Work 05/02/17 Session – Norfolk City Council


>>>ALL RIGHT, MR. MANAGER.
>>MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, GOOD TO BE WITH YOU ALL.
I’M GOING TO RUN YOU THROUGH THE AGENDA REAL QUICK AND THEN WE’LL
JUMP INTO THE BUDGET WORK SESSION.
SO WE’LL TAKE UP WHATEVER SOMETIME WE NEED, OBVIOUSLY, TO
WORK THROUGH THE BUDGET, AND THEN WANTED TO DO A COUPLE OF
QUICK POP-UPS. I ASKED JAMES ROGERS TO JUMP UP
AND DO A PIECE ON THE CIGAR FACTOR.
OBVIOUSLY, A LOT OF ACTIVITY THERE, I WANT EVERYBODY TO KNOW
WHAT’S HAPPENING AND IT’S BIKE MONTH.
MAY IS BIKE MONTH AND WYNTER AND I WERE TALKING AND I THINK
THERE’S A FEW THINGS GOING AND HE’LL JUMP UP AND GIVE YOU A
QUICK OVERVIEW OF THAT. THEN JOHN KOWNACK WILL TALK
ABOUT DIGGS TOWN. THERE’S A COUPLE STADIUMS WE
DIDN’T GET DO LAST WEEK, RENOVATION OF DIGGS TOWN AND THE
PARK PLACE RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY. THIS IS AS MUCH FOR THE PUBLIC
AS ANYTHING. AND WE’VE TALKED A LOT SINCE
I’VE BEEN HERE ABOUT TOURISM ZONES AND SOME OF THE TOOLS
AVAILABLE TO US, NOT ONLY DOWNTOWN, BUT IN AREAS OUTSIDE
OF DOWNTOWN, PARTIALLY OCEAN VIEW AND MILITARY CORRIDOR AND
I’M GOOD TO PROPOSE TO YOU THAT YOU ALL SHOULD PASS AN ORDINANCE
THAT EXPANDS, FRANKLY, THE TOURISM ZONE AND ACTUALLY HAVE
THREE TOURISM ZONES WHICH THEN QUALIFY PROJECTS FOR THE TOURISM
DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCING PROGRAM.
IT’S A REALLY ATTRACTIVE STATE PROGRAM AND CHUCK RIGNEY WILL
JUMP UP AND GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ON THAT.
SO WITH THAT SAID, IF YOU DON’T MIND PUTTING UP THE BUDGET
PIECE. JUST TO REMIND YOU OF SORT OF —
WE’RE REALLY TONIGHT I THINK TALKING ABOUT GENERAL FUND AND
JUST TO REMIND YOU OF HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE WERE IN TERMS OF THE
RECOMMENDATION TO YOU, YOU HAD AN $835 MILLION GENERAL FUND
BUDGET LAST YEAR. YOU HAD 5 MILLION OF ONE-TIME
MONEY. WE BACKED THAT OUT AND YOU START
WITH A BASE OF $830 MILLION. YOU THEN ASK STUFF THAT YOU JUST
GOT TO DO. SALARY INCREASES THAT YOU PUT IN
JANUARY THAT YOU NOW HAVE TO ANNUALIZE, CONTRACTUAL
OBLIGATIONS, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS, DEBT SERVICE.
THAT ADDED ABOUT $19 MILLION TO OUR BASE, SO CERTAINLY BEFORE
YOU REALLY DO ANYTHING, YOU’RE AT 849, LET’S SAY $850 MILLION,
AND SO THEN WE TALKED TO THE DEPARTMENTS AND TRIED TO GET
SAVINGS AND THINGS THAT WE COULD DO AND LITERALLY HAD SOME
ACROSS-THE-BOARD CUTS AND WE WERE ABLE TO SAVE SOME MONEY
DOING THAT. WE DIDN’T TAKE AS MUCH FROM
PUBLIC SAFETY AS WE DID SOME OF THE DEPARTMENTS, BUT WE GOT A
LITTLE BIT LEANER AND DID SOME THINGS TO BE MORE EFFICIENT AND
SAVED OURSELVES SOME PRETTY GOOD MONEY ON DEBT SERVICE
EXPENDITURES, MADE SOME MORE AGGRESSIVE ASSUMPTIONS ON
VACANCIES, AND THAT GOT US ABOUT $6.5 MILLION WORTH OF SAVINGS.
THEN FROM LISTENING TO YOU AND THINGS WE OUT IN WERE IMPORTANT
TO YOU, WE PUT ABOUT $6.5 MILLION WORTH OF
ENHANCEMENTS BACK THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE LAST COUPLE
MEETINGS. WE HAD THE UNDESIGNATED FUND
BALANCE OF A COUPLE MILLION DOLLARS AND WE WERE RECOMMENDING
600,000 OF THAT GOING TO RETIREES, LEAVING A MILLION-FOUR
AND MADE SOME BEST PRACTICE CHANGES AND ALL THAT PUT US AT
AN $853 MILLION BUDGET. WHAT I’M TELLING YOU IS IN MY
ESTIMATION, WE HAVE THE ORGANIZATION AT A POINT WHERE
WE’RE GETTING PRETTY GOOD SERVICE DELIVERY, ACTUALLY
REALLY GOOD SERVICE DELIVERY AND IF YOU GO BACK AND CUT THE
ORGANIZATION MUCH MORE, YOU WILL IMPACT THE DELIVERY OF OUR CORE
SERVICES. SO THAT LED US TO THE
CONVERSATION WE HAD LAST — GO BACK ONE MORE IF YOU DON’T MIND.
WE’LL TALK TO YOU NOW, WE DID THE REVENUE, PATRICIA AND HER
TEAM DID THE REVENUE REFORECAST AND I’LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT
FOR A SECOND AND THEN, FRANKLY, THE MEAT OF THIS CONVERSATION IS
YOUR CONVERSATION OF WE NEED SOME GUIDANCE, SO WE’VE GOT
THREE BIG TOPICS. REMEMBER THE RETIREE SUPPLEMENT
I’LL TALK ABOUT A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT OBVIOUSLY THEY WANTED
A COLA, BUT WE SAID IF WE DO A ONE-TIME BONUS OR SUPPLEMENT,
THEY’D LIKE US TO LOOK AT REALLY WHO’S IMPACTED A LITTLE TIGHTER
THAN WE DID LAST YEAR, SO I’LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT OUR
RECOMMENDATION THERE. AND THEN COUNCIL INTERESTS, THE
THINGS THAT WE’VE HEARD YOU ALL TALK ABOUT, SPECIFIC THINGS YOU
ALL RAISED INDIVIDUALLY AND I SENT YOU THOSE LAST NIGHT, THAT
LIST, AND JUST NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT LIST AND FIGURE OUT
WHAT’S IMPORTANT TO YOU AND WHAT YOU WANT TO GET IN AND ARE THERE
THINGS ON THAT LIST THAT ARE IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO TAKE OTHER
THINGS, SO WE’LL TALK THROUGH THAT, AND THEN WE’LL GET INTO
THE SCHOOL FUNDING. SO A LOT OF CONVERSATION,
OBVIOUSLY, LAST MEETING AND SUBSEQUENTLY ABOUT THE
RELATIONSHIPS OF THE SCHOOLS AND OUR FUNDING OF THE SCHOOLS AND
WE’LL TALK THROUGH THAT, AND I THINK THERE’S GOOD CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE CHAIR AND THE SUPERINTENDENT ABOUT HOW WE WORK
TOGETHER BETWEEN NOW AND THE FALL AND REALLY KEY OURSELVES UP
FOR MAYBE A MORE PREDICTABLE FALL THAN WE HAD THIS LAST FEW
YEARS. SO THAT’S OUR BUDGET WORK
SESSION AGENDA. SO KIMBERLY, IF YOU’LL THROW THE
NEXT ONE UP. SO WE FORECAST THE REVENUES, WE
TOLD YOU ABOUT 835,000. WE WERE LOOKING AT AMBULANCE TEE
FEES AND THINKING THOSE THINGS WERE NOT TRACKING WHERE WE OUT
IN. SINCE THEN, THEY’VE REALLY
CAUGHT BACK UP AND OUR FORECAST IS THEY’LL BE REALLY AT ABOUT
WHERE THEY WERE THIS PAST YEAR, THIS CURRENT YEAR, WHICH REALLY
ALLOWS US TO ADD $250,000 TO THE REVENUE FORECAST OF THE BUDGET,
SO THAT VA IN YOUR MIND.>>YES, GO AHEAD, MS. GRAVES.
>>ON THE AMBULANCE FEE, I WAS WATCHING THE NEWS AND THERE WAS
ONE LOCALITY, I CAN’T REMEMBER WHAT LOCALITY IT WAS, BUT THEY
INSTITUTED A FEE FOR MULTIPLE NON-EMERGENCY PHONE CALLS.
NON-EMERGENCY.>>OKAY.
>>WE CAN’T GET WHOEVER DOWN THE STAIRS, WE NEED HELP DOING
WHATEVER, SO THEY CALL 911 AND GET THE EMERGENCY PEOPLE OUT
THERE AND WHEN THE EMERGENCY PEOPLE GET OUT THERE, IT’S NOT
AN EMERGENCY. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT?
>>I DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER. CERTAINLY —
>>I DON’T KNOW IF YOU KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT, BUT WHY DON’T
YOU LET US FIND OUT.>>WE DO NOT.
>>WE DO NOT HAVE THAT, OKAY.>>DO WE KNOW — BECAUSE THIS
PARTICULAR LOCALITY HAD MULTIPLE CALLS, AND I DON’T KNOW IF IT
WAS JUST, YOU KNOW — IT WAS JUST A LOT FOR THAT LOCALITY,
BUT CAN WE LOOK AT WHAT OUR CALLS FOR SERVICE WHEN IT COMES
TO THE AMBULANCE ACTUALLY ARE, AND THOSE THAT ARE NOT
EMERGENCY? BECAUSE I THINK THEY ENDED UP
SOMEWHERE LIKE FIVE OR SIX, SO IF YOU MADE FIVE OR SIX A YEAR,
AFTER THAT THAT WERE NON-EMERGENCY-RELATED CALLS,
THEN THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE BECAUSE IT TIED UP THE —
YOU KNOW, THE EMS PEOPLE FROM REAL EMERGENCIES.
CAN WE LOOK AT WHAT OUR CALLS FOR SERVICE ARE AND, YOU KNOW,
WHAT WE’RE SENDING OUR PEOPLE OUT FOR?
>>YES, WE CAN DO THAT ANALYSIS.>>OKAY, THANK YOU.
>>CAN I JUST SAY THAT WOULD BE A VIRGINIA CODE ISSUE, RIGHT?
I WOULD ASSUME.>>DUAL CONTROL AND OUR CHARTER?
MY FIRST IMPRESSION IS WE PROBABLY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO
DO IT, WITH A USER FEE, SO WE DO CHARGE FOR THE AMBULANCE AND
THIS IS JUST PART OF THAT COST. THAT’S MY FIRST REACTION BUT
YOU’RE CORRECT, WE’D HAVE TO DO THAT ANALYSIS.
>>IT’S ANOTHER LOCATION. IT’S VIRGINIA — ONE OF THOSE
OTHER LOCATIONS LOCALLY HERE THAT LOOKED AND IT WAS AN
EXORBITANT NUMBER OF COMPLETELY NON-EMERGENCY KIND OF CALLS.
[ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ]>>NOT EMS, NO.
>>WE’LL DO AN ANALYSIS.>>THE ANIMAL PEOPLE ARE COMING
AFTER YOU.>>WE’LL SEE IF THERE’S SOME
OPTIONS THERE. WE’LL TALK ABOUT RETIREE
SUPPLEMENTS, IF YOU COULD, KIMBERLY.
REMEMBER, WE TOLD YOU THAT — OR LAST YEAR, $600,000 SUPPLEMENT
AND THAT $600,000 WAS DIVIDED AMONG RETIREES THAT WERE MAKING
LESS THAN $30,000, AND OBVIOUSLY IT WAS GIVEN TO FOLKS THAT
NEEDED IT THE MOST. I THINK AN UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCE, THE RETIREES WERE EXPLAINING TO US ABOUT FOLKS
THAT MAYBE HAD A GOOD HEALTHY SALARY BUT WEREN’T HERE VERY
LONG, ONLY FIVE, SIX, EIGHT YEARS AND SUDDENLY BECAUSE THEY
WERE MAKING LESS THAN $30,000 IN RETIREMENT, THEY GOT MORE FROM
OTHER PLACES, THEY GOT THE BONUS AND THAT WAS AN UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCE. THEY SAID WE REALLY WOULD LIKE
YOU TO LOOK AT FOLKS THAT, FRANKLY, DEDICATED THEIR
PROFESSIONAL CAREERS TO THE CITY, AND WE WENT AND DID SOME
ANALYSIS AND WHAT I’M SHOWING YOU IS OUR RECOMMENDATION, BUT
WE LOOKED AT EVERY CATEGORY, THOSE MAKING 30, 40, 50, 60,
$70,000, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IMPACTED AND WHERE YOU MIGHT
DIVIDE IT UP. WHERE WE’VE LANDED AND I THINK
IT’S TRUE TO THE EXTENT YOU HAD, WE USE THAT SAME $30,000
THRESHOLD AND WE SAY YOU NEED TO HAVE BEEN IN A CLASSIFIED
POSITION, YOU ARE A NONEXEMPT, ESSENTIALLY, EMPLOYEE WITH A
CLASSIFIED POSITION AND I’LL TELL YOU THAT’S THE MOST
DIFFICULT IN TERMS OF PAPERWORK. SO WE MAY HAVE SOME GLITCHES.
IF SOMEBODY COMES BACK AND SAYS, HEY, I THINK I QUALIFIED, THEY
MAY BE RIGHT AND IF THEY ARE, WE’LL FIX THAT, BUT OUR
PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS SAYS IF YOU LOOK AT LAST YEAR ON THE LEFT,
USING THE THRESHOLD — NOT USING THE 25-YEAR THRESHOLD, YOU
IMPACTED 1577 PEOPLE. THE AVERAGE BENEFIT WAS $17,000,
AND ON AVERAGE, THEY GOT — NOT AVERAGE.
THEY ALL GOT 380 BONUS AND THAT WAS IN EFFECT, HAD THE SAME
EFFECT AS A ONE-TIME 2.1% RAISE. OUR PROPOSAL, AGAIN, GOING TO
THE 25 YEARS WOULD IMPACT A SMALLER NUMBER OF YEARS, BUT IT
WOULD IMPACT THEM MORE SIGNIFICANTLY, AND THEIR AVERAGE
BENEFIT IS $21,000 AND THE BONUS FOR THEM WOULD BE $857.
SO YOU TAKING THE FOLKS THAT ARE, IN OUR MIND, NEED THE MONEY
THE MOST BECAUSE THEY’RE MAKING THE LEAST AND THIS IS IN ALL
LIKELIHOOD THE MOST MONEY, THE MAJORITY OF THEIR RETIREMENT,
AND YOU’RE GIVING THEM A MEANINGFUL BONUS.
THAT’S OUR RECOMMENDATION TO YOU AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS.>>COULD I ASK YOU A QUESTION?
YOU SAID IT WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES?
>>YES.>>SO THE UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES
ARE NOT A SUSPECT CLASS, YOU JUST HAVE TO HAVE A RATIONAL
REASON TO TREAT THEM DIFFERENTLY?
>>AND THE THOUGHT AGAIN, THE RATIONALE WAS THESE ARE FOLKS
THAT MADE — IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, MADE LESS MONEY AND HAD LESS
OPTIONS IN TERMS OF RETIREMENT AND —
>>WOULDN’T THAT EQUALLY APPLY TO THE UNCLASSIFIED?
IT’S NOT OBVIOUS TO ME WHY THAT LABEL, IF YOU’RE UNDER 30 —
>>FRANKLY, TAKING IT FROM THE CONVERSATION WE HAD WITH THE
RETIREES, HOW THEY WANTED THOSE —
>>DO WE HAVE ANY — HOW MANY UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS DO WE
HAVE THAT MAKE UNDER $30,000? UNCLASSIFIED, PROBABLY THERE’S
VERY FEW THAT ARE MAKING UNDER $30,000.
>>AND FURTHER, I MEAN ALSO FURTHER FOR THE PEOPLE WATCHING,
CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE VERSION —
>>ON EXEMPT AND NON — IN MY MIND, ISN’T THE FOLKS THAT —
GREG IS SHAKING HIS HEAD AT ME. I’M ABOUT TO TELL IT TO YOU
WRONG.>>CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES ARE
PROTECTED BY — NONCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES FOR ALL INTENTS AND
PURPOSES ARE IN AN APPOINTED POSITION.
