is like bathrooms and you know what I mean? Like they kind of need services where they are. Um and I don't I don't know. Sorry, I'm starting to get tired. Um, >> yeah, me too. Me too. I'm
>> Yeah. Yeah, me too. And I mean, it's a whole Well, it's a very related topic, but I I know we've already got a lot of talking points, but still the lack of a place to use the restroom >> on the downtown mall is a huge one. And
that would definitely be something to tackle at some point, particularly at the city hall end of the downtown mall. >> Okay. >> But anyway, >> we can put it down there. You know, I don't think that that's that's like a
good thing to ask for. I don't know if other people feel that way, but we can also how could we do this? I mean, I feel like we could say we are going to pass these recommendations. We are going to continue to work on them. I mean, I'm happy to I mean, one,
we could have a meeting on November 20th if we want to, but we could also just follow up separately and and go through them and be like, "Okay, so this is the status now. What do you think?" Like, I know, you know, Elizabeth is committed to like working on these and I I'm
definitely committed to working on them, too. I'm sure that between the two of us, like we can get a lot of strong language hammered out and, you know, pass it to you guys. I don't know if we can just email them to everyone and say, "What do you think?" Um,
>> just that way we can not have to stay on the meeting past 8. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Um, >> go ahead, Don. >> No, I was saying I'm just telling that sounds good, but she was saying I was agreeing. Never mind. >> Nice. Um, yeah. I mean, I I think the
only thing is just kind of deciding um what we want to say about how to how you know and I know Sam Sanders has talked about like having designated campsites um with like kind of services there, you
know. Um, but I I think I think that issue is multi-pronged because there's different populations. Like there's the folks that are kind of sleeping on the downtown mall without any kind of real like formal shelter and then there's the
folks that are camping along the Ravana trail at Zero East High. Um, and those are two really different populations actually. Um so so just I think whatever you're writing Heather about this I think is
going to be perfect and just you know like continuing to invest in supportive um supportive services like those offered through the haven and also looking like sight specific solutions um for these communities these community
members or something. >> Yeah. And I think your the the term multi-pronged effort is is really important too because that's kind of what I was trying to say but I wasn't saying it very well is like there are so many different populations. We're not going to smush them all into
one place like they don't all need the same thing and and I think everybody knows that. And so but multipronged effort is a very good way to put that. So, um, uh, do do you guys think that like if if
I send an email I I usually just send to like the char the Human Rights Commission list, do people get those emails and then like I just don't I I don't want to say, "Okay, we're going to pass these," and then you never see them again, you know? Um, I think people
weighing in is really really really helpful. Um Todd and Lily, do you all have the kind of um power to email people at their other email addresses or should we set a
date by which like everyone is going to like commit to logging in and looking at the final draft or something like that? >> Yeah, it's a good question. I mean, we could we could reach out to folks and see for those we haven't seen in a bit
um to let them know like, hey, check your city email um so that you can look at this draft before a certain date. Yeah. If you have a date in mind. Um >> Okay. >> I I don't know. I honestly don't I can't I can't see what people are doing with
their city emails if they are logging in or not or uh Yeah. So I don't but we can try reaching out to to specific people individually at their personal addresses and then copying their city email.
>> Okay, that sounds good. Um and sometimes people just can't like not everybody can participate all the time. Um, we just wouldn't want I wouldn't want to pass these without without having like let's say we've got
four people here like let's make sure that these four people get followed up with, you know. Um, and and I would love to obviously get all of our all of the commissioners to to get their eyes on it, too. Um, so yeah, but we want to get
them passed by the end of the month. So, um, what do you guys think? Do you think we can like should we pass them tonight or should we we should we have a meeting on the 20th to pass them like you do more um in the interim and then have
like a fast meeting on the 20th or what do you think? >> Um I think that's a good idea to see if you can get them passed by the plan that way hopefully other people be there. I think that's >> Yeah, I was going to say some of them
still feel in rough draft form to be honest. >> Yeah, for they definitely are. Okay. Okay. I think we can do that. I mean, there's the risk that we wouldn't have quorum on the 20th, but if
like if we I mean, I I will be there on the 20th for sure. Um, if you guys even if it could be like just a half an hour, we could get it done. >> It would have to be I would have to be online. I don't know about any about any
other constraints. Would actually would online be preferable for other people or would it be preferable? Okay. What about you, Elizabeth? says that >> that'd be good. Yeah. >> And that's good for you, Don. Okay. >> Yeah. On online is preferable. >> Okay. And Todd, we're fine to do that,
right? We haven't exceeded >> so because it's like it's it's 25%. It's two or 25% whichever is less, I think, is the >> Okay. >> of your total meetings, but or something like that. I have to look at the exact policy, but I think you're in the clear
if you do one more virtually. And I would I'll see how we Yeah, we can we can orchestrate that maybe similarly to how we've done it. >> Okay. >> Evening. I I may have to I'm going to be at a training, but I may be able to escape and come back to the office to
run it a little bit easier. So >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. I think that's great. If people could do that, then I'm I'm very comfortable like, you know, giving this another couple weeks to cook, keeping it in um the SharePoint doc.