GENERALLY IT’S A BUREAU MANAGER OR ABOVE-LEVEL POSITION, SO IT’S
A HIGHER LEVEL MANAGEMENT POSITION.
>>SO THEY WOULD PROBABLY BE MAKING MORE THAN $30,000 — IS
IT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN MAKING MORE —
>>NO, THE 30 WHAT IS THEY’RE MAKING FROM THE RETIREMENT
TODAY. AND THAT WAS THE PROBLEM WE GOT
INTO LAST YEAR. IT DIDN’T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO
WHAT W WHAT THEY MADE WHILE THEY WERE WORKING.
WHAT THEIR RETIREMENT BENEFIT WAS, WHAT’S WE’RE TRYING TO GET
AWAY FROM AND WE HAD PEOPLE MAKING GOOD HEAVY SALARIES THAT
REALLY DIDN’T — I’M SURE THEY WERE HAPPY TO GET THE BONUS.
>>IF I’M NOT MISTAKEN, AND I DON’T KNOW IF JUANITA IS HERE TO
CORRECT ME, THE LOWEST GRADE A NONCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEE IS IN
RIGHT NOW IS 16 AND THEY HAVE A MINIMUM SALARY OF AROUND
SOMEWHERE IN 58 TO –>>I CAN CORRECT THAT.
EVERYBODY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF LAW IS UNCLASSIFIED, SO I HAVE A
RUNNER, RECEPTIONIST, SECRETARY, AND THEY ARE NOT MAKING A LARGER
AMOUNT OF MONEY, WHICH IS WHY THEIR RETIREMENT WOULD BE, BUT
I’M NOT LOBBYING JUST FOR MY OFFICE.
IT JUST DIDN’T SEEM TO BE OBVIOUS WHAT THE RATIONZ NAL WAS
IF — RATIONALE WAS IF EACH PERSON IS RECEIVING $17,000 IN
RETIREMENT, ONE GETS IT AND THE OTHER DOESN’T, BUT MAYBE IT IS
RATIONAL.>>DO WE NEED TO MAKE THIS
DISTINCTION THAT WE ONLY USE WHAT THEIR RETIREMENT SALARY IS?
BERNARD IS SAYING HE HAS SECRETARIES AND RUNNERS THAT ARE
UNCLASSIFIED.>>AND I THINK IT’S — HIS
DEPARTMENT IS VERY UNIQUE.>>RIGHT, SO TO COVER THE UNIQUE
AREAS, WHY DON’T WE JUST DO IT BY THE SAME CRITERIA WE HAD,
BEING RETIREMENT SALARIES AND USE THE SERVICE.
>>AND NO MATTER WHETHER –>>WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.
>>I DON’T THINK IT WOULD INCREASE IT PROBABLY THAT MUCH
AT ALL.>>THAT GIVE YOU HEARTBURN?
>>NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. WE HAVE THE DATA, SO IT’S EASY
ENOUGH TO RESTRUCTURE.>>OKAY.
I’D LOVE TO GET SOME CONCURRENCE IF THAT’S THE WILL, THEN WE’D
LIKE TO CHECK THIS BOX, SO THE ADJUSTMENT IS 25 YEARS, LESS
THAN $30,000 IN RETIREMENT COMPENSATION, WE’LL DIVIDE UP
THE $600,000 SUPPLEMENT. I THINK THAT STAYS TRUE TO THE
INTENT, AGAIN, OF FOLKS THAT DEDICATED THEMSELVES FOR THE
MAJORITY OF THEIR PROFESSIONAL CAREER AND ARE NOT GETTING A
LARGE RETIREMENT.>>SO THEY GET THE 857?
>>IT WILL BE A LITTLE BIT SMALLER, BUT YOU’LL HAVE MORE
THAN 700 PEOPLE, AND WE CAN GIVE YOU THAT NUMBER, BUT IT’S
CERTAINLY A LOT LESS THAN A 1577 LAST YEAR.
>>YOU HAVE $600,000 SET ASIDE FOR A SUPPLEMENT FOR INDIVIDUALS
WHO HAVE 25 YEARS OF SERVICE AND ARE MAKING $30,000 OR LESS IN
THEIR RETIREMENT, AND SO WE’LL GO FROM 700 PROBABLY TO A LARGER
NUMBER, BUT UNTIL THEY RUN THOSE NUMBERS, WE WON’T KNOW WHAT THE
NUMBER OF RETIREES, BUT 600,000 IS THE NUMBER WE’RE GOING TO
WORK WITH.>>THANK YOU.
>>I THINK NO MATTER WHAT IT IS, YOU PICK THE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCE OF LAST YEAR. SO THAT’S RETIRE SUPPLEMENT.
KIM, IF YOU’LL THROW US UP — SO LAST WEEK, REALLY SINCE OUR
SUBMISSION, WE’VE HAD A NUMBER OF COUNCIL INTERESTS THAT HAVE
COME INTO MY OFFICE AND IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER, SOON WHAT I’VE
DONE IS PUT THEM INTO ONE-TIME REQUESTS AND ONGOING REQUESTS,
AND PARTICULARLY THE ONGOING REQUESTS, WHAT YOU HEARD IS
YOU’VE GOT ABOUT A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS MORE IN REVENUE
THAN WE BUDGETED FOR WHEN WE MADE THE PROPOSAL A COUPLE WEEKS
AGO. YOU HAVE THAT NUMBER IN YOUR
MIND. YOU START GETTING OVER THAT
NUMBER IN ONGOING, THEN SOMETHING HAS TO GIVE SOMEWHERE,
SO HAVE THAT IN THE BACK OF YOUR MIND.
THEN THE ONE-TIME REQUESTS ARE OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE EASIER TO
PULL OFF, BUT NEVERTHELESS, IT’S REAL MONEY.
SO THE ONE-TIME, I’LL JUST READ THEM FOR YOU.
EXPANSION OF THE HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY.
HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE HISTORIC PROPERTIES ARE
IN NORFOLK AND BRING SOMEBODY IN TO HELP STUDY THAT.
I THINK MS. McCLELLAN ACTUALLY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT — LET ME
RUN THROUGH THE WHOLE LIST. THE COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM AND
THINGS THAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE MORE EFFECTIVE ON OUR END.
>>MAY I JUST ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THE HISTORIC PROPERTY?
DO YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE END?
>>WHY DON’T YOU LET ME RUN THROUGH THEM ALL SO YOU KNOW
WHAT THEY ARE, AND I THINK FRANKLY, SOME OF YOU ALL ARE
GOING TO DEFEND AND ADVOCATE FOR SOME OF THESE DIFFERENT ONES.
PROJECT AT INGLESIDE A VARIETY OF THINGS THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN
THE INGLESIDE NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU’VE SEEN SOME EMAILS THE LAST
COUPLE DAYS, THE LAST FEW MONTHS ABOUT DREDGING ON THE HAGUE AND
SOME OF THE SILTING HAPPENING THERE, AND ACTUALLY STUDY THAT
EFFORT, WHAT IT WOULD TAKE. WHAT DID YOU TELL ME, WYNTER,
THE HAGUE HASN’T BEEN DREDGED SINCE THE EARLY ’70s?
>>1973.>>AND THE PACE PROGRAM,
SOMETHING THAT THE CHAMBER IS INVOLVED N I KNOW A COUPLE OF
YOU ARE INTERESTED IN. SO ABOUT $240,000 WORTH OF
ONE-TIME REQUESTS COME FROM YOU ALL.
THEN THE ONGOING REQUESTS, FESTEVENTS, ABOUT $200,000 WORTH
OF REQUESTS FOR NEW POSITIONS AND OVERHEAD THAT THEY’VE GOT
AND I THINK ALL OF YOU ALL GOT A PRETTY GOOD BRIEFING ON THAT.
SATURDAY HOWARD AT THE RESOURCE — HOURS AT THE
RESOURCE CENTER IN CATCH TELL LARKS WE DON’T HAVE SATURDAY
HOURS THERE, SO WE THINK ABOUT $12,000 TO PROVIDE THOSE HOURS.
. THEN THE IDEA OF USING VOLUNTEER
HAMPTON ROADS TO COME IN AND HEAD UP A VOLUME TOOR PROGRAM.
A COUPLE OF YOU TALKED TO ME ABOUT FUNDS FOR D’ART AND THE
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WAS TO HELP D’ART, OBVIOUSLY THEY HAD TO
VACATE THE SELDEN ARCADE WITH THE EXPLOSIONS.
HAD TO MOVE INTO A DIFFERENT BUILDING.
I THINK STAFF FEELS LIKE OBLIGATIONS — COMMITS WERE MADE
AND HONORED ABOUT — COMMITMENTS WERE MADE AND HONORED ABOUT
GETTING THEM IN THAT BUILDING. AND I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO
SUPPLEMENT THESE THINGS REAL QUICK, AND THE BIG CONVERSATION
IS SCHOOLS. AS YOU THINK THROUGH THESE
THINGS, JUST HAVE SCHOOLS IN THE BACK OF YOUR MIND THAT ANYTHING
YOU SPEND HERE IS NOT AVAILABLE TO SEND TO THE SCHOOLS.
>>YES, YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT AND WE’LL GO THROUGH THEM, BUT I
WANT TO JUST MAKE ONE OBSERVATION TO FESTEVENTS.
I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GO AHEAD FUND THAT $198,000 FOR
FESTEVENTS. I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT
FOR WHAT WE GET, FOR THE RETURN OF INVESTMENT FOR WHAT THEY GIVE
AND WHAT WE RECEIVE, NOT ONLY AS A CITY, BUT A REGION, THEY DO IT
WITH BARE BONES, SO THE $198,000 REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT AND OTHER RESOURCES, I THINK WE SHOULD FUND THAT.
>>I AGREE. I THINK —
[ ALL SPEAKING AT ONCE ]>>HERE’S ONE OF THE CHALLENGES,
ONE OF THE THINGS I’D ASK OF YOU ALL AND WE’RE STILL FIGURING
EACH OTHER OUT. IF YOU ALL CAN GIVE US DIRECTION
IN WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, LET US FIGURE OUT — DON’T JUMP INTO
THE SOLUTION. LET US TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO
GET AT — ABSOLUTELY WE’LL LOOK AT THAT, BUT THERE MAY BE OTHER
WAYS TO GET THERE AS WELL.>>YOU FUND IT AND TELL US HOW.
AS WE GO THROUGH THE LIST, BECAUSE WE HAVE SCHOOLS TO BE
DETERMINED.>>THAT’S A WHOLE OTHER SLIDE.
>>OKAY, YOU WANT TO DO ANOTHER SLIDE THERE?
>>I THINK WHAT I’D LIKE TO DO IS GET SOME SENSE — I JUST
DIDN’T WANT YOU SAYING, HEY, LENS SPEND ALL THIS MONEY —
LET’S SPEND ALL THIS MONEY AND NOT —
>>BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, I THINK WE NEED TO SAY SOMETHING
ABOUT SCHOOLS BEFORE WE — WE SILL HAVE OTHER PRIORITIES OUT
THERE, SO AS YOU KNOW, TOMMY AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH
DR. BOONE AND WITH THE ADMINISTRATION AND WE HAVE SOME
IDEAS AND SO WE CAN JUST TALK ABOUT — AND THEN WE’LL LOOK
AT –>>HERE’S WHAT WE HEARD LAST
WEEK AND WAS REALLY A VARIETY OF THINGS WITHOUT CONSENSUS, WHICH
IS FINE, BUT SOME INTEREST IN ONE-TIME FUNDING FOR THINGS, FOR
SCHOOLS, AND I WOULD TELL YOU THAT THAT IS — DEPENDING ON HOW
FAR YOU GO, THAT’S ATTAINABLE AS LONG AS YOU DON’T GO TOO BIG A
NUMBER AND IT DOESN’T REALLY IMPACT SERVICE DELIVERY BECAUSE
WE HAVE SOME POTS THAT WE CAN LOOK AT ONE-TIME OBVIOUSLY.
ONGOING, THERE WAS CONVERSATION ABOUT ONGOING FUNDS.
SOMETHING WE WANT TO GIVE THEM MONEY AND KEEP THAT AS AN
ONGOING COMMITMENT.>>I TAKE THAT OFF THE TABLE.
BUT I AGREE WITH YOU, I TAKE IT OFF THE TABLE AND WE CAN MOVE
ON.>>OR A COMBINATION OF SOME
ONGOING AND SOME ONE-TIME MONIES AND I THINK THAT’S GIVING YOU A
FAIR BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE PUBLIC AMENITIES FUND
BALANCE AND WE HAD SOME BACK AND FORTH AND THE CHALLENGE YOU HAVE
THERE, IF YOU DO THAT, YOU HAVE SOME COMPLIMENTS SO BY 2020 IF
YOU LOOK — SOME COMMITMENTS SO BY 2020, FRANKLY, THE GENERAL
FUND — YOU’D HAVE TO MOVE SOME THINGS OUT OF THE PUBLIC
AMENITIES FUND OR MOVE SOME MONEY IN THERE AND I WOULD SAY
IF YOU WANT TO GIVE THEM ONE-TIME MONEY, THERE’S OTHER
WAYS TO DO IT THAT DON’T CAUSE AS MUCH ISSUES.
>>MR. SMIGIEL.>>AND I DO APPRECIATE THE
CONVERSATION THAT DOUG AND THE MAYOR, THAT WE’VE BEEN TALKING
ABOUT THIS, AND I KNOW 6 MILLION SOUNDS LIKE A LOT, BUT IT GOES
BACK TO KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND IF WE CAN GET THROUGH
THIS BUDGET CYCLE WITH HELPING THE SCHOOL SYSTEM GET THIS PAY
AND COMP, BECAUSE THE MAYOR AND I TALKED ABOUT, I THINK
EVERYBODY AROUND HERE IS UNDERSTANDING — UNDERSTANDS
WHAT’S GOING ON WITH TEACHER SALARIES.
I THINK WE’VE TILLED THAT ENOUGH AND THAT THERE’S A COMPRESSION
ISSUE, AND SO THE MAYOR AND I KNOW HAS BEEN WORKING ON AND
SHOWING OUR COMMITMENT TO THAT. I KNOW THERE IS THAT $6 MILLION
AVAILABLE AND SOME ONE-TIME FUNDS THAT WILL HELP US GET
THROUGH THIS YEAR WHERE WE DON’T HAVE TO GO INTO THE PUBLIC
AMENITIES FUND OR RAISE TAXES AND AS WE CONTINUE THOSE
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, IT ALLOWS US THEN THE
OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT DIFFERENT SOURCES OF MONEY THAT WE CAN DO
FOR ONGOING FUNDS WITH THAT. AND I KNOW THAT DR. BOONE AND
RODNEY HAVE TALKED TO KENNY. I HAD SOME BRIEF CONVERSATIONS
WITH RODNEY ABOUT THIS AND THEN PRESENTING THEIR REDESIGNED
EFFORTS, AND I THINK BY OCTOBER, WE SHOULD HAVE A BETTER HANDLE
WHAT THEY’RE GOING TO BE PROPOSING AS FAR AS THEIR
REDESIGN, AND IT ALLOWS US THEN TO ALSO LOOK AT SOME
ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES THAT I KNOW HAS BEEN A CONCERN FOR SOME
COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAKING SURE THAT WE’RE SEEING SOME
CONSOLIDATION EFFORTS AND SEASONAL — SOME OTHER THINGS.
BUT I THINK IN YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH DR. BOONE AND
ME AND DOUG, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WE CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN FOR THEM
AND THE SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS THAT I’VE SPOKEN TO HAVE SAID
THAT THEY ARE TRULY COMMITTED TO THE PAY AND COMP PART OF THEIR
REQUEST, AND SO IT’S NOT JUST GIVING THEM THE 6 MILLION AND
ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE THAT AND BUY A BUNCH OF
SCHOOL BUSES WITH IT. THIS IS TRULY, THEIR NUMBER ONE
PRIORITY IS THE PAY AND COMP, AND I THINK, KENNY, YOU CAN
AGREE THAT THAT’S WHAT THEY SAID TO US.
>>THAT’S RIGHT.>>COULD YOU EXPAND, KENNY, SO
PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS COMMITMENT THAT IS DRAWN UP WITH
THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, SO THEY UNDERSTAND THAT BY OCTOBER, YOU
KNOW, DOUG HAS DONE –>>LET’S GO AHEAD AND TALK —
>>AS WE DEVELOPED THE FUNDING FORMULA, IN ORDER FOR US TO
SUSTAIN AND SUPPORT THEM, WE’RE LOOKING AT THE CORE
INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS, FACILITY UTILIZATION, THAT CONSOLIDATION
PLAN, AND INCLUDING IMPROVEMENT OF SOME BUILDINGS, AND THEN
STRENGTHENING SPECIALTY PROGRAMS, WHICH IS ONE OF OUR
EFFORTS TO TRY TO BRING FAMILIES BACK INTO NORFOLK, AND THEN
ENSURING EQUITY FOR ALL WERE THE POINTS THAT WERE MADE.
I DON’T KNOW IF THAT HELPS YOU.>>YES.
>>AND THAT’S GREAT STUFF. HERE’S A LIST THAT — LISTENING
TO YOU ALL, I THINK COVERS ALL THE SAME THINGS.
THE SPECIALTY PROGRAMS I DIDN’T HAVE ON HERE, BUT WE’LL GET THAT
ON HERE, AND OBVIOUSLY WE PUT A LOT OF MONEY IN THE CTE, TALKING
ABOUT NEWTON CREEK, EDUCATION IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT IN THAT
PIECE, WE WANT COLLABORATION THERE, AND FOR US, AND I SAID
THIS TO DR. BOONE, WE WOULD HAVE THIS AGREEMENT, IT’S NOT FOR US
TO LOOK OVER HER SHOULDER AS MUCH AS IT IS FOR US TO BE IN
THE ROOM SO WHEN WE GET TO OCTOBER, WE KNOW — WE’RE WELL
VERSED IN WHAT IT IS THEY’RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH AND WHAT
THEY’RE TRYING TO DO AND WE’VE ALL BEEN AT THE TABLE TOGETHER
TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN.>>AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS —
THEY HAVE A FOCUS. IT’S LITERACY, LEADERSHIP AND
RIGOR. IT’S NOW, THEY’RE NOT PROCESS OF
DEFINING THOSE AND I THINK THAT’S PART OF THE
ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN. I DON’T KNOW, FOR THOSE WHO HAVE
BEEN ON COUNCIL FOR A WHILE, WE’VE SEEN MULTIPLE
ACCOUNTABILITY PLANS OVER THE YEARS, BUT WITH THE NEW
SUPERINTENDENT AND NEW SCHOOL BOARD, GIVING THEM THAT
OPPORTUNITY TO FIND THAT IS, YOU KNOW, BY OCTOBER, I THINK IS
WHEN WE WERE TOLD THAT WOULD HAPPEN.
>>AND I WOULD ADD THAT SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT, STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
AND GREATER SUCCESS FOR ALL OF OUR SCHOOLS IS PART OF IT, AND
WE CAN DO THIS, MR. MANAGER, WITHOUT RAISING TAXES AND
WITHOUT RAIDING THE PUBLIC AMENITIES FUND, CORRECT?
>>CORRECT.>>I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT EQUITY FOR ALL SCHOOLS, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK
LIKE? IS THERE A DETAILED PLAN TO
ADDRESS WHAT EQUITY FOR ALL SCHOOLS — BECAUSE THE FAILING
SCHOOLS ARE YOUR TITLE ONE SCHOOLS.
>>SO THE CITY AND NPS WILL WORK TOGETHER ON THIS
COLLABORATIVELY. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE
WILL JUST BE GIVEN BY NPS. THIS AGREEMENT IS THE CITY OF
NORFOLK AND OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS WORKING CLOSELY TOGETHER ON ALL
OF THESE INITIATIVES. SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE NOT DONE
IN THE PAST.>>I THINK THERE’S AN
OPPORTUNITY, TOO, WITH THE LIFELONG LEARNING COMMISSION, TO
LOOK AT THE POVERTY ASPECTS, SO IT’S ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED
THROUGH THE POVERTY COMMISSION, BUT NOW TAKING THAT INTO THE
EDUCATION REALM AND SEEING HOW WE CAN USE COMMUNITY
PARTNERSHIPS POSSIBLY TO HELP IN SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND
BRINGING IN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS TO HELP OFFSET SOME OF WHAT WE
CAN’T DO IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND HELP WITH THAT, WHETHER IT’S
TUTORING CENTERS OR WHETHER IT’S COLLEGES PARTNERING WITH US ON
LOOKING AT — YOU KNOW, THERE’S SO MANY DIFFERENT AVENUES THEY
CAN LOOK AT, I THINK THAT COMMISSION WOULD REALLY BE ABLE
TO LOOK AT THAT ISSUE, IN PARTICULAR FOR SUPER WARD 7 AND
LOOKING OUT FOR OUR KIDS THERE, AND DEVELOPING MAYBE INNOVATIVE
PROGRAMS FOR THE CITY TO ASSIST WITH THAT.
>>ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO JUST REMIND
EVERYBODY, IS THAT WE HAVE HAD ALL THESE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT
THIS PLAN AND THAT PLAN AND THIS SUPERINTENDENT AND THAT
SUPERINTENDENT, AND MORE THAN LIKELY ANY ONE OF THESE PLANS
WITH ANY ONE OF THOSE SUPERINTENDENTS WOULD HAVE
WORKED, AND WE REALLY NEED, I THINK, SOME PATIENCE AS A PUBLIC
BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING THAT — IT’S LIKE THERE’S NO PILL TO
MAKE YOU LOSE 20 POUNDS IN TWO DAYS, AND THERE’S NO —
>>DARN IT.>>I KNOW.
THERE’S NO PILL FOR THAT, AND THERE’S NO PILL — THERE’S NOT A
QUICK FIX, SO IF WE — I THINK THAT WITH THIS COUNCIL AND WITH
THE CURRENT SCHOOL BOARD, THAT WE’RE COMING TO THE TABLE, WE’RE
TALKING, WE’RE WORKING TOGETHER IN A WAY THAT WE HAVEN’T DONE
BEFORE AND IT’S NOT SOMETHING THAT’S GOING TO TURN THINGS
AROUND JUST BECAUSE — YOU KNOW, OVERNIGHT.
IT’S GOING TO TAKE TIME BECAUSE ALL OF THESE THINGS HAVE TO BE
IMPLEMENTED, THEY HAVE TO BE TAUGHT, AND I THINK WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE WE’RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
IF WE’RE GETTING THE SUPPORT OF THE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE PUBLIC
SCHOOL SYSTEM IS GETTING OUR SUPPORT, THEN WE SET REAL RISK
EXPECTATIONS FOR THE — REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS FOR THE
PUBLIC, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO OUTCOMES AND HOW
REALISTICALLY WE CAN DO THESE THINGS.
>>MS. JOHNSON, DID YOU WANT TO FINISH YOUR THOUGHT?
>>OH, NO, I’M FINISHED.>>SO MR. MANAGER, I WANTED TO
GET THAT NOUBT TABLE — THAT NUMBER ON THE TABLE, THAT
6 MILLION, SO WE CAN BUILD FROM — WE HAVE THE COMMITMENT
FOR SCHOOLS AND YOU CAN BUILD FROM THERE.
>>MY QUESTION IS BASED ON THE INFORMATION YOU SENT OUT LAST
NIGHT, YOU HAD A LIST OF OPTIONS OF FUNDING THE ONGOING AND
MAINTENANCE –>>YOU STARTED TO EXPLAIN THAT
TO ME. I THINK SOME OF US MISREAD THAT
WHEN YOU SENT THAT OUT.>>THAT’S WHY I WANTED TO START
WITH HOW WE GOT TO THE NUMBER WE GOT TO.
SO WE GOT TO THAT — I’LL GET MY NUMBERS, 843 OR 8 — AND THEN
THE ENHANCEMENTS WE PUT ON WAS THE LIST THAT I SHOWED YOU, THAT
6.5 MILLION OR SO OF ITEMS THAT WEREN’T INLESS YEAR AND IF YOU
WANT TO TRY TO FIND CUTS OR ADD MONEY, I RECOMMEND YOU NOT CUT
BASIC SERVICES.>>SO IT READ ORIGINALLY LIKE WE
WERE GOING TO HAVE TO TRADE IN POLICE VESTS TO GIVE MONEY TO
THE SCHOOLS. SOME OF US WERE TALKING ABOUT
THAT –>>TOMMY SAID TO ME EARLIER
TODAY, AND I WENT, I DON’T THINK THAT’S TRUE AND IF IT IS, I HAVE
AN ISSUE.>>ANDRIA, WHAT WE JUST
DISCUSSED DOES NOT INCLUDE RAISING TAXES, DOES NOT RAID THE
PUBLIC AMENITIES, NOR DOES IT CUT CORE SERVICES, FUNDING AND
RESOURCES FOR OUR CORE SERVICES. SO WE’RE —
>>SO SIX IS ON-TIME OR ONGOING OR YOU WANT US TO DETERMINE
THAT?>>THREE MILLION SHOULD BE
ONGOING AND THREE MILLION SHOULD BE ONE-TIME.
>>ALL RIGHT.>>THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, EVERYBODY.>>SO I THINK WE CAN GO BACK —
>>WE KNOW WE GOT THERE FOR FREE.
>>WHAT? [ LAUGHTER ]
>>I ACTUALLY LOVED IT.>>THE KIDS THANK YOU.
THIS IS FOR STUDENTS.>>ALL RIGHT.
I’M GOING TO PUT THIS BACK TO YOU ALL.
THIS IS YOUR LIST OF THE THINGS THAT WERE NOT IN OUR PROPOSAL
THAT I’VE HEARD THAT YOU ALL HAVE INTEREST IN.
WE’VE ALREADY OBVIOUSLY COVERED FESTEVENTS AT THE TOP RIGHT.
>>I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT FESTEVENTS.
I KNOW WE’RE GIVING THAT MONEY THIS YEAR, BUT ARE WE GOING TO
SUSTAIN THAT? BECAUSE IF ERIN GOES OUT AND HAS
TO HIRE ALL THESE PEOPLE WITH THAT MONEY AND THEN —
>>YES, THAT’S CONTINUOUS.>>OKAY.
I KNOW IT SAID ONGOING, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A
FUNDING SOURCE FOR THAT.>>WE WILL HAVE TO —
>>AND JUST TO CLARIFY, ONE OF THE REASONS WE’RE DOING THIS IS
BECAUSE WE’RE ASKING FEST EVENT STOP DO OUTSIDE OF THE DOWNTOWN
AREA IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS — FESTEVENTS TO DO MORE OUTSIDE OF
THE DOWNTOWN AREA IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, CORRECT?
>>THAT’S CORRECT. [ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ]
>>I MEAN, I DON’T KNOW HOW THEY DO WHAT THEY DO WITH 12 PEOPLE.
IT’S UNBELIEVABLE.>>JUST REMEMBER THE FIRST — WE
OPENED WITH YOU GOT 250 IN REVENUE THAT WE DIDN’T
ANTICIPATE HAVING.>>DR. WHIBLEY.
>>YOU JUST SPENT 185 OF IT.>>SO TWO THINGS.
TELL ME ABOUT THIS EXPANSION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES.
WHAT IS THAT?>>AGAIN, THESE ARE YOU ALL’S
REQUESTS FOR –>>BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE DID
THIS WHEN WE HAD THE PRESERVATION COMMITTEE AND THEY
WENT OUT AND IDENTIFIED ALL THE HISTORIC PROPERTIES.
WE ALSO HAVE A HISTORIC FOUNDATION THAT HAS IDENTIFIED
ALL THE PROPERTIES. AREN’T WE A LITTLE REDUNDANT
HERE?>>THE LAST TIME THEY DID A
SURVEY WAS IN 1996. THERE ARE A LOT OF PROPERTIES
NOW THAT HAVE COME ON BOARD.>>WHAT WAS THE STUDY DONE THREE
YEARS AGO?>>THEY DIDN’T DO A LAND STUDY.
>>SO WE’RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE CITY HAS DONE, NOT WHAT
DIFFERENT CITY FOUNDATIONS HAVE DONE?
>>SO BASICALLY, THIS WOULD — CAN I — YOU SAID EXPAND THOSE
PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR TAX CREDITS.
>>I’M ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT. I’M JUST SAYING IT SEEMS LIKE
WE’VE ALREADY DONE IT. SO WHAT’S THE COST?
WHERE’S THE COST COME FROM?>>AGAIN, THESE ARE YOU ALL.
NOT TO SAY WE WON’T DO LOTS OF REFERENCE TO FIGURE THEM OUT,
BUT THIS IS THE LIST COMING FROM COUNCIL.
>>WHAT I’M SAYING IS WHERE DO YOU GET 100,000?
>>THE NUMBER I GOT WAS FROM CASE POLLARD AND IT ESSENTIALLY
HAS CDBG MASTER FUNDS AND IT WOULD BE SPREAD OUT OVER SEVERAL
YEARS.>>BUT WHAT’S THE COST?
ARE YOU HIRING MORE PEOPLE?>>IT WAS TO CONTRACT OUT TO
HAVE IT DONE.>>THERE’S A WHOLE — I HOPE
WE’RE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF COMMUNITY GROUPS THAT HAVE, YOU
KNOW, WOULD LOVE TO DO THIS.>>WHAT COMMUNITY GROUPS?
>>I THINK — GO AHEAD.>>LENNY?
>>LENNY FIRST.>>IN YOUR STATE AND FEDERAL
DISTRICTS, WE HAVE SURVEYED THAT WERE DONE BACK IN THE 1970s TO
ESTABLISH WHAT AREAS WERE ELIGIBLE TO BE LISTED FOR
STRUCTURES. WE HAVE NOT UPDATE THE SURVEY
SINCE THEY WERE ORIGINALLY DONE IN THE 1970s AND IT IS TIME —
>>SO THE COST IS THE CONSULTANT?
>>IT’S THAT AND TO DO THE LEG WORK OF IT.
>>ALL RIGHT, GREAT. THEN THE OTHER THING, JUST FOR
THE D’ART CENTER, THAT WAS ONE-TIME FUNDING, THAT’S NOT
ONGOING.>>THAT GOT ON THE WRONG SIDE,
I’M SORRY.>>THAT’S ONE-TIME.
>>I ASSUMED IT WAS ONGOING. SO ONE-TIME, OKAY.
>>SO MRS. JOHNSON WAS NEXT.>>THE ADVANCED COMMUNITY RATING
SYSTEM, EXACTLY WHAT — [ ALL SPEAKING AT ONCE ]
>>I PASSED OUT A LITTLE CHEAT SHEET TO EXPLAIN IT TO YOU GUYS.
NORFOLK PARTICIPATES IN THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
AND THE COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM, WE CURRENTLY HAVE A RATE OF 8.
WHAT THAT MEANS IS A REDUCTION ON ALL PERHAPS IN THE FLOOD
INSURANCE PROGRAM, AND CURRENTLY WE SAVE A LITTLE FOR OUR
HOMEOWNERS, A LITTLE UNDER $800,000 A YEAR.
HOWEVER, WE COULD IMPROVE THAT. WE CAN IMPROVE THAT TO A 20%
REDUCTION OR A 25% REDUCTION, WHICH WOULD CALL BETWEEN 1.6 TO
$1.9 MILLION A YEAR SAVINGS AND IF YOU SAW THE RECENT NEW YORK
TIMES ARTICLE TALKING ABOUT FLOOD INSURANCE RATES AND HOW
DIFFICULT THAT IS IN OUR AREA, I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
THE CHALLENGE IS, WE HAVE A STAFF IN OUR PLANNING DEPENDS
THAT IS ONE-THIRD OF THE SIZE OF WHAT IT WAS IN 2008 AND WE HAVE
A FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR WHO IS AMAZING, BUT I DON’T THINK
HAS THE TIME TO SPEND ON THIS AND AS I UNDERSTAND TALKING WITH
FEMA FOLKS LAST WEEK AND OTHERS, THIS TAKES A LOT OF WORK ON
FOCUS ON IMPROVING A RATING. SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS I THINK
IT’S A SMART MOVE FOR TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO SPEND MONEY TO
CONTRACT OUT APPROXIMATELY $50,000 WHICH WE COULD POSSIBLY
GET AN $800,000 RETURN FOR OUR CITIZENS.
>>SO THIS FOR THE ENTIRE CITY?>>YES, MA’AM.
>>ALL HOMEOWNERS?>>NOT ALL HOMEOWNERS.
THOSE WHO ARE IN THE FLOODPLAIN.>>SO I HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE AND
I’M NOT REQUIRED.>>SO ESPECIALLY FOLKS THAT ARE
REQUIRED TO HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE.
>>RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE — I CAN TELL YOU HOW MANY — WE HAVE A
LITTLE UNDER 12,000 HOMES WHO HAVE PLANS.
THE AVERAGE PREMIUM IS $786, BUT I KNOW YOU HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE
PLANS THAT ARE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.