Like I could send a we could send some emails that are like, hey, you know, the doc is in more cleaned up fashion. Have a look and and then we could have a meeting. >> Can I ask a question though? Um just about the options. Um so like
before it sounded like you were talking about that we could say like these are the tenants we are committing to recommending but that we want to like ch we want to refine the specific language and take that vote. like is there some
way to take like a preliminary vote that we commit to these tenants? I don't know. I guess I'm just trying to see if there's a way we don't have to have another meeting. >> Yeah. No, that's that was what I was suggesting is that we can just we would not I would never ever ever in a million
years suggest that we send this document to to city council, but that we basically say, okay, you know, this is what like these are the these are the things that we're going to put in, but we can continue to work on these. We can
continue to refine them, but we we like we I don't know, you don't say pass them in spirit. Maybe that is what you say. >> In the past, I believe you all have voted to authorize this. I was going to
say city manager, but you're not the city manager. You are the chair of the human rights commission. um to authorize the chair of the human rights commission to finalize a draft based on the discussion that you had during this meeting. I mean if you have you know you
as chair um have the authority to speak on behalf of the commission and submit recommendations on behalf of the commission but if you want the blessing of a quorum of the commission you could you could do it that way to say per the discussion we've had this evening we'll
the chair will draft a a final set of recommendations and send it to council if you know it depends if you're trying to not have to meet on the 20th if that might be one way to do it if you'd like to have that vote on record. >> Well, what happened the last time is we
passed it. That's how basically how we passed it the last time and then Lily and I like worked, you know, for a day just like ham, you know, we went back to like all of the different service providers and talked to them >> about what their recommendations had
been. And so that is how we did it. Um, we don't have to do it that way. like I I don't want to make anyone uncomfortable that um you know we would end up with something in the recommendations that you wouldn't you know that you wouldn't want. Um but
>> well just speaking for me I'm I'm comfortable signing off on this and and and refining the language and just kind of saying these are you know these are the concepts that we've talked about because we've this will now be the second meeting we've dedicated to this.
Um, so I'm comfortable, but I don't want to push other folks if other folks aren't. >> I I'm I'm comfortable with it as well. >> I am. >> Okay. I I'm comfortable with it, too.
Um, and I can commit like I'm sitting here working on this document right now and I can commit to like making it clearer, making it more concise. Like it won't be three pages. It'll be, you know, one page. and it won't look like my meeting notes.
Um, and then we can like absolutely, you know, I know there's the language about like the authority of the chair, but in reality, I'm going to circle back to everyone and be like, "So, what what do you think now? What do you think now?" Um,
so I I think it's not a bad idea just honestly just in case something happened to our meeting on the 20th and we weren't able to like get quorum to vote then. Um, that would be that would be bad if we couldn't do it.
Um, yeah. So I'm comfortable with it too. Okay. Well, do we need to like vote on that? I mean, I guess we do. We need to vote to um to do it. >> I can't remember. I need to like somebody am I allowed to make a motion
that we vote to >> pass them >> provisionally or with the understanding that we'll continue to refine them? That is basically what you did in um >> Okay. >> in August on the in your meeting on the
21st for the legislative recommendations. Yep. >> Okay. Well, I but I I can't I think that as a chair I still can make that motion. Sometimes like the chair can't make that motion. >> I can never remember. But if I can I'll
make that motion to to do that. >> We don't have to second it here. And we don't do Okay, >> you can follow. >> Let's just vote. Let's just vote. >> Regardless, I second it. >> Okay, >> I feel like I've heard us second things in on the commission, but I'm sure we
just like change the rules all the time. >> Anyway, um >> as long as it's clear that you're making a decision um and >> that that decision-m process is is obvious, then I don't if you stray from your rules, you are probably okay. Um would you like me to do a roll call
vote? Yeah, I think it's a good idea. >> Okay. Heather, >> yes. >> Uh, Don, >> yes. >> Elizabeth, >> yes. >> And Jason, >> yes. >> Okay,
your motion passes. >> Okay. Um, so let's see. Okay, so I will follow up with you guys. Um, and I'll email and we'll we'll hammer all this out. Um, we've got work plan check-in. I don't I
don't feel like there's much we have to do there. I mean, this is our big this is like our big task right now. Um, new business. Nothing that I've got. Um, matters by the public. Um, any public comment. If you would like to make a comment, just use the raised hand
function if we have these. Okay. We've got a couple attendees still. Okay. But I don't see a raised hand. Um, so I guess now we can just do next steps and adjourn. I I love that this um this meeting is like been
recorded because I feel like this is a little uh like less less organized than some of our meetings, but you know, we've got evidence of it. Um >> you have one moment. >> Yeah. >> Just wanted to put a plug in. So work plan we're not looking at but
remembering that in December you have the nominating committee will be presenting a slate just to put a bug on that that we don't want to forget that that that >> so yes and the nominating committee has been I think we're we're emailing everybody to say like okay what's your
what's your level of interest what's your level of you know in this in this position and so like if if you haven't gotten an email we're emailing um we will email Um, >> I just want to say
>> uh both of the other commissioners that are not on the nominating committee have been emailed. So, Don and Jason, I saw your email back to me and I'll follow up. >> Oh, you did. Okay. Because I know I did not do that email. Um, I emailed uh
Maryanne and Okay, whatever. I I emailed a couple of commissioners too and I have not heard back. But um anyho, so yes, we will we will make um recommendations and uh so I think we can just do I think
we can ajourn. Is that okay? >> Yep. >> Okay. Thank you guys so much for hanging in there for this very long meeting. Um >> thanks for your endurance. Zoom is hard. >> And thanks to our attendees. We
appreciate you coming out. Um yes, join the commission. It's so fun.