MY FLOOD INSURANCE IS $400 BECAUSE I’M NOT IN A —
>>YOU’RE NOT REQUIRE.>>BUT THIS IS ONE WAY WE CAN
DEMONSTRATE THAT WE WORKING TOWARDS ADDRESSING OUR FLOOD
ISSUES AND TRYING TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE COST SURGES.
>>DIDN’T WE JUST DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT?
>>WE’VE DONE A LOT THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION OVER THE
YEARS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
WE’VE ADOPTED A LOT OF RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT ALLOW US TO
HAVE CREDITS ALREADY.>>OKAY.
>>AND WHAT I’M SAYING IS WE’VE DONE A LOT OF CUTS OVER THE
YEARS BECAUSE THE RECESSION AND ETCETERA, AND WE’RE ASKING OUR
STAFF TO DO SO MUCH MORE AND I THINK THIS IS AN AREA WHERE THAT
I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO CONTRACT OUT, AND I’VE TALKED
WITH GEORGE SOMEWHAT ABOUT THIS AND ASKED FOR HIS INPUT.
I THINK HE’S A BOARD AS WELL. AND MARTIN UNDERSTANDS THIS
PRETTY WELL. [ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ]
>>AGAIN, WE’VE BEEN WORKING ON DIFFERENT WAYS TO GET THIS
NUMBER AS LOW AS POSSIBLE THROUGH CITY STAFF FOR YEARS,
AND INCH BY INCH, WE’VE GOTTEN WHERE WE ARE TODAY, BUT I THINK
WE NEED TO (INAUDIBLE).>>WHERE IS THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT ON ELIMINATING THEIR SUBSIDY?
BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WERE A LITTLE — THEIR PLAN WAS
TO LOWER OVER TIME THE AMOUNT THAT THEY WERE CONTRIBUTING TO
THE OVERALL, SO THAT’S GOING TO MEAN THAT FLOOD INSURANCE IS
JUST GOING TO FOR FROM ONE HAND TO THE NEXT, GOING TO GO FROM
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO HOMEOWNERS, SO WHERE ARE THEY IN
ALL OF THAT? WHERE IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
IN THEIR FORECAST?>>LET ME — I COULDN’T HEAR
THAT, I’M SORRY.>>WHERE IS THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IN THEIR PLAN TO ELIMINATE OR REDUCE THEIR
SUBSIDY TO THE FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM?
BECAUSE THERE WAS CONVERSATION ABOUT THEY WERE GOING TO BE
PAYING LESS AND HOMEOWNERS WERE GOING TO BE PAYING MORE, SO
WHERE IS THAT?>>THE FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
IS ABOUT $28 MILLION AND THEY STARTED SEVERAL YEARS AGO WITH A
BILL THAT WENT THROUGH CONGRESS, ONE CALLED DEEP WATERS AND ONE
CALLED GRIM WATERS. THEY BOTH ATTEMPTED TO ESTABLISH
A METHOD OF BRINGING FLOOD INSURANCE FROM ACTUARY LEVELS,
WHICH IS EXTREMELY SUBSIDIZED RIGHT NOW AND WHAT WE DO KNOW IS
THAT THE FIRST ONE TOOK OFF AND THERE WAS AN OUTCRY.
REPRESENTATIVES WEREN’T BACK TO CONGRESS, THEY SLOWED DOWN THE
INCREASES, BUT RIGHT NOW FLOOD INSURANCE IS GOING TO BE RISING.
IT IS A SUBSIDIZED COST AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STARTS TO
LOOK AT THEIR FINANCIAL (INAUDIBLE), WHICH WE HOPE THEY
WILL DO SOME DAY, THEY’RE GOING TO ADDRESS THAT.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT EVERYBODY WHO HAS FLOOD
INSURANCE WHO’S IN A FLOOD ZONE, PARTICULARLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD
CLAIMS, THEIR RATES ARE GOING TO GO UP SOMEWHERE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD OF 10 TO 17% HERE. SOMEWHERE LIKE THAT.
>>OKAY.>>MINE IS GOING UP, I’M IN A
FLOOD ZONE AND I’VE ALREADY HAD A CLAIM.
>>RIGHT. OURS IS, TOO.
WE’RE IN A FLOOD ZONE AND WE’RE REQUIRED TO HAVE FLOOD
INSURANCE. YEAH, IT IS GOING UP AS WELL, SO
YEAH — OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHERE THEY
WERE.>>WE JUST RECENTLY — THE
ANNOUNCEMENT CAME DOWN AND I FORWARDED TO YOU ALL, WE’VE GONE
FROM A LEVEL 9 TO A LEVEL 8, RESULTS IN A 5% SAVINGS, 10%
SAVINGS. WE WERE NOT SATISFIED WITH THAT.
WE EXPECTED TO GO 7. WE ARGUED BACK AND FORTH AND
FEMA HAS GIVEN US A CHANCE TO RESUBMIT RIGHT ON TOP OF THE
ANNOUNCEMENT, SO BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, WE COULD BE IN THE 7,
OR 15% REDUCTION.>>SO IS THIS IS TRYING TO NET
NEUTRALIZE A LITTLE BIT OF THAT OR BALANCE OUT WHAT’S GOING AWAY
WITH THE SAVINGS OR WHAT’S GOING TO INCREASE WITH THE SAVINGS
THAT WE’VE GIVING THEM TO TRY TO — SO IT’S LESS OF AN IMPACT
ON THE RESIDENTS? BECAUSE IF THE PRICE GOES UP AND
WE GET NO ADDITIONAL SAVINGS, THE PRICE GOES UP, BUT IF WE GET
ADDITIONAL SAVINGS AND THE PRICE GOES UP, THEY KIND OF BALANCE
EACH OTHER OUT.>>THAT’S THE —
>>OKAY.>>AND YOU WILL ACTUALLY SEE ON
YOUR FLOOD INSURANCE POLICY WHEN YOU GET THE BILL, IT WILL
ACTUALLY WILL SHOW 5% OR 10% REDUCTION OF THE RESULT OF
PARTICIPATING IN THE PROGRAM. VIRGINIA BEACH DOESN’T
PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM, BY THE WAY, SO WE WERE VERY FORWARD
THINKING THANKS TO OUR PLANNING STAFF TO GET US INTO THIS A
WHILE BACK. IT’S NOT JUST A MATTER OF
FILLING OUT PAPERWORK. WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO THINGS
AND WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, FEMA HAS VERY SPECIFIC AREAS.
THE BEST RATING IN THE REGION IS GLOUCESTER AND THEY’RE AT A
RATING OF 6. I BELIEVE THAT’S THE CASE.
GLOUCESTER’S AT A 6?>>THEY’RE A 6.
I DON’T KNOW HOW THEY DO THAT. [ LAUGHTER ]
>>5 IS THE SORT OF GOLDEN STANDARD, THAT’S WHERE WE’D LIKE
TO BE. ANYWAY, THIS MAKES A LOT OF
SENSE FOR WHERE WE ARE, WHAT WE’RE DOING, ALL THE CHALLENGES
WE FACE, AND IT IS A CITYWIDE PROGRAM.
>>SO MR. MANAGER, WHAT’S THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION?
>>WELL, YOU GOT MY BUDGET PROPOSAL, RIGHT?
SO THESE WEREN’T IN THERE. THIS IS — YOU GOT A QUARTER OF
A MILLION DOLLARS OF NEW REVENUE AND SO PART OF WHAT I THINK
YOU’RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS ADVOCATING FOR A HANDFUL OF
THINGS THAT YOU THINK MERIT BEING IN THE BUDGET.
>>ARE YOU ALSO COUNTING THE 1.4 UNDESIGNATED FUNDS?
>>THAT’S AVAILABLE.>>YOU HAVE 1.4 PLUS 250?
>>WELL, 250 OF ONGOING, 1.4 OF UNDESIGNATED.
CORRECT. SO IF YOU WANTED TO SPEND THAT
MONEY AS PART OF THE 1.4, YOU CAN DO THAT.
>>MS. JOHNSON.>>SO, MR. MANAGER, I’M GLAD YOU
CLARIFIED THAT AND WE COULD ADDRESS WITH MY COLLEAGUES AND
EVERYTHING SO WE’RE ALL CLEAR ON HOW MUCH MONEY IS AVAILABLE FOR
US, AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE’RE INTERESTED ARE NOT ON THIS
LIST RIGHT NOW. SO THAT IS WHERE WE’RE GOING
TOWARDS RIGHT NOW.>>DOUG, LET’S FUND THIS, OKAY?
>>FUND THE CRS.>>YES.
>>I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE FUNDS FOR D’ART.
I THINK SOME OF US HAVE BEEN GETTING LETTERS THAT PUBLIC ARTS
HAS BEEN COMPLETELY CUT. I DON’T KNOW WHERE THAT CAME
FROM, BUT THEN WE GOT ANOTHER LETTER HERE THAT SAID THAT IT
WASN’T THAT IT WAS COMPLETELY CUT, IT’S JUST NOT AT THE LEVEL,
BUT THE FUNDS FOR D’ART, THAT IS WHAT THAT LETTER WAS ASKING FOR?
>>I DON’T KNOW, BUT LET’S TALK ABOUT PUBLIC ARTS AND LET’S TALK
ABOUT D’ART. SO YOU’VE GOT, AND GREG CAN
CORRECT ME ON THE NUMBERS, $445,000 OF COMMITTED MONEY FOR
PUBLIC PARTS. ALL RIGHT?
APPROPRIATED MONEY.>>HOW MUCH?
>>445. YOU HAVE ANOTHER 989,000 THAT IS
AVAILABLE, SO ESSENTIALLY, YOU HAVE FOUR YEARS WORTH’ OF PUBLIC
ARTS, USES FOR WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED.
SOMETHING LIKE COMPLETE STREETS HAS A POT OF MONEY STILL THERE,
WE DIDN’T FUND ADDITIONAL MONEY FOR PUBLIC ART IN THIS BUDGET.
LET’S SPEND THE MILLION DOLLARS YOU GOT RATHER THAN PUTTING NEW
MONEY IN.>>I KNOW WE DON’T WANT TO GET
INTO A HUGE DEBATE, BUT WHY ISN’T THE MOAN BEING SPENT?
BECAUSE THERE’S NO PUBLIC ART DOWN IN OCEAN VIEW OTHER THAN
THEY JUST PAINTED — THERE’S PLACES ALL THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
I THINK WARDS CORNER CAN PROBABLY USE SOME MORE, BUT I
GUESS MY QUESTION IS, HOW DO YOU GET ON THE LIST AND REQUEST
PUBLIC ART, IF IT’S SITTING THERE, YOU KNOW?
>>THEY’RE WORKING ON IT. FOR EXAMPLE, THEY HAVE —
THEY’VE BEEN WORKING TO BRING ART WORK TO THE AIRPORT FOR A
FEW YEARS.>>RIGHT, I SAW THAT.
>>AND THERE’S AN RFP FOR THAT. SO IT IS AN ONGOING PROCESS.
>>AND THIS IS APPROPRIATED FOR THE CITY A LONG TIME AGO.
>>RIGHT. IS THAT STILL IN THAT
$8 MILLION.>>WHAT HAPPENED WAS THE
PROPOSAL THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT WAS NOT PASSED, AND SO NOW
THEY’VE GONE BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD TO GET ANOTHER PUBLIC ART
FOR THAT — SO THAT MONEY IS STILL IN THERE.
>>WHY DON’T YOU LET US GIVE YOU —
>>AND YOU NEED TO TALK TO YOUR COMMISSION AND RAISE THE ISSUE
THAT YOU’RE INTERESTED IN HAVING ART WHEREVER.
>>WE’LL GIVE YOU, JUST LIKE WE DID ON THE PUBLIC AMEANTITIES
FUND, WE’LL — AMEANTITIES FUND, WE’LL GIVE YOU A BRIEFING PAPER
ON PUBLIC ART AND TELL YOU WHAT YOU GOT AND WHAT THE PROCESS IS.
>>SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, IN GENERAL, I THINK IT’S — AS —
IT ADDS TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN NORFOLK, BUT NOT AT THE
DETRIMENT OF OTHER THINGS. I ALSO DON’T THINK WE NEED TO
HAVE TILES FALLING FROM THE CEILING OF OUR SCHOOL AND DRIP
BUCKETS UNDER.>>IT JUST BOTHERS ME THAT
THERE’S A RUMOR THAT WE TOOK ALL THEIR MONEY AWAY AND THAT’S NOT
TRUE.>>IT’S STILL THERE.
WE’RE NOT ADDING LIKE WE HAVE IN THE PASS.
>>YOU HAVE ALMOST A HALF MILLION ENCUMBERED AND
ALMOST A MILLION UNENCUMBERED.>>JUST BECAUSE THE MONEY IS
THERE DOESN’T MEAN YOU’RE GOING TO SPEND IT THIS YEAR.
>>IT TAKES MULTIPLE YEARS.>>YOU STOP THE STREAM NOW, YOU
KNOW, THERE’S A YEAR DOWN THE ROAD FROM NOW WHERE THEY’RE NOT
GOING TO HAVE MONEY DOING PROJECTS AND I THINK THAT’S
WHERE THEY’RE MORE CONCERNED AND I THINK WE MADE A COMMITMENT
YEARS AGO TO FUND PUBLIC ART IN THE CITY AND I THINK THAT’S
IMPORTANT AS WELL.>>THAT FUNDING IS NOT UNLIKE
THE PUBLIC AMENITIES FUND, THAT ONE PERCENT AND WE MADE THAT
PROMISE AND I THINK IT’S A STRONG ONE.
>>ALL RIGHT. MR. MANAGER?
>>ALL RIGHT. SO —
>>SO I GUESS TO CLARIFY, THE D’ART, THAT’S —
>>I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE –>>WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE D’ART
WAS ONCE THEY WERE IN LIMBO AND DIDN’T HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE,
THEY COULDN’T HAVE ANY OF THEIR ONGOING MONEY-MAKING PROJECTS.
TO DO THE SHORT-TERM DESCRIPTION, SO WHERE THEY ARE
NOW, TO STAY IT IN, THERE’S 50,000 THEY NEED TO BE WHOLE TO
SUSTAIN THEIR RENT.>>MR. MANAGER, LET’S FUND THAT
50,000 BECAUSE, AGAIN, THEY WILL BE BACK —
>>THEY CAN’T PAY THEIR RENT — THEY CAN’T STAY IN THEIR CURRENT
LOCATION WHICH I BELIEVE THEY’RE TRYING TO BUY OR THEY’RE
TALKING, DISCUSSING ABOUT PURCHASING THAT LOCATION, BUT
CERTAINLY IT’S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD TRY TO — AND ALSO WORK
WITH THEM, HOPEFULLY, ABOUT A LONG-TERM SOLUTION.
>>YOU SAY YOU DON’T WANT TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION RIGHT
NOW, BUT I’M JUST GOING TO BRING THERE BACK UP AGAIN.
SOMETHING LIKE THAT, TO ME, IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE FUNDED
OUT OF THE PUBLIC AMENITIES FUND.
IT DOESN’T HAVE TO KEEP ON COMING OUT OF OUR GENERAL —
>>D’ART?>>D’ART.
THAT WILL BE A CONVERSATION THIS WHOLE NEXT YEAR FOR BRINGING
PUBLIC AMENITIES BACK UP, BUT WE HAVE TO START LOOKING AT THOSE
FUNDS TO ASSIST WITH THINGS LIKE THAT AND I EVEN BROUGHT UP IN
OUR BUDGET, WE HAVE THE WISCONSIN AND WE’VE PUT MONEY
TOWARDS WISCONSIN. ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING
THAT COULD COME OUT OF THE PUBLIC AMENITIES FUND THAT WE
DON’T HAVE TO KEEP ON FUNDING OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND, YOU
KNOW, TO ASSIST WITH THAT. I KNOW THE WORRIES OF THAT
PUBLIC AMENITIES FUND AND YOU GUYS ARE VERY CONSERVATIVE ON
YOUR FORECASTS FOR THAT REVENUE FOR THE PUBLIC AMENITIES FUND.
I THINK THAT WILL BE A LOT HIGHER DOWN THE ROAD, BUT I
THINK IT WILL BE A GREAT DISCUSSION, MAYBE AN SMALL
COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT PUBLIC
AMENITIES FUND, PARTICULARLY THE STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE THAT IT
WAS ALWAYS FOR DOWNTOWN AND CORRECTING THAT BECAUSE THERE
ARE OTHER PLACES WE MAY WANT TO LOOK AT THAT MONEY GOING AND TRY
TO UTILIZE SOME OF THOSE FUNDS TO DO SOME THINGS THAT MAYBE WE
HAVEN’T BEEN ABLE TO DO AND ASSIST THROUGHOUT THE CITY THAT
IS A PUBLIC AMENITY.>>SOMETIMES I THINK YOU NEED TO
LEAVE SOME MONEY ALONE. YOU MAKE THAT ARTLE, BUT I
REMEMBER — ARGUMENT, BUT I REMEMBER IN THE PAST WE WERE
ABLE TO TAKE THAT MONEY AND DO SOME BIG TICKET ITEMS.
YOU CAN’T JUST KEEP NIBBLING, NIBBLING, NIBBLING, BECAUSE IF
YOU DO, IT’S GOING TO BE ALL GONE.
IT’S JUST LIKE HAVING A $100 BILL, YOU BREAK THAT 100, IT’S
GONE.>>IT’S 100.
>>YOU CAN’T KEEP NIBBLING.>>I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT SCOPE
NEEDS WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
LET’S STOP ONCE AGAIN KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD WITH THAT
AND LET’S TAKE A PLAN TO USE THAT FUND WITH IT.
>>THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH JUST HAVING SOME —
>>I KNOW I’M ON COUNCIL MORE MORE YEAR —
>>AND I NEED MORE DIRECTION, SO D’ART, AND I HEAR YOU IT’S THAT
ONGOING, BUT IF YOU DO THAT –>>NO, NO, ONE TIME.
>>DO THE ONE-TIME. WE’RE NOT GOING TO TELL YOU
WHERE TO GET IT FROM.>>THAT’S ALL THEY WANT.
>>OKAY, THANK YOU.>>SO MRS. JOHNSON AND DR.
WHIBLEY.>>WE SAID AS A COUNCIL THAT ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT IS HOW WE SPEND OUR MONEY,
AND I THINK THAT WE STILL HAVE TO BE FOCUSED ON HOW WE’RE
SPENDING OUR MONEY, WHERE IT’S GOING, DOES IT HAVE A DIRECT
IMPACT AND THE GREATEST IMPACT ON WHAT OUR INITIATIVES ARE FOR
THE COUNCIL AS WELL AS FOR THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND OVERALL FOR
THE CITY. SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE
KEEPING THAT IN MIND AS WE GO THROUGH THESE — THE BUDGET AND
HOW WE’RE SPENDING MONEY, HOW MUCH MONEY WE’RE SPENDING AND
WHERE IT’S COMING FROM BECAUSE THAT’S SOMETHING THAT WE SAID WE
REALLY WANTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT, HOW WE SPEND OUR MONEY AND WHERE
OUR MONEY IS GOING. SO THAT’S WHAT I WANT TO SAY.
AND AS SOON AS, MR. MAYOR, YOU’RE READY AFTER DR. WHIBLEY
SPEAKS AND YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT’S NEEDS TO GO ON THAT LIST,
I AM PREPARED.>>DR. WHIBLEY.
>>I HATE TO BE A DEBBY DOWNER, BUT I STILL HAVE — I BROUGHT IT
UP AT THE RETREAT, I STILL HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT — I THINK WE’VE
ALL HEARD TODAY ABOUT SOME ONGOING POTENTIAL, BIG CHUNKS OF
REVENUE, AND I KNOW WE’VE ASKED WHAT THE LEVEL WE THOUGHT WAS
APPROPRIATE, BUT I DON’T KNOW. I’D LIKE SOMEBODY’S OPINION ON
THAT, IF I’M THE ONLY ONE THAT’S BEING NEGATIVE, BUT —
>>SURE. MR. RIDDICK AND THEN
MRS. JOHNSON.>>DR. WHIBLEY, I AGREE WITH
YOU. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS
GOING TO MENTION ALONG THOSE LINES, BUT NOT JUST, YOU KNOW,
TRY TO GET FUNDING FOR, IS THE PERCENTAGE OF OUR RETIREMENT
FUND THAT’S FUNDED. WE GOT MIXED MESSAGES FROM —
WHAT WAS IT –>>THE ACTUARY?
>>YEAH, WE GOT MIXED MESSAGES FROM THE ACTUARY AND ALSO FROM
THE JONES ADMINISTRATION WHEN THEY LEFT, AND WHILE I THINK —
I KNOW I DID, THINK THAT WE WERE FUNDED, YOU KNOW, ABOVE 83 OR
84%, I’M CONCERNED THAT MIGHT ONLY BE FUNDED BETWEEN 79 AND
82%. THERE’S NOTHING WE CAN DO RIGHT
NOW WITH THE MONEY WE HAVE IN, BUT JUST LIKE WHAT DR. WHIBLEY
IS SAYING ABOUT OUR RISK MANAGEMENT FUND, SOMETHING YOU
NEED TO GET PREPARED FOR AND I THINK THIS GOES ALONG WITH DR.
WHIBLEY IS SAYING.>>MS. JOHNSON AND MS. GRAVES.
>>THE RISK MANAGEMENT FUND, I DO THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT
THAT. WE HAVE SOME THINGS — AND YOU
JUST DON’T KNOW WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES ARE, AND WE HAVE
ALWAYS BEEN PREPARED. THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY
WE RECEIVED THAT DOUBLE-A STANDARD IS BECAUSE WE’RE
PREPARED IN ADVANCE. WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR BUDGET, WE
LOOK AT OUR RESERVES, WE LOOK AT THE RISK MANAGEMENT FUND, AND I
THINK WE NEED TO REALLY REVISIT THAT AGAIN, TOO, TO ENSURE THAT
THE MONEY IS THERE THAT WE NEED FOR RISK MANAGEMENT.
I REALLY — I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THAT FUND AS WELL.
>>SO AT SOME POINT, WE’LL GET A — MAYBE AN UPDATE ON WHAT’S
POTENTIAL OR WHAT’S OUT THERE AND WHAT WE HAVE, SO
MR. MANAGER, IF YOU CAN SCHEDULE FOR US TO KNOW WHAT WE HAVE LEFT
IN THE FUND AND WHAT –>>WE’VE GOT SOME — WE HAVE TO
DO THAT. WE HAVE 5 MILLION IN THE RESERVE
AND HELP ME WITH THE NUMBERS. WE HAVE A POLICY FROM — A CLAIM
FOR TEN MILLION? WE’LL PUT THAT IN PLACE AND YOU
HAVE MANAGER’S CONTINGENCY, BUT WE’RE HAPPY TO HAVE THAT
CONVERSATION.>>ECONOMIC DOWNTURN?
>>ANOTHER FIVE. I THINK IT’S FIVE.
>>SO WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY, FIVE, FIVE, TEN — A POLICY
THAT’S THREE TO TEN?>>WHY DON’T YOU JUMP UP IF
YOU’RE COMFORTABLE.>>RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, OUR
RESERVE IS 5 MILLION AND THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN IS 5 MILLION
IN THE RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE AND THAT’S THE POLICY THAT THE
MANAGER IS SPEAKING OF AS INSURANCE POLICY FOR RISK THAT
WOULD GO ON TOP. BASICALLY THE WAY IT WOULD WORK
IS ANY CLAIM THAT CAME IN, CITY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
FIRST 3 MILLION. BETWEEN 3 AND 10, THE INSURANCE
POLICY WOULD PICK UP AND ANYTHING 10 OR OVER, THE CITY
WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR, BUT THAT WOULD NOT COVER ANYTHING
THAT IS CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS.
>>SO WE’RE LOOKING AT PURCHASING A POLICY AT THIS
POINT THAT WOULD TAKE US OUT OF THE FULLY SELF-INSURED, BUT AS
YOU JUST SAID, ANYTHING THAT’S OCCURRED TO DATE WOULDN’T BE
INSURABLE.>>ANYTHING THAT WE’VE BEEN
NOTIFIED ABOUT, WILL THAT BE INSURABLE?
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO DISCLOSE THAT.
>>THOSE POLICIES ARE WRITTEN ON AN OCCURRENCE BASIS RATHER THAN
A CLAIMS MADE BASIS. I DON’T KNOW WHAT WE’RE LOOKING
AT, BUT THE COMMON POLICY IS BASED UPON WHETHER THE
OCCURRENCE HAPPENED WITHIN THE POLICY PERIOD.
>>ALL RIGHT.>>I THINK WE NEED AN UPDATE.
>>I HEAR YOU. WE’LL GIVE YOU AN UPDATE AND THE
GOOD NEWS IS IT WOULD BE ONE-TIME MONEY.
>>ALL RIGHT, MR. MANAGER, WHAT’S NEXT?
OH, MRS. GRAVES, I’M SORRY.>>I WOULD LIKE, BECAUSE WE DO
HAVE SOME THINGS THAT ARE COMING DOWN THE PIKE, SO I WOULD
LIKE — I THINK I WOULD LIKE THIS OFF-LINE, A WORD WITH YOU.
>>OKAY. [ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ]
WELL, I MEAN I KNOW WE FOUND STUFF LIKE (INAUDIBLE).
>>OKAY, MR. THOMAS.>>I’M GOING TO FOLLOW
MS. JOHNSON. SHE’S GOT SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS
SHE NEEDS TO ADDRESS.>>OKAY, ONCE WE FINISH THIS
LIST, THEN WE’LL ADD ON.>>THE ONLY ONES YOU HAVEN’T
TALKED ABOUT ARE THE RESOURCE CENTER, THE VOLUNTEER, THE HAGUE
STUDY AND –>>DID WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT
THOSE AND GET IT OUT OF THE WAY?>>I’D LIKE TO YOU TO TALK
THROUGH THOSE BECAUSE –>>YOU HAVE TO GIVE ME SOME
DIRECTION ON WHETHER YOU WANT TO ADD.
IF I WERE YOU, I WOULD DO IT NOW.
>>SO MY LIST INVOLVES, WHICH WILL ALSO TAKE CARE OF THE
CITY’S INITIATIVE AS WELL AS THE SCHOOL INITIATIVE WITH THE FOCUS
ON NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT, SO WITH THAT
REQUEST, I’M LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY — AND I CAN BREAK
IT DOWN FOR MY COLLEAGUES AND EVERYTHING, APPROXIMATELY
$350,000, WHICH THEN WOULD INCLUDE $100,000 FOR BLIGHTED
PROPERTIES AND ACQUISITION, $100,000 FOR BUSINESS FACADE AND
IMPROVEMENTS. WE’RE ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT WHAT
CAN WE DO WITH OUR EXISTING BUSINESS TO HELP THEM GET
INVOLVED WITH THE COMMUNITIES AND A GOOD EXAMPLE IS, IT’S NOT
ONE-STOP MIRACLE BUT IT’S OVER IN FAIRMOUNT PARK.
[ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ]>>RIGHT, SO THAT IS A PERFECT
EXAMPLE –>>DID YOU HEAR?
THAT.>>TINY GIANT.
YOU REMEMBER THE OLD TINY GIANT.>>THEY PUT A LOT OF MONEY IN
THAT PROJECT.>>THEY DID, ALONG WITH WHAT WE
DID TO HELP THEM.>>WE DID A MATCH.
>>A WONDERFUL EXAMPLE OF THAT, AND THEN THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY
FOUR OTHER COMMUNITIES WITHIN OUR CITY’S WARD 3 THAT HAVE NOT
RECEIVED ANY ECONOMIC OR NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT OR
IMPROVEMENT, AND THOSE ARE ABOUT FOUR VARY COMMUNITIES — VARIOUS
COMMUNITIES AT $50,000 EACH.>>SO IF YOU DON’T MIND, 100,000
FOR BLIGHTED PROPERS, 200 FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND 50 FOR
FACADE IMPROVEMENT?>>100,000.
>>SO 400 ALTOGETHER.>>THE FOUR NEIGHBORHOODS YOU’RE
LOOKING AT, ONLY BECAUSE LAST YEAR WE SET A PLAN TO FOCUS ON
THE 20 — WHAT’S THE — THE YEAR 2030 PLAN AND FOCUSING ON THIS
CORRIDOR, I WAS GOING TO DO A SMALL REQUEST FOR LITTLE CREEK
ROAD FOR SIMILAR BUSINESS FACADE IMPROVEMENT, BUT THERE’S A FOCUS
IN THAT PLAN, SPECIFIC BENCHMARKS IF YOU GO TO THE
APPENDIX OF THE 2030 PLAN THAT ARE TARGETS, SO I JUST WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT IF YOU WANT TO GIVE NEIGHBORHOODS 50,000, IF
THEY’RE NOT IN THE PLAN BOOK, IT’S DIFFICULT TO THEN IDENTIFY
PROJECTS, SO YOU GET INTO — AND I’M NOT SAYING IT’S A BAD THING,
BUT YOU’RE GETTING INTO A CIVIC LEAGUE — YOU GO TO THEM AND SAY
I’VE GOT 50,000 FOR YOU, BUT THEY HAVEN’T BENCHMARKED OR SAID
WHAT THEY WANT TO SPEND THAT MONEY ON.
SO OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE — I KNOW THERE’S PLENTY OF
NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE PLAN, BUT ARE THOSE IN WARD 3?
>>YES.>>TOMMY, ALSO, WHAT THE MANAGER
AND JAMES ROGERS IS WORKING ON IS A STRATEGIC COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN WITH ALL OF OUR 120 OR SO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WILL BE
DEVELOPED WITH AND BY THE COMMUNITY AND IT WILL BE THEIR
PLAN, AND SO WE DON’T KNOW WHETHER IT’S GOING TO BE 50,000
OR 100 BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT IDENTIFIED ALL OF THOSE GOALS
AND SO THAT’S SOMETHING WE NEED TO WORK ON AS WELL.
EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD HAVE, EVENTUALLY, A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
OR STRATEGIC PLAN, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN —
>>RIGHT, BUT WE HAVEN’T GOTTEN ACTUALLY OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS
LIKE YOU SAID THAT HAS A PLAN, BUT THERE ARE AREAS THAT THEY
ARE WORKING ON WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITY THAT ADDRESSES WHAT WE
COMMITTED TO AS FAR AS NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT.
>>ALL RIGHT. IS THAT YOUR LIST, MS. JOHNSON?
>>THAT IS MY LIST. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.
>>MORE THAN HALF OF MY LIST HAS ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED AND
TAKEN CARE OF. THE OTHER THINGS, I’LL JUST ASK
DOUG IF YOU CAN REVIEW THESE AND GET BACK TO ME NEXT WEEK.
I’M WONDERING WHAT IT WOULD COST — TO BACK UP, WHEN THE
ECONOMIC RECESSION OCCURRED, WE HAD TO DIAL BACK ON THE HOURS AT
OUR REC CENTERS AND I’D LIKE TO SEE SUNDAY HOURS AT THE FITNESS
AND WELLNESS CENTER EXPANDED IF THAT NUMBER IS NOT TOO
RIDICULOUS AND MAYBE IF WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT AND FIND OUT —
>>DARRELL IS GOING TO — IS THAT ANOTHER DARRELL CRITICISM?
>>THEY’RE DEDICATING A ROOM FOR HIS PARENTS, SO HE CAN’T BE —
>>CAN YOU GET THAT QUESTION ANSWERED?
THAT’S SOMETHING WE SHOULD TRY TO DO BECAUSE THAT’S — WELLNESS
AND FITNESS –>>ON SUNDAY.
>>ON SUNDAY.>>AND SOMETHING ELSE TO LOOK AT
WOULD BE SISTER CITIES, IF THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL REQUEST —
[ ALL SPEAKING AT ONCE ]>>15,000.
>>ONE-TIME OR ONGOING?>>ONGOING I THINK IT WOULD BE.
>>YEAH, THEY DO GREAT WORK.>>ALL RIGHT, MRS. GRAVES.
>>I AM ASKING TO ADD TO THE 250,000 FOR REC CENTER, WHAT I’D
LIKE TO DO IS OVER THE COURSE OF TIME, SO THAT WE DON’T HAVE ONE
HUGE PART OF THE BUDGET, WE HAVE TO ACCUMULATE LAND AND BUILD A
RECREATION CENTER SO I’M ASKING FOR 250,000 FOR — JUST TO ADD
TO WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE FOR THEM, AND WITH SISTER CITIES,
THE 15,000, THEY ASKED ME FOR THAT AS WELL, SO I DO — AND I
SUPPORT MAMIE’S REQUEST AS WELL.>>SO WE’RE HEADING THE
DIRECTION, BUT A LOT — [ LAUGHTER ]
>>I WAS FEELING GOOD AROUND
FIVE MINUTES AGO.>>YOU HAVE THE UNDESIGNATED
FUND.>>ABSOLUTELY.
>>I’M HEARING THAT. YOU ALL CAUGHT ON THAT ONE-TIME
FEELS BETTER THAN ONGOING.>>JUST TO GET BACK, ANDRIA AND
I DISCUSSED EARLIER ABOUT EAST LITTLE CREEK ROAD AND GOING BACK
TO OUR COMMITMENT AND HAVING 100,000 AVAILABLE FOR THE FACADE
IMPROVEMENT SO WE CAN START GOING BACK.
WE USED TO HAVE THAT FUND AND I THINK IT JUST WASN’T TASED WELL,
SO THE — ADVERTISED WELL, SO THE CITY FELT THAT THE FUND
NEEDED TO GO AWAY BECAUSE IT WASN’T BEING UTILIZED, AND THAT
WAS ALSO DURING THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN.
BUT IF WE CAN OFFER 25,000 HERE OR THERE, YOU KNOW, TO A
BUSINESS IN MATCH GRANTS, I THINK IT’S A GREAT TOOL THAT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WE CAN USE.
WE’VE BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB WITH PARTNERING WITH MORE
BUSINESSES ON EAST LITTLE CREEK ROAD TO ASSIST WITH THAT, AND
THAT’S ONE-TIME FUNDING.>>WHAT WAS THE TOTAL?
>>100,000.>>ON LITTLE CREEK ROAD?
>>EAST LITTLE CREEK ROAD.>>MR. THOMAS?
>>WITH FACADE IMPROVEMENTS, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT PROGRAM
AND MAKE SURE THERE’S A METRIC. I DON’T WANT TO REWARD AN OWNER
THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO UPGRADE HIS PROPERTY AND JUST DOESN’T DO
IT AND THEN ACCEPTS CITY MONEY. SOME SORT OF METRIC WHERE THIS
IS AN AREA WHERE THEY NEED THE HELP AND PUSH THINGS FORWARD.
>>AND THAT’S WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK.
CAN WE GET A PRESENTATION? SOMETIMES IT’S HELPFUL WHEN WE
TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT FACADE GRANTS, WHERE YOU CAN BE IN AN
ENTERPRISE ZONE AND IT WAS A MATCH.
SO IF YOU SPENT 20, YOU GOT 20, SOME VERSION OF THAT, BUT ALSO
THERE ARE BUSINESSES THAT FELL OUTSIDE OF THAT ENTERPRISE ZONE
THAT NEEDED HELP, TOO, AND I’M ALL FOR IF WE GIVE MONEY, THEY
JUST GIVE MONEY. NOT JUST US GIVING MONEY.
>>AND THAT’S WHAT THIS IS, A MATCHING GRANT FUND.
BUT, CHUCK — IS IT OKAY IF I CALL ON CHUCK?
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO.
EAST LITTLE CREEK ROAD USED TO HAVE 75,000, BUT IT WAS UTILIZED
AND EVERYBODY WHO UTILIZED IT, NOBODY TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE
CITY ON THAT. IT WAS ALL MATCHING, WHETHER
THERE WERE RENOVATIONS MAYBE WOULDN’T HAVE BEEN DONE IF WE
DIDN’T COME IN WITH THE MATCH BECAUSE IT KIND OF TIPPED THEM
OVER. THEY WERE THINKING BUT —
THINKING ABOUT IT, BUT THEY DIDN’T HAVE THE EXTRA 10,000
UNTIL WE CAME IN. [ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ]
>>SO MR. MANAGER, WE’RE RUNNING A FEW MINUTES OVER TIME.
>>SO YOU’VE GOT, SOME QUICK MATH, ABOUT 800,000 OF ONE-TIME
REQUESTS AND A QUARTER MILLION OR SO OF ONGOING REQUESTS.
I THINK WHAT I’D ASK OF YOU –>>CAN I JUST SAY THAT I’M
TAKING ONE REQUEST OFF THE TABLE?
>>ABSOLUTELY. TAKE ALL THE TIME YOU NEED.
[ LAUGHTER ]>>WELL, I VERY MUCH THINK IT
NEEDS TO HAPPEN. I’VE ACTUALLY PASSED OUT THE
PICTURES THE HAGUE AND HOW AWFUL THE SILTING PROBLEM IS THERE AND
THE GREEN ALGAE BLOOMS THAT ARE HAPPENING AND TALKING WITH
PUBLIC WORKS, THEY REACHED OUT TO STORMWATER AND THEY FOUND
THIS THEY HAVE A GRANT PROGRAM UNDER WHICH THAT CAN BE HANDLED,
SO I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THAT OFF — THE MONEY FOR THIS POCKET
OF MONEY OFF, BUT I STILL WANT IT DONE.
IT’S GOING TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE.
>>ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD. ANYWHERE YOU WANT TO TAKE OFF,
ANYBODY ELSE? YEAH, MR. RIDDICK.
>>YOU HAVE THAT 12,000 IN THERE, RIGHT, FOR THE RESOURCE
CENTER THAT’S IN THERE, BUT I GUESS WHAT MY QUESTION — ONE OF
MY QUESTIONS AS WE WENT AROUND THE TABLE, NOW, JAMES ROGERS’
DEPARTMENT, THEY WILL STILL GET COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT FUNDS AND IS THERE ANY RESIDUE FROM THIS BUDGET THAT
WOULD CARRY OVER TO THE NEXT BUDGET, WHICH MIGHT GIVE HIM
OVER $3 MILLION, SO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE REQUESTED AS
FAR AS NEIGHBORHOODS ARE CONCERNED, CAN COME OUT OF
COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FUNDS AS WELL AS IF HE SHOULD HAVE ANY
RESIDUE LEFT FROM THE 17 BUDGET, SO I THINK IF WE LOOK CLOSELY AT
THE NEIGHBORHOOD FACADES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, HE MIGHT
BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE IT OUT OF MR. ROGERS’ FUNDS, WHICH
IS FOR HOUSING MORE, YOU KNOW, THAN ANYTHING ELSE, BUT THERE
COULD JUST BE A COUPLE DOLLARS LEFT AND TO TAKE THE MONEY OUT
OF THIS BUDGET — YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT WE WERE OUT OF THAT
SPEND-EVERY-NICKEL SYNDROME. I THINK WE NEED TO BE A LITTLE
BIT MORE CONSERVATIVE AS OPPOSED TO SOMEBODY CALLING IN AND
SAYING I NEED 300,000, WE PUT IT ON THE TABLE AND TRY TO
ACCOMPLISH THAT. I THINK WE NEED TO BE A LITTLE
MORE CONSERVATIVE BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT’S COMING DOWN
THE PIKE. THAT’S ALL I GOT TO SAY.
>>SO HERE COMES MAMIE — WE REALLY NEED TO —
>>I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU’RE SAYING ABOUT BEING CONSERVATIVE
WITH OUR MONEY, BUT THERE ARE SOME COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN
WAITING FOR A LONG TIME AND WE JUST CAN’T AFFORD TO MAKE THEM
WAIT ANY LONGER AND MY BIGGEST CONCERN ABOUT MR. JAMES ROGERS’
BUDGET THAT IS WE LOOK AT HIS BUDGET TO MAKE SURE THAT HE IS
ABLE TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WE’RE ASKING HIM TO DO THROUGHOUT THE
CITY INSTEAD OF TAKING AWAY FROM HIS BUDGET AS WELL AS THE
RECREATION, PARKS AND OPEN SPACES TO ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE
THE MONEY THAT IS THESE FOR OUR CITY BECAUSE I’M NOT — THIS
SUMMER, I AM NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO MAKE CALLS IN
CONCERNING GRASS BEING CUT ON OUR MAJOR FAIR WAYS LIKE I DID
LAST SUMMER AND WE NOT HAVE THE MONEY IN BOTH OF THOSE TWO
BUDGETS TO TAKE CARE OF IT.>>ALL RIGHT, MR. SMIGIEL.
>>ONE OF THE THINGS WE’VE BEEN ABLE TO DO IS BUY SOME OF THE
EQUIPMENT WE TALKED ABOUT, A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
WITH THE 17 MONEY, SO I THINK THAT WILL HELP.
>>I UNDERSTAND WHAT MR. RIDDICK IS SAYING, BUT I ALSO NOTE THAT
WE HAVE STOCK PILES OF MONEY IN OUR BUDGET, THAT WE CAN REDUCE
TO DO BIG PROJECTS AND IF WE HAVE AN EMERGENCY, WE CAN ALWAYS
LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE FUND. WE GOT INTO A PICKLE WITH THAT.
WHAT I WANTED TO ASK IS, KENNY, I THINK EVERYBODY AROUND THIS
TABLE AT SOME POINT HAS TALKED ABOUT AN ATHLETIC FACILITY OF
SOME SORT, INDOOR USE. I DON’T KNOW IF THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO LOOK INTO — I DON’T KNOW HOW MUCH IT
WOULD COST TO STUDY THAT OR MAYBE EVEN DO A PRELIM DESIGN.
I DON’T KNOW IF THERE’S ALREADY SOMETHING IN THE WORKS, BUT
WE’VE TALKED ABOUT IT FOR A COUPLE YEARS NOW.
NOT AS SERIOUS AS WE HAVE THIS YEAR, BUT WITH VIRGINIA BEACH’S
REASONS ANNOUNCEMENT OF WANTING TO PUT 40 MILLION IN ANOTHER
STRUCTURE, IT ONLY IS PUTTING NORFOLK BEHIND AGAIN ON NOT
HAVING A SPORTS PLEX FACILITY FOR A CITY THAT — IT MAY BE
SOMETHING THAT’S BIGGER, BUT I DON’T KNOW IF THAT’S SOMETHING
THAT CAN BE STUDIED THROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR IF WE
NEED TO PUT 50,000 ASIDE TO STUDY THAT AND FIGURE OUT WHERE
THE RIGHT LOCATION WOULD BE FOR THIS, HOW BIG OF A FACILITY WE
WOULD NEED IN NORFOLK TO STAY COMPETITIVE.
BUT I’LL TELL YOU, AND THE OTHER THING THAT I HEAR FROM CITIZENS
ALL THE TIME, IT’S ABOUT OUR RECREATION.
WE HAVE SOME GOOD FACILITIES, BUT WE’RE FALLING BEHIND IN
COMPETITION, AND WE DON’T HAVE TO GET TO THE LEVEL OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, BUT WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO RAISE THE BAR IN SOME OF
THOSE AREAS AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD INVESTMENT
FOR THIS COUNCIL TO LOOK AT DOWN THE ROAD.
>>I THINK THAT’S SOMETHING WE WOULD WANT TO STUDY THIS YEAR.
THERE ARE A COUPLE THRESHOLD QUESTIONS YOU WANT TO ASK, WHO
IS YOUR MARKET? SIT CITIZENS OR TRYING TO BRING
TOURNAMENTS AND THINGS IN AND THERE’S DIFFERENT STRATEGIES
DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU DO. YOU WANT THE INDOOR FACILITY,
YOU WANT THE OUTDOOR FACILITY B UT I THINK WE COULD COME TO YOU
ALL WITH DARRELL AND HIS CROWD. I WOULDN’T ASK YOU TO FIND BIG
DOLLARS IN THIS BUDGET, BUT I HEAR YOU.
>>NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. WE HAVE SOME MONEY THAT WE
HAVEN’T SPENT YET, BUT YOU COME BACK NEXT TIME AND SAY TO DO A
STUDY LIKE THAT WOULD BE 50,000 OR SOMETHING.
MAYBE BY THE NEXT MEETING YOU CAN TELL US WHAT THAT WOULD BE
AND LET’S GET THE CONVERSATION GOING BECAUSE IT MAY TAKE TWO OR
THREE YEARS TO EVEN GET A DESIGN DONE AND WE’RE REALLY BEHIND AT
THAT POINT.>>YES, I’M IN AGREEMENT WITH A
SPORTS PLEX BECAUSE I’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR THREE YEARS
AND I THINK WE NEED TO BRING IT FORWARD AND SEE WHAT CAN
POSSIBLY BE DONE.>>CAN I MAKE A REQUEST THAT YOU
STOP CALLING ON PEOPLE, MR. MAYOR, BECAUSE I’M RUNNING
OUT — [ LAUGHTER ]
>>YOU HAVE THE EASY JOB. THAT WAS EASY.
>>ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT.>>MRS. GRAVES.
>>NO, NO!>>I HAVE ONE — I’M NOT ASKING
FOR ASKING FOR ANY MONEY. I’M NOT TAKING ANY OFF EITHER.
>>I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS 250,000, SO I SAID OKAY —
>>THE PHRASE IS YOU CAN’T SELL THAT DONKEY TWICE.
WE SOLD IT FOUR TIMES.>>MRS. GRAVES.
>>I JUST WANTED TO SAY, YOU KNOW, OVERALL, JUST HAVING SAT
THROUGH SOME OF THOSE BUDGETS SESSIONS, I THINK YOU GUYS PUT A
GREAT BUDGET TOGETHER. MR. MANAGER, YOU DID A GREAT JOB
WITH WORKING ON IDENTIFYING MONEY FOR SCHOOLS, SOMETHING
THAT’S VERY IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF US AND WE ALL FEEL PASSIONATE
ABOUT AND THE ONE THING I WOULD SAY, WE HAVE A COMMITTEE OF ONE
FOR EDUCATION THAT NEVER MEETS, AND SO AS WE GO THROUGH THESE
CONVERSATIONS, I THINK THAT THERE IS SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR US
TO MEET AND BE BRIEFED AS A COMMITTEE OF ONE OR HOWEVER MANY
PEOPLE OF THAT COMMITTEE OF, YOU KNOW, ALL, IF YOU WILL, WANT TO
MEET TO GET — YOU KNOW, TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT
SCHOOLS. BUT I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE DONE A
REALLY GREAT JOB IN TERMS OF PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, MATCHING
OUT EVERYBODY’S WISH LIST AND WANT LIST AND COMING UP WITH
MONEY FOR THE SCHOOLS.>>THANK YOU.
>>ALL RIGHT, A QUICK UPDATE ON CIGAR FACTORY.
>>YES, SIR. AS EVERYONE KNOWS WE WENT TO
COURT ON LAST MONDAY FOR THE CIGAR FACTORY AND THEY HAD ASKED
FOR A RESUMPTION. GENTLEMAN MARTIN — I MEAN THE
JUDGE DID NOT GRANT THAT MOTION, AND SO WE BEGAN — WE SIGN THE
CONTRACT WITH A CONTRACTOR ON WEDNESDAY, THAT THURSDAY, AND WE
TORE ONE WALL DOWN ON FRIDAY AND WE WILL HAVE — THERE’S A CRANE
THAT WE HAVE TO GET OUT THERE AND THAT WILL BE ON SITE
TOMORROW, THURSDAY, AND WE’LL BEGIN DEMOLITION OF THE
PROPERTY. AGAIN, WE’RE MOVING FORWARD AND
WII MY STAFF IS OUT THERE EVERY DAY MAKING SURE WE GET IT DONE
AND WE’LL WATCH THAT UNTIL IT GETS COMPLETELY DOWN.
>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU, JAMES.
>>WYNTER?>>MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL, NORFOLK
AS VIBRANT CITY AND THIS IS BIKE MONTH HERE IN NORFOLK.
FOR A LIST OF EVENTS — HERE WE GO.
HERE’S SOME EVENTS IN OUR CITY THAT ARE LED BY CITY STAFF.
THAT VIBRANCY SPILLS OVER INTO OUR CAMPAIGN ABOUT PEDESTRIAN
AND BIKE SAFETY, CALLED TRAVEL WITH CARE, AND WE’RE USING
PEOPLE THAT YOU MAY KNOW. SOME OF WHOM HERE THAT LIVE
LOCALLY, SO YOU’LL START TO SEE THESE ON BILL BOARDS O BUSES AND
OTHER PLACES, AND WHAT WE’RE INTERESTED IN IS NOT ONLY SAFETY
ON BIKES, BUT JUST WALKING AROUND.
SO WE’RE USING RESIDENTS AND MAYBE EVEN SOME COUNCIL
PERSON –>>NOT ON THE BILLBOARD.
>>YOU’RE RIDING YOUR BIKE OUT THERE.
[ LAUGHTER ]>>AGAIN, YOU’LL SEE THESE DISH
JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT, MAY IS BIKE MONTH AND CONTINUES THE
WONDERFUL VIBRANCY WE HAVE IN THIS WONDERFUL CITY THANK YOU.
>>ALL RIGHT. I WOULD ASK — REALLY THE NEXT
COUPLE THINGS WE’RE GOING TO DO ARE A COUPLE ITEMS WE DIDN’T GET
TO BEFORE. JOHN KOWNACK IS GOING TO GIVE
YOU AN UPDATE ON NRHA’S NEXT STEPS FOR THE DIGGS TOWN
COMMUNITY RENOVATION.>>GOOD AFTERNOON.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY,
AND I’D LIKE TO — I’M GOING TO JUST SET CONTEXT WITH WHERE WE
ARE AND STEVE MORALES, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECT DIRECTOR IS
GOING TO TAKE US THROUGH DIGGS TOWN RENOVATIONS AND IF WE HAVE
ANY QUESTIONS THAT ARE TOO HARD FOR HIM, I’LL STAND UP AND
TAKING THE BEATING. IN THE FIRST SLIDE — KIMBERLY,
ARE YOU MOVING THEM OR AM I — [ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ]
>>IT’S NOT MAGIC? THERE USED TO BE A TOUCH SCREEN.
I REMEMBER THERE, USED TO BE A TOUCH SCREEN THERE.
>>I REMEMBER A FOOT BOARD.>>THERE YOU GO, IT MOVED.
LAST SUMMER, THE COUNCIL APPROVED NRHA TO GO CREATE TWO
ENTITIES TO SEEK LOW INCOME TAX CREDITS TO RENOVATE YOUNG
TERRACE AND DIGGS TOWN AND PART OF THAT APPROVAL, WE PROMISED
WE’D COME BACK TO YOU BEFORE WE ACTUALLY MOVED FORWARD AND NOW
WE’RE COMING BACK TO YOU WITH THE NEWS THAT THERE’S BEEN LOTS
OF DISCUSSIONS AND WE’VE REALLY — WE’VE STOPPED OUR
EFFORTS TO ACTUALLY SEEK LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS TO
RENOVATE YOUNG TERRACE. WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY AND
WE HEARD FROM A LOT OF STAKEHOLDERS THAT A RENOVATION
OF THAT PROPERTY WAS REALLY JUST KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD
AND NOT TRANSFORMATIONAL ENOUGH, SO WE’VE TAKEN THAT OFF OF OUR
PLANS TO ACTUALLY RENOVATE. BUT WE DO WANT TO PROCEED WITH
DIGGS TOWN. THERE’S LOTS OF ENERGY ABOUT THE
IDEA WITH NEWTON CREEK AND THE TRANSFORMATION PROJECT THAT
MIGHT BE THERE, BUT WE STILL HAVE THE COMMUNITIES OF DIGGS
TOWN, GRANBY VILLAGE, AND OAK LEAF FOREST THAT WE NEED TO MAKE
SURE STILL MEET THE NEEDS OF THE RESIDENTS.
STEVE IS GOING TO TAKE US THROUGH OUR PLANS TO USE TAX
CREDITS AND DEBT TO DO A RENOVATION WITH DIGGS TOWN AND
YOU SEE THAT 422 UNITS THERE, IT’S CURRENTLY 422.
PART OF THE RENOVATION IS ACTUALLY VACATING THROUGH
ATTRITION AND CLEAR 100 OF THOSE UNITS.
ACTUALLY IT’S 91 UNITS, BUT THE OTHER NINE ARE GOING TO BE
COMBINED TO MAKE BIGGER ACCESSIBLE UNITS.
WITH THAT, I’M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO STEVE AND HAND HIM THIS
THING, WHAT PROBABLY WORKS.>>JOHN STOLE A LOT OF THUNDER
THERE. FIRST AND FOREMOST, WE ARE NOT
HERE ASKING FOR MONEY. AS YOU ALL JUST HAD THE BUDGET
DISCUSSION, BUT WE ARE LOOKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
DIGGS TOWN WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT IN 1952.
422 UNITS AS JOHN NOTED, 27 ACRES, 100% OCCUPIED.
WE HAVE 35 TO 45 UNIT TURNOVER ANNUALLY ROUGHLY WITHIN DIGGS,
AND WE REOCCUPY IN 15 DAYS. THE LAST RENOVATION WE DID IN
DIGGS TOWN WAS BACK IN THE EARLY 1990s AND AT THIS POINT, WE DO
NEED TO DO A WHOLESALE RENOVATION IN ORDER TO KEEP THE
COMMUNITY VIABLE. WHAT WE’RE LOOKING TO DO IS
BASICALLY DIGGS TOWN IN THREE PROJECTS.
TWO ARE RENOVATION PHASES, PHASE ONE AND TWO.
THE FIRST PHASE WILL BE 222 UNITS AND THE SECOND PHASE WOULD
BE 100 AND THEN THE THIRD PART OF THE PROJECT IS THE DEMOLITION
OF — SELECTED DEMOLITION OF 91 UNITS PEPPERED THROUGHOUT THE
COMMUNITY. THIS GRAPHIC JUST SHOWS THE TWO
PHASES. ACTUALLY, NORTH WOULD BE THIS
WAY, SO IT’S REALLY WEST AND EAST, PHASE ONE BEING THE WEST
SIDE AND PHASE TWO BEING THE EAST SIDE.
THIS GRAPHIC SHOWS — THE DOTS ARE A LITTLE OFF ON THIS, I’M
SORRY. WHAT THIS GRAPHIC SHOWS IS THE
BUILDING THAT ARE — LET ME SEE IF I CAN USE THE — THE
BUILDINGS THAT ARE IN THE DARK GRAY IN THIS HASH, THOSE ARE THE
ONES THAT ARE GOING TO BE DEMOLISHED.
THERE’S 16 BUILDINGS PEPPERED THROUGHOUT THE TWO PHASES, EIGHT
BUILDINGS IN EACH PHASE. THE IDEA IS ONCE WE TAKE THESE
DOWN, THIS WILL CREATE MORE OPEN SPACE.
IT WILL RELIEVE A LOT — WE HAVE A LARGE PROBLEM WITH PARKING
CONGESTION IN THE COMMUNITY, AND WHEN YOU DO GET INTO DIGGS TOWN,
IT FEELS QUITE TIGHT IN THERE ON THE 27 ACRES WITH THE 422 UNITS.
SO WHAT WE’RE DESIGNING WITH THE DEMOLITION, ESSENTIALLY TO
RELIEVE SOME OF THAT FEEL AND IMPROVE THE OVERALL LIVEABILITY
OF THE COMMUNITY. A BIG QUESTION IS WHAT’S GOING
TO HAPPEN WITH FOLKS. THERE’S THREE BASIC OPTIONS THAT
WE PROVIDE FOR ALL THE FOLKS OUT IN DIGGS TOWN.
EVERYBODY IS GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE AT LEAST ONCE IN THIS
PROJECT AND THAT’S BECAUSE IT’S A COMPLETE RENOVATION.
YOU CANNOT DO — HAVE THE FAMILY LIVING IN THE UNIT WHILE WE DO
THE FULL RENOVATION WITH ADDING AIR CONDITIONING, REPLACE THE
ROOF, KITCHENS, BATHROOM, UPGRADE ALL THE ELECTRICAL.
EBB HAS TO MOVE AT LEAST ONCE. THE FIRST ITEM WE’LL DO IS FOLKS
THAT WANT TO STAY IN THE COMMUNITY, WE WILL HAVE UNITS
BECOME AVAILABLE, SO WE’LL BE ABLE TO DO TEMPORARY RELOCATION.
WE’RE NOT DOING THE WHOLE PROJECT AT ONCE, WE DO IT IN
PHASES, SO WE EXPECT TO BE TURNING OVER FOUR TO FIVE
BUILDINGS AT A TIME, AND SO WE’LL BE WORKING WITH THOSE
FAMILIES ON TEMPORARY RELOCATION.
WE’LL ALSO MAKE AVAILABLE FOLKS, CERTAINLY WHEN WE DEALING WITH
THE DEMOLITION, TO TALK ABOUT PERMANENTLY MOVING USING A
HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER, AND THEN THIRD, IF THEY DON’T WANT TO USE
A VOUCHER AND DON’T WANT TO REMAIN IN THE COMMUNITY
TEMPORARILY, THEY CAN POLICE OFFICER TO ANOTHER PUBLIC
HOUSING COMMUNITY. WE SURVEYED THE COMMUNITY AND
RIGHT NOW BISHOPS 65% OF THE — IT’S ABOUT 65% OF THE FOLKS
WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A VOUCHER AND LEAVE THE COMMUNITY.
SO OUR PROBLEM REALLY ISN’T THAT WE’LL HAVE ENOUGH PLACES WITHIN
THE COMMUNITY TO KEEP FOLKS THERE.
IT’S ACTUALLY WE’RE GOING TO HAVE A GREATER PROBLEM WITH
HAVING ENOUGH VOUCHERS TO ACCOMMODATE EVERYONE WHO WANTS
TO LEAVE. WE ARE HOPING AND WE’LL SEE THAT
A LOT OF FOLKS THAT RAISED THEIR HAND AND SAY THAT THEY’D LIKE TO
LEAVE WITH A VoIP, A LOT OF THOSE — WITH A VOUCHER, A LOT
OF THOSE FOLKS END UP NOT LEAVING AND WE’RE HOPING THAT AS
THEY SEE THE RENOVATION OCCUR, THAT ALREADY MORE WILL DECIDE TO
REMAIN IN THE COMMUNITY. BUT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL
RELOCATION EXPENSES. DOMINION BILLS FOR DEPOSITS AND
THINGS OF THAT NATURE, WE’RE GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
THAT. WE ACTUALLY STARTED TALKING
ABOUT THIS PROJECT TO THE FOLKS OUT IN THE — THE RESIDENTS OUT
IN DIGGS TOWN BACK IN JUNE OF 2015 WHEN WE FIRST WENT OUT AND
PROPOSED THE IDEA AND GOT THEIR FEEDBACK AND INPUT.
WE’VE CONTINUED TO MEET WITH THEM ON A REGULAR BASIS TO TALK
ABOUT THE PROJECT AND HOW IT’S COMING ALONG.
WE’VE ALSO — THE AUTHORITY HAS A RESIDENT ADVISORY BOARD, WHICH
IS A COMBINATION OF THE — YOU CAN SAY OF THE ALMOST CIVIC
LEAGUE PRESIDENTS OF EACH OF THE COMMUNITIES, THEY GET TOGETHER
AND ADVISE IS ON OUR ANNUAL PLAN AS WELL AS WE BRING TO THEM OUR
MAJOR PROJECTS. AND THEN FINALLY, WE GO TO OUR
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULARLY ALSO AND GET THEIR FEEDBACK,
INPUT, AND ADVISE THEM OF HOW WE’RE PROCEEDING WITH THE
PROJECT. THE NEXT STEPS, WHAT WE’RE DOING
NOW IS WE’RE WORKING WITH THE VHDA.
WE DO HAVE AN ALLOCATION OF TAX CREDITS.
WE’RE PUTTING ALL THE OTHER FINANCING IN PLACE.
WE’RE GOING TO VHDA FOR BOND FINANCING.
THIS IS A RAD DEAL, AND THAT’S AN OVERLY COMPLICATED ITEM, BUT
BASICALLY IT WILL ALLOW US TO TAKE DEBT ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH
WE CAN’T DO CURRENTLY ON PUBLIC HOUSING COMMUNITIES, BUT AT THIS
POINT ALSO, WE NEED TO SUBMIT A DEMOLITION APPLICATION AND TO DO
SO, WE COME TO THE COUNCIL AND SEEK YOUR SUPPORT AND IT’S A
VERBAL SUPPORT AND THEN WE WOULD GO TO THE CITY MANAGER AND ASK
FOR A SUPPORT LETTER BASED ON COUNCIL’S ACTIONS.
>>MRS. GRAVES.>>I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ON THE
DEBT PART. GIVEN THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION
IN WASHINGTON, D.C., AND THEIR PROPOSED CUTS TO ALL KINDS OF
PROGRAMS THAT WOULD BASICALLY AFFECT HOUSING AUTHORITIES
ACROSS THE COUNTRY, IF WE’RE TAKING ON DEBT, WHAT’S OUR PLAN
TO PAY FOR IT?>>YEAH.
PART OF THE RAD PROGRAM, IS SIMPLE PART OF IT IS THIS.
THEY TAKE THE OPERATING FUND WHICH CURRENTLY WE USE TO
OPERATE DIGGS TOWN, WE’LL CONTINUE TO DO SO, AND THEY
BRING IN THE CAPITAL FUND AND ACTUALLY ADD TO IT THAT
FREIGHTING FUND AND PUT IT AS ONE SINGLE HOUSING ASSISTANCE
PAYMENT, HAP CONTRACT, UNDER THE SECTION 8 PROGRAM, SO THE
CAPITAL FUND AMOUNT IS THE AMOUNT WE’LL BE USING TO PAY
BACK THE DEBT AND YOU ARE DEAD RIGHT.
YOUR CONCERN ABOUT WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO
DO AND EVEN IT MAKES IT MORE IMPERATIVE THAT WE GO THROUGH A
RAD CONVERSION FOR DIGGS TOWN FOR THIS PROJECT.
THE KEY THING IS WHAT WE SEE IS THEY’RE GOING TO CHOP AT THE
PUBLIC HOUSING SIDE OF THE LEDGER, BUT ON THE SECTION 8 AND
PARTICULARLY THE PROJECT-BASED SECTION 8 PROGRAMS, THEY
ACTUALLY TEND TO NOT CUT THOSE AS HEAVY AND THEN WHEN YOU HAVE
A HAP CONTRACT, WHICH IS WHAT THIS WILL BE, THEY LEAVE THOSE
ALONE. SO WE ACTUALLY SEE THIS AS A WAY
TO PROTECT THE FUNDING FOR DIGGS TOWN.
>>BUT THE — GO AHEAD.>>YOUR PRESENTATION OF THIS AND
UNDERSTANDING IT, I ASKED MULTIPLE TIMES JUST WHAT THE
COUNCILWOMAN ASKED AND I THOUGHT THE ANSWER THEN WAS THAT UNDER
THE RAD, YOU HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,
WHICH IS BINDING BEYOND CHANGING LEGISLATION, SO SECURES THE
FUNDING GREATER THAN BEING DEPENDENT UPON LEGISLATION, THAT
YOU SUBSTITUTE APPROPRIATION FOR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION.
DID I MISUNDERSTAND THAT?>>WE ACTUALLY HAVE A CONTRACT
FOR THE OPERATING SUBSIDY, BUT IT’S SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION.
>>OKAY, I MISUNDERSTOOD THEN.>>WE THINK THAT THE BUDGET
PHASE RELATIVE TO CONTRACTS HAS BEEN HONORED MORE, BUT I DON’T
THINK THERE’S ANYTHING THAT WOULD KEEP CONGRESS FROM
ELIMINATING THE PROGRAM. IT COULD HAPPEN, BUT I’LL SAY
THIS. EVEN IN TRUMP’S PROPOSAL, WHICH
IS FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR, THEY’RE CUTTING $6 BILLION, HE DID NOT
TOUCH THE PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
WE JUST THINK IT’S SAFER. I THINK CONGRESS WANTED TO DO
IT, THEY COULD. THEY COULD ELIMINATE THAT
OBLIGATION, BUT WE THINK IT’S A MUCH SAFER OBLIGATION THAN THE
OPERATING SUBSIDY THAT HAS BEEN SLICED JUST DRAMATICALLY IN THE
LAST TEN YEARS.>>OKAY.
MRS. JOHNSON.>>DO WE KNOW OR HAVE A CLEAR
UNDERSTANDING OF WHY THE CITIZENS DON’T WANT TO COME BACK
ONCE THE RENOVATION AND THE DEVELOPMENT HAS TAKEN PLACE?
>>TYPICALLY WHEN FOLKS WANT TO GO OUT ON A VOUCHER, THEY’RE
LOOKING FOR, YOU KNOW, BETTER HOUSING IN GENERAL, AND THAT’S
WHETHER TO GO INTO AN AREA WITH BETTER SCHOOLS OR THEY’RE
LOOKING FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES, SOMETHING WITH MORE
SPACE. EVEN WITH OUR RENOVATION, AND
THIS IS THE PART WE CAN’T CHANGE, WE CAN’T MAKE THE UNITS
BIGGER, SO WE’RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE SORT OF BEHIND THE PRIVATE
SECTOR WHEN IT COMES TO A MODERN APARTMENT.
THIS CERTAINLY WILL MAKE THEM MORE LIVEABLE, THIS WILL
CERTAINLY MAKE THEM BETTER, BUT WE CAN’T MAKE THEM BIGGER.
THESE THINGS WERE BUILT, THESE ARE CONCRETE WALLS, CONCRETE
CEILINGS. THESE ARE BUILT TO LAST FOREVER
IN SOME RESPECTS, BUT WHAT IT DOESN’T MEAN IS THAT IT’S
VERY — IT’S VERY DIFFICULT AND EXPENSIVE TO REPLACE THE MAJOR
SYSTEMS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM, AND SO CERTAINLY THESE
WILL BE BETTER, BUT NOT BIGGER.>>OKAY.
MY NEXT QUESTION IS IN REFERENCE TO THE VOUCHERS.
HOW DO WE GO ABOUT — AND I KNOW IT’S THE RESIDENT’S DECISION,
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS WE’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS
PARTNERING IS THAT THE CHOICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE VOUCHERS
ARE BEING USED, AND THE LANDLORDS IN GENERAL THAT THE
RESIDENTS, ONCE THEY COME OUT OF PUBLIC HOUSING, AND YOU’RE
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, MR. MORALES, WE CAN’T MAKE THE UNITS BETTER,
SO –>>BIGGER.
>>BIGGER, SO THEY GO INTO VOUCHERS USING THE HOME
VOUCHERS, AND IT DOESN’T ALWAYS NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THEY’RE
GOING INTO A BETTER PLACE THAN YOU’RE PROVIDING, BUT IT DOES
GIVE THEM SOME SIZE, AND SO COMING THROUGH THE SCHOOL
SYSTEM, WE FOUND OUT — WE SEE THAT THEY’RE WORSE OFF THAN WHEN
THEY WERE IN A GOOD — A STABLE SITUATION, GOING INTO USING A
HOME VOUCHER. SO — ALTHOUGH YOU CAN’T TELL US
WHERE THEY ARE, WE ALSO SEE THAT SOME COMMUNITIES BECOME
EXTREMELY STRAPPED WITH ABSENTEE LANDLORDS AND IT REALLY PUTS A
HARDSHIP ON COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE A DECENT FOUNDATION, BUT
NOW THEY, TOO, FIND THEMSELVES STRUGGLING TO ACCOMMODATE THE
HOME VOUCHERS.>>AND, YOU KNOW, WE’RE WORKING
ON A COOPERATION AGREEMENT AS PART OF THE POVERTY STUDY AND
WORKING WITH SUSAN PERRY AND WE CERTAINLY IDENTIFY THAT WE NEED
AN OUTREACH PROGRAM FOR THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM
AND MORE RESPONSIVE TO CIVIC LEAGUES AND CITIZENS AS WELL AS
LANDLORDS, BUT ALSO CAPACITY BUILDING TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR
FAMILIES WHO WANT TO CHOOSE A VOUCHER WILL BE AS SUCCESSFUL AS
THEY CAN. BUT THE — WE ALSO PUT INTO
PLACE THAT FOR THE FIRST 12 MONTHS, IF IT’S NOT WORKING OUT,
YOU CAN COME BACK TO THE TOP OF THE LIST FOR PUBLIC HOUSING AND
PEOPLE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT. THEY TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THAT IN
BROAD CREEK, SO IT’S — EVEN THOUGH TWO-THIRDS, AND THAT’S A
THUB THAT’S BEEN CONSISTENT — NUMBER THAT’S BEEN CONSISTENT
THROUGHOUT ALL OUR SURVEY, IT’S REALLY ABOUT ONE-THIRD THAT END
UP REALLY WANTING TO TAKE A VOUCHER.
RIGHT NOW PEOPLE HEAR VOUCHER AND FOR THE MOST PART, THEY —
THEY’RE THINKING, I’M GOING TO GET A HOUSE.
I’M GOING TO RENT A HOUSE, A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME.
AND DEPENDING ON WHAT THEIR SITUATION IS AND THEIR
INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, THAT MIGHT NOT BE POSSIBLE AND THEN THEY
END UP STAYING OR THEY END UP CHOOSING NOT TO GO.
>>AND ALSO, WHEN THEY DO FIND A PLACE WHERE THEY WANT TO LIVE
AND WITH THE LANDLORD, HOW OFTEN DOES NRHA GO OUT TO INSPECT, TO
ENSURE THAT THE FAMILIES ARE DOING PRETTY GOOD BECAUSE IT’S
THOSE LANDLORDS WHERE THE FAMILIES AREN’T TALKING ABOUT
AND THEY DON’T FEEL THAT THEY CAN DO ANY BETTER AND THEY’RE
NOT WILL ING TO REPORT THE LANDLORD ONCE THE LIVING
CONDITIONS AREN’T ACCEPTABLE.>>WE DO A PHYSICAL INSPECTION
BEFORE VERY MOVE-IN. WE DO AN ANNUAL PHYSICAL
INSPECTION, AND THEN WE DO AN INSPECTION IF THERE’S ANY
COMPLAINTS, ANY THINGS RAISED, ANY ISSUES WITH THE RESIDENCE,
SO WE HAVE A FULL INSPECTION PROCESS.
HUD HAS ALLOWED TO US GO TO TWO TO THREE YEARS, BUT WE STAYED AT
ONE BECAUSE WE THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE.
WE TELL EVERYBODY THAT WE’RE OUT HERE AT LEAST ONE TIME A YEAR.
>>AND I THINK MAYBE IF WE PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE TO ENCOURAGE
THE RESIDENTS, OUR CITIZENS, THAT IT’S OKAY FOR YOU TO REPORT
THE LANDLORD BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE A SENSE OF ONCE THEY REPORT
SOMETHING THAT’S NOT WORKING OUT WHERE THEY LIVE, THAT THEY’RE
GOING TO LOSE THAT PLACE AND THEY WON’T HAVE ANYWHERE TO GO.
THAT IS THEIR GREATEST FEAR ONCE THEY MOVE OUT ON THEIR OWN.
>>AND IF IT DOESN’T WORK OUT AND IT’S SOMETHING THE LANDLORD,
A PHYSICAL IMPERFECTION OF SOME SORT, THAT PERSON DOES NOT LOSE
THEIR VOUCHER. THEY GET TIME TO TAKE THEIR
VOUCHER AND MOVE TO ANOTHER PLACE.
THAT’S PART OF THE CHOICE IS THAT THE LANDLORD ISN’T
GUARANTEED THAT THIS TENANT IS GOING TO STAY HAPPY, THEY CAN
TAKE THEIR VOUCHER AND GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
>>ALL RIGHT. MR. RIDDICK.
>>YES. STEVE, YOU MADE THIS
PRESENTATION AT SOUTH SIDE TASK FORCE MEETING THIS MORNING, AND
A COUPLE OF THE GREATEST CONCERNS WAS THE SECTION 3.
HOW DO YOU DESCRIBE THAT?>>SECTION 3 IS A PROGRAM UNDER
HUD, AND IT BASICALLY GETS INTO A SORT OF, ALMOST LIKE A WORK
REQUIREMENT WHERE WE’RE LOOKING FOR NEW JOBS THAT ARE CREATED AS
A RESULT OF THE FEDERAL INFUSION OF MONEY TO THE PROJECT, THAT IF
NEW JOBS ARE CREATED, THEN WE WORK WITH THE EMPLOYER OR THE
CONTRACTOR IN THIS CASE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY’RE OUT — GOING
OUT AND LOOKING FOR RESIDENTS AND THE COMMUNITY AND THE AREA
THAT WOULD BE SECTION 3. THAT IS, IT’S AN INCOME BASIS.
>>IT’S AN AREA BASIS, BUT I THINK SHOULD SAY THE CITY HAS A
SECTION 3 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN.
WE HAVE A SECTION 3 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN.
EVERY CONTRACT WE ENTER INTO WITH THESE RENOVATION CONTRACTS
REQUIRE THE CONTRACTOR TO IDENTIFY ITS WORKFORCE, HIRING
NEEDS, AND ANY NEW HIRING THAT IS TO BE REFERRED THROUGH US AND
THEY HAVE TO GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY.
THERE’S NO GUARANTEE THEY HAVE TO HIRE FOLKS, BUT THEY HAVE TO
GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY. WE ALSO LOOK AT ALL PAYROLLS
DURING THE WORK, SO IF THERE ARE NAMES THAT SHOW UP THAT ARE NOT
ON THEIR ORIGINAL LIST, YOU CAN COME BACK AND SAY YOU NEED TO
VERIFY WHERE THIS PERSON CAME FROM, DID YOU TRANSFER THEM FROM
ANOTHER JOB. WE ARE VERY COMPLIANT, BUT
UNFORTUNATELY NOT VERY EFFECTIVE.
YOU KNOW, WE HIRE A LOT OF FOLKS THROUGH THIS PROGRAM.
>>WE FAILED WHEN WE BUILT THE CAMPOSTELLA SCHOOL.
GUYS OR WOMEN ACROSS THE STREET WANTED TO COME AND WORK, SO I
KNOW NRHA RIGHT NOW IS LOOKING FOR A LETTER, SOMEHOW I BELIEVE
THAT WE NEED TO BE ASSURED THAT WHEN IT COMES TO DISADVANTAGED
BUSINESS GOALS AND THINGS LIKE THE SECTION 3, THAT YOU WON’T
JUST TAKE THIS LETTER AND RUN AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE
INDIVIDUALS WHO CAN — IF THEY CAN’T — SOMEBODY SAID THIS
MORNING, IF THEY DON’T KNOW HOW TO BILL SOMETHING, THEY
CERTAINLY — BUILD SOMETHING, THEY CERTAINLY CAN CLEAN UP FROM
THE DEMOLITION. THERE’S JUST SO MUCH THINGS THAT
CAN BE DONE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HINDER
AND LOT OF THESE SMALL CONTRACTORS IS INSURANCE.
IF I’M NOT MISTAKEN, WHEN HRT BUILT THE LIGHT RAIL IN NORFOLK,
THEY INCORPORATED INSURANCE FOR THOSE SMALL OPERATORS, AND SO
ALL OF THESE THINGS WE NEED TO PUT TOGETHER SO THAT WHEN THE
DUST CLEARS, A LOT OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE NOT REALLY
IN GOOD SHAPE WILL BE, YOU KNOW, IN BETTER SHAPE AFTER THIS.
>>ALL RIGHT. MR. SMITH.
>>THIS MORNING, JAMES ROGERS SHARED THAT CONCERN AND I THINK
THIS IS ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE TO ENGAGE NORFOLK
WORKS. YOU’RE GOING TO GET A
PRESENTATION ONE NIGHT, NORFOLK WORKS IS GOING TO COME IN AND I
THINK THAT’S A FEES THAT WE’RE FEEL GOING WITH — A PIECE THAT
WE’RE FEELING ABOUT ABOUT THE CONNECTION WITH WATER SIDE AND
OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAPPENED AND I THINK WE’RE LEARNING A LOT AND
THAT’S SOMETHING WE’RE GOING TO WANT TO INCORPORATE INTO THIS
CONVERSATION AS WELL.>>ALL RIGHT, MR. MANAGER.
>>I’M DOING A TIME CHECK. YOU’VE GOT THE OVERLAY FOR PARK
PLACE, WHICH I THINK YOU ALL ARE PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH.
YOU’VE HAD IT IN YOUR PACKET A COUPLE TIMES.
LENNY IS PREPARED TO JUMP UP AND GIVE YOU A PRESENTATION.
I’LL LOOK TO YOU TO DECIDE IF YOU WANT IT.
>>YOU’VE BEEN CUT, LENNY.>>CHUCK IS GOING TO COME UP AND
DO A QUICK FEES ON THE TOURISM ZONE AND IT’S GOING TO BE ON
YOUR AGENCY SHORTLY TO ADD THESE, BUT I THINK CHUCK ASSURES
ME HE’LL BE DONE BY 6:00.>>GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY.
I WILL MAKE THIS VERY QUICK. TOURISM ZONES ARE A MEANS BY
WHICH WE CAN HAVE COMPANIES THAT CAN APPLY FOR SPECIAL INCENTIVES
THAT MAY BE USEFUL IN TRYING TO GET LODGING, DINING, RETAIL,
SPORTS AND MEETING FACILITIES, OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND
OTHER THEME PARK AND EVENT TYPE VENUES AND IT’S SIMPLY, AGAIN,
AN AREA THAT WE CAN DESIGNATE, WE CAN HAVE MULTIPLE ZONES IN
THE CITY TO, AS A STEP TO AL LOUL THESE BUSINESSES —
ALLOWING THESE BUSINESSES OR OPPORTUNITIES THAT MAY COME INTO
THESE ZONES, TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, IN PARTICULAR, THE STATE
TOURISM DEVELOPMENT FINANCING PROGRAM.
WE CAN DO A DEEPER DIVE ON THE TDFP AT A DIFFERENT DATE, AND
THERE’S A VERY NICE WEBSITE THAT I CAN REFER EVERYBODY TO WITH A
TEN-MINUTE OVERVIEW OF THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM.
CURRENTLY, THE ONLY ONE WE HAVE WAS DONE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE
MAIN PROJECT, THE 100 MAIN TOURISM, SO WE CREATED THAT ZONE
IN THAT AREA SPECIFICALLY SO THEY COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
THAT SPECIAL FINANCING PROGRAM. THAT ALLOWED THEM TO CLOSE THE
GAP AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A SPECIAL 20-YEAR FINANCING
PROGRAM THAT ALLOWED THEM TO CLOSE THAT GAP THAT EXISTED ON
THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT. THESE ARE AREAS THAT WE ARE
PROPOSING FOR TOURISM ZONES AND YOU CAN SEE THAT BASICALLY WHAT
WE’RE TRYING TO DO IS WHERE WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THINGS
LIKE THE MILITARY HIGHWAY CORRIDOR AND IN PARTICULAR THE
OCEAN VIEW/BAYFRONT, AND THEN ALSO BECAUSE OF THE LARGE NUMBER
OF EVENT VENUES WE DO HAVE IN DOWNTOWN AND ALONG HAMPTON
BOULEVARD, MOST LIKELY ANOTHER ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY ALONG THE
LINES OF THOSE QUALIFYING VENUES CAN BE ENCOURAGED TO COME INTO,
SO IT REALLY IS A KIND OF A MARKETING TOOL THAT WE CAN USE.
THESE ZONES ARE A STEP TOWARD AND A RIDERSHIP FOR A COMPANY
TO — A REQUIREMENT FOR A COMPANY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
STATE’S PROGRAM, SO WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND IS THE APPROVAL
OF AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD CREATE THESE THREE ZONES.
THE DOWNTOWN NORFOLK AREA, THE MILITARY HIGHWAY CORRIDOR
ACTUALLY, AND IN OCEAN VIEW ALONG OUR BAYFRONT.
I’LL BE GLAD TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
>>SO THE TDFP I THINK IS ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING PROGRAMS IN
THE STATE IN MANY WAYS BECAUSE IT AFFORDS YOU THE OPPORTUNITY
TO BRING STATE POINT FOR A LOCAL PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
THAT’S FILLING A TOURISM VOID OR NEED.
AND I THINK FOR VERY FOUND REASONS, THOSE OF YOU ON —
SOUND REASONS, THOSE OF YOU ON COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY DREW PRETTY
TIGHT ZONES AND WHAT WE’RE SEEING IN OTHER COMMUNITIES IS
REALLY BROADENING THE ZONE. WE LEARNED A LOT FROM MR.
SMIGIEL ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET A HOTEL IN OCEAN VIEW AND WE
THINK THERE’S OTHER OPPORTUNITIES DOWNTOWN AND
MILITARY CORRIDOR AND WE’LL GIVE YOU MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE
FINANCING PROGRAM. THE DEVELOPER MANY TIMES WILL
HAVE A GAP. MAYBE THERE’RE GOING INTO A
MARKS THAT’S CHALLENGING OR THEY HAVE A PRODUCT THAT PUSHING THE
ENVELOPE QUALITY-WISE. I THINK THAT’S WHAT YOU DID WITH
THE MAIN AND IT AFFORDS YOU THE ABILITY TO BRING IN SOME OF THAT
STATE MONEY SO WE HAVE THIS MORE AND WE’LL KEEP BUILDING ON IT.
>>ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.>>MR. MANAGER.
>>ALL RIGHT, MAYOR, THAT IS THE BUDGET AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
STAFF WILL BE UP ALL NIGHT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW IN THE
WORLD TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUESTS.
WE WENT FROM 5, 10, TO 5, 20. BUT WE APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK.
>>WE HAVE ONE CLOSED SESSION ITEM.
>>ALL RIGHT, MR. CLERK.>>MOVE THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL
ASSEMBLY IN CLOSED MEETING MAY 2, 2017, AT 6:05 P.M. FOR
CONVERSATION WITH LEGAL COUNCIL REGARDING THE CIGAR FACTORY.
MS. GRAVES.>>AYE.
>>MS. JOHNSON.>>AYE.
>>MS. McCLELLAN.>>AYE.
>>MR. RIDDICK.>>AYE.
>>MR. SMIGIEL.>>AYE.
>>MR. THOMAS.>>AYE.
>>DR. WHIBLEY.>>AYE.
>>MR. ALEXANDER.>>AYE.
CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY CAPTION ASSOCIATES, LLC

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *