Okay, it's 9:32.

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our Saturday public hearing.

Madam Clerk, please call the role.

Vice Mayor Bagley.

Councilman Aguirre.

Here.

Councilman Chapman.

Councilman L Newby.

Here.

Councilman McGreen.

Here.

Hey, Madam Clerk, next item.

Public discussion.

Oh, excuse me, proclamations, presentation of proclamation recognizing National Library Week.

Okay, I've asked Councilman Aguirre to begin with our proclamation recognizing National Library Week.

If you are here joining us for this proclamation, we ask that two representatives come to the front and then we'll recognize everyone who is joining at the end of the proclamation.

Yeah, Ms.

Gross, are you in here?

Oh come on up.

Come on up.

All right, good morning, everyone.

So libraries have a great place in my heart, and I wanted to be on the library board the first go around, but I didn't get to do that second term though.

I made sure to make it a point to get onto the library board.

Um and we will go ahead and jump into this and then I'll pass the mic around, let everyone introduce themselves.

Um and uh if our library director has a few words to say, we'll let her say that.

All right.

Whereas the residents of this city have acted upon this principle to create and support a system of library and information services through the Alexandria Library, library media centers of the Alexandria City Public Schools, a number of special libraries, as well as libraries and private and parochial schools and institutions of higher excuse me, of higher education, and whereas these libraries serve as a gateway to information and technologies that support the preservation of our democratic traditions and cultural heritage.

And whereas libraries have long served as trusted institutions for all members of the community, regardless of race, ethnicity, creed, ability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status.

And whereas libraries of today function as much more than repositories of knowledge, helping residents keep up with changing technology, offering audio books, e-reader materials, free computer classes, hotspots, and laptops, community meeting spaces, access to free online resources, passport services, English language classes, adult programs, story hours, and as you can tell, our libraries do a whole lot.

And whereas the nation and the city of Alexandria celebrate America's 250th anniversary, libraries are ensuring that all the nation's history is told.

As prominent Virginian James Madison stated, knowledge will forever govern ignorance.

And whereas libraries, library workers, and library supporters across the United States will celebrate National Library Workers' Day on Tuesday, April 21st, 2026.

Now, therefore, I, Kanik Agar, on behalf of Elia Gaskins, mayor of the city of Alexandria, Virginia, and on behalf of the Alexandria City Council, do you hereby recognize and proclaim the week of April 19th through April 25th, 2026 as National Library Week in the City of Alexandria.

This year's theme is Find Your Joy, an invitation for people of all backgrounds to explore and discover what brings them joy in their library.

I encourage all residents to support the library's mission to be a bastion of intellectual freedom where all views are represented and everyone is welcomed.

Further, the city council expresses its appreciation to the dedicated staff of the Alexandria Library and urges residents to reach out via the library's website, Facebook, Instagram, and other social media platforms to thank library workers for the essential services they provide.

A witness whereof I have here on two set my hand and cause the seal of the city of Alexandria, Virginia to be affixed this 18th day of April 2026.

My name is Luis Labra.

I'm the deputy director of the Alexandria Library.

Um I am I have the pleasure of serving as the library's director.

My name is Rose Dawson, and yes, the Titanic name.

And I just want to say for any of you who are all in the overflow room or who are in this room, I'd like for you to stand up and you can do a super silent cheer or whatever, recognizing your support for the library.

Um, uh, as the board chair stated, I'd like to thank the council, the city manager, and my staff who are amazing, amazing public workers and public servants who make sure that the community gets what it is they need and they deserve.

And so I would like to, while we've been celebrating the America 250th, I would like to make you all aware that in 2027, the Alexandria Library turns 90.

We will be celebrating.

The staff have already begun to prepare to celebrate our 90th anniversary.

And that just shows you how much Alexandrians love their public library, that we have had one since 1937.

So on behalf of the staff, the board, the foundation, and the library friends, I thank you all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh, Madam Mayor, with that, I would move the proclamation.

Okay, there has been a motion by Councilman Aguirre and a second by Councilman Chapman.

Is there any discussion?

All right.

Well, let me just say this.

Um, I just want to give my thanks to the board, to Miss Dawson, to our librarians, to our staff.

At the end of the day, we don't achieve a legacy of 90 years without your stewardship, without your dedication, and your commitment to making sure that we have the best library system.

And so I just thank you.

I know the wealth and depth of programs you continue to provide, but also being such a safe and supportive place for so many in our community.

So thank you.

Um, with now there's discussion.

Uh Councilman Chapman.

I apologize.

I just wanted to definitely wanted to recognize folks from ACPS and the partnership that you've had with the city and city libraries as well.

So thank you very, very much.

Thank you.

With that, there has been motion and a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

The ayes have it, and the proclamation is passed.

Okay, Madam Clerk, next item.

Public discussion period.

Okay, so we are gonna go into our public discussion period.

I need to make a few announcements as we as we go into this since we have a large number of people.

First and foremost, as always, the purpose of this meeting is for conducting the business of the city.

So if we have disruptions that prevent our ability to continue that business, I'll first give a warning, then I will give a second warning, and then I will ask APD to escort the person out.

Second thing, everyone has three minutes.

Given the volume of people, I will cut you off at exactly three minutes.

Not to be rude or not to stop you in the middle of the sentence, but we want to make sure that we can hear every single person.

Third, you are allowed to bring signs, you're allowed to support and encourage those who are speaking.

We do ask, though, that you be mindful of who's around you, make sure that they can see and be able to engage as well.

Second, we allow snapping, but not clapping.

Um, snapping is because it's easier for us to be able to hear what's going on and to transition to the next person.

And at the end of the day, it's most important that we hear and that the next person be called.

And lastly, we're gonna try something different today.

Because we're not allowed to have people standing in the room, and a lot of people are not in this room.

I'm gonna try calling three names so that people can begin to come in.

We're not allowed to have people line up.

So probably what I would ask is if you're in the room, just get ready, but don't get out of your seat.

If you're in the overflow, please begin to make your way uh to the hallway.

And I'm looking at the manager, I'm gonna assume maybe staff is out there.

Okay.

So then we'll have staff out there who can begin to help people um line up.

And with that, the only other thing I will just say on a personal note, I'm an old millennial and I still print things on paper.

This list is constantly evolving.

I think people are still signing up.

So if we things are out of order, I just need to make some adjustments.

Please bear with us.

With that, the first three speakers are David Hole, Nicole Radshaw, and Jacob Wolf Barnett.

Do we have David Hole?

Is David online?

Oh, okay.

Oh I will learn that I have to wait for people to get here.

I'm sorry.

Good morning, everyone.

Michael Morris.

Policy Commission with this month's quick update.

Um, so first, quick recap on our March meeting.

Uh, we focused on housing and sustainability with three binds of buying presentations.

We heard from ARHA, who shared their sustainability efforts across their public housing portfolio.

Very much appreciated the progress and encourage them to formalize their goals and deepen collaboration with the city on EDO's eco-city actions.

Uh, we also heard from the Healthy Homes program, which does awesome work supporting lower-income residents with issues like mold, pests, and air quality.

Uh, we suggested four simple low-cost additions to complement what they already do.

Uh, weather stripping, regular HVAC filter replacement, smart thermostats, if that's feasible, uh, and ensuring operable windows for ventilation.

And finally, we finalized our comments on the housing 2040 master plan and submitted a letter of strong endorsement.

It's enormously encouraging to see sustainability elevated to a standalone goal uh alongside affordability, not just against it.

Uh, quickly looking ahead, uh, the April uh EPC meeting.

Uh, we're gonna focus on extreme heat, obviously a major issue right now and getting worse.

Um, we'll hear from Ryan Freed from the Office of Climate Action uh and Hashim Taylor from our PCA on current and future uh extreme heat mitigation efforts with a particular focus on environmental justice.

And then just two quick reminders, guys.

Uh, first, the EPC submitted a letter supporting the Braddock Road safety improvement plan, uh including the dedicated bike lanes, obviously expanding bike infrastructure is a key step towards reducing vehicle emissions, which the EBC cares enormously about.

Uh, and our annual repeat, so save the date.

Uh, the EPC retreat is May the 2nd.

Uh, we'd welcome council participation, uh, particularly for the late morning discussions that we're gonna have, but you're very welcome and encouraged to stay uh for any parts of the agenda that you find interesting.

Uh that's all I've got today.

Uh thank you, and I'm happy to follow up on any of these points.

Thank you so much for your time today.

I was gonna share quick good news.

Yesterday, we just found out that um the city is going to be recognized for its stay cool campaign and some of the efforts that we're doing around heat.

So I suspect Dr.

Freed, well, Director Fried will share that with you.

Thank you.

Our next person, Nicole Radshaw, Jacob Wolf Barnett, and Aaron Propes.

Is Nicole online?

Yes, I just unmuted her.

Yeah.

Okay.

Hey, uh, good morning.

You can it's Nicole.

Thanks uh for all you do.

You can never guess where I am at a soccer game in Pennsylvania.

Anyway, last summer, my family and I went to Disney World.

It was our first family trip there, and it was a blast.

One night while riding the free bus back with all different kinds of people, some speaking foreign languages.

I realized that Alexandria has so much of what Disney offers.

I was amazed at how much people pay and what we paid to go when they could just pay taxes in Alexandria and have a similar experience.

So let's start easy, right?

Parades.

Disney has princesses and cartoons.

We have George Washington, Men in Kilts, and Leprechauns plus cute dogs.

Fireworks, we have our fabulous birthday fireworks plus views of DCs.

And if you're lucky, you can catch some illegal shows in Holmes Run Park.

Um, Epcot's basically the Smithsonian.

Beers actually cheaper at Disney than at Nat Stadium.

Um, crazy rides.

Our first ride was Guardians of the Galaxy.

But let's talk about the Tower of Terror.

Never knowing how far you'll drop or when you'll stop.

Kind of like our bike network that jumps from Sherrows to bike lanes to nothing at all.

Or the rack and roller coaster.

Just get on a bike and ride down Pegram.

You can also get a rush of adrenaline dodging cards, or get hit by one while riding your bike on Beauregard or Van Dorn.

But free buses, here's where what what I loved about Disney.

If you stay on site at Disney, you can watch them 10 minutes, walk less than 10 minutes to a bus stop that'll take you to any park.

And then at the parks, you can get on another free bus to any other park.

No cars needed.

In Alexandria, you can walk less than 10 minutes for a bus to take you to the Metro, the Pentagon, or the parades or fireworks.

And if you stay in Alexandria, it's free.

The transportation is calm and friendly and safe, like Braddock Road could be when you vote for the city's plan.

The walkability in Disney is wonderful.

And you know, Alexandria does have the two blocks of the King pedestrian, but I think we should do the whole thing.

Right.

Disney does have giant parking lots.

Um, and so do we.

We also have many parking lots that Disney doesn't, like private driveways.

Um, Disney does not have cars in their kingdom, and we should follow that example.

So Disney wasn't a blast.

It was an expensive blast.

Don't get me wrong.

I have plenty of issues with the commercialism of it.

But what people love about Disney is how they're taken care of, how they can walk in their community, and they have fun times at parades and fireworks and rides, and how they know they have a free bus to take them home.

Kids are centered, kids and adults feel safe.

Vulnerable people are centered.

So when you're making your budget decisions and council votes about transportation, like bus networks, radic road improvements, changing parking on Sunday after one, and parking lots.

Oh, maybe even a gondola.

Think about what Mickey and Minnie would do.

They would vote yes on Braddock Road.

And uh there you go.

And I love libraries.

Thanks so much.

Have a great day.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Jacob Wolf Barnett, followed by Aaron Probes, followed by Ellis Orrin Brown.

Good morning.

My name is Jacob Wolf Barnett, Mayor Gaskins, Us Millennials, can you night?

Each of you this week received a letter from me with a link to a change.org petition asking the city council to get more involved in school board reform.

That petition, as of this morning, has just over 260 signatures.

And although my name's on it, it was written with a group of parents from across Alexandria City who have been deeply involved with the school board and the central office over the last couple of years on a number of issues.

And as a result, we're at a place where we believe that structural reform is needed.

And this structural reform requires the input and the leadership from the city council.

How we got here is a number of issues.

I'll just give a few examples, but the list is much longer.

Repeated interactions with the ACPS front office that to us feel like information is sometimes going into a black hole with no accountability and no follow-up.

A recent redistricting process, this is something I was deeply involved with, that after many public meetings, much discussion, a lot of money being spent has gotten us to a place where with the reforms going into place next fall, by 2028, over half of the elementary schools will still be at or over 100% utilization.

That's not acceptable.

We've had seven principals leave our division in the last two years, and the list goes on.

And all of this on top of a 20% increase in budget for ACPS since 2023, which is well deserved, but we're not seeing the needle move.

And so the point that we're at is that we don't believe, as parents and taxpayers anymore, that the school board is able to enact the necessary reforms on their own.

And so our ask here of you all is twofold.

One is to make the school board smaller.

The idea being that a smaller school board will result in more competitive elections, which will be one mechanism of accountability for school board members.

The second being that we increase compensation for the school board.

And I believe efforts are already underway to do this or have been put underway by the school board, but it's a big job, it's a thankless task, and the folks who raise their hand for this need to be compensated more in line with our neighboring jurisdictions.

The reason this ask is coming to you all instead of to the superintendent or to the school board is because we do not believe that they are capable of enacting these reforms, certainly not on their own.

And in response to this petition, the school board has put out a number of statements, or I should be clear, a couple of members of the school board have, referring to recent reforms that they've attempted to initiate over the last couple of years.

These have to do with um staggered terms or excuse me, staggered, yeah, staggered terms um and also some other changes, including term length.

And for us, what I would say is parents is what we ask for in our petition is not exclusive.

There are additional reforms needed, but for us, these two, the size of the school board, and then also the compensation can be one really important lever and starting to get us towards a right direction because for us as parents, what we're not seeing is action by the school board.

And so we ask for your leadership on these issues in time for next year's elections.

Thank you.

Hey, uh Councilman Agarry.

Uh Mr.

Wolf Burnett.

I just wanted to share with you that uh your concerns uh do resonate with several of the folks up here on this body.

I'd also like to further inform you that um I personally have been advocating for the reduction of the school board for several years, and I think a couple of other of us have as well.

Um, and in terms of redistricting and the elementary schools being overcapacity, I definitely share your concerns on that.

Uh, part of the reason is that I've been advocating for potentially looking at uh building a middle school at Polk because we have the land to do it there.

Um, building the middle school at Polk would then uh handle our middle school capacity across the city and then open up elementary school capacity.

So it's uh a real thing that I think we need to start taking a look at.

So uh appreciate your advocacy.

Thank you.

Uh Councilman Alnuby.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, I would echo some of that.

Um, two things on your two asks.

The first one, the salary increase.

Um, this is something when I was on the school board before, right before I left the committee I was chairing, the operational excellence committee.

We actually discussed this issue.

We did the research and we put together a process and a framework for the school board to be able to increase the salary.

Unfortunately, it's they have some restrictions on them, so they couldn't do it.

We couldn't do it in that year.

What we realized it has to be done in the year prior to the election.

So basically this year, they have to take that vote.

We also came up with a process where we tie the salaries to the teacher's salary.

So that way they don't have to guess.

So every three years they automatically get a raise.

And I was pleased to see in the blog post that you referenced that they actually adopted these policies.

So I am glad to see that.

So I'm right there with you.

Like that I started the process before I left the school board, and I'm glad to see them continue.

Now, on the size reduction, I was also on the school board when they passed those um the calls for those reforms.

Um, I was not in the meeting, the last meeting where they voted on the resolution.

Um, and if I was there, I wouldn't have voted in favor of the resolution.

Basically, because it did not include size reduction.

And I made that clear to some of my colleagues at the time.

If it doesn't include size reduction, I was not gonna support the resolution.

So even when they sent it to council the resolution public, it has eight signatures.

My signature is missing on that resolution because that was my line, the size.

Because I think I agree with you, the size is most important.

So I'll leave it at that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Aaron Probes, followed by Ellis Orin Brown, followed by Bill Dickinson.

Mayor Gaskins, members of City Council, good morning.

We need your help.

I am here to talk to you about the school board.

I'm a single father of three children, and I have a vested interest in the performance of ACPS.

I do not have the financial resources to send my three kids to a private school.

ACPS is their only option in education to get an education and make something of themselves.

At its core, the school board is practicing executive malfeasance.

This board needs to be results driven.

ACPS had their budget increased by 20% since 2023.

Where did this money go?

What did we buy?

ACPS scores fell well below the state average in every subject.

Under the state's new system for evaluating schools, nine were rated off track, and four were flagged for intensive support.

Seven principals left within two years.

After two, one principle of the year awards.

To me, that signifies administer administrative toxicity within central office.

And to me, it also signifies.

Sorry.

And to me, it also signifies that the school board forgot their core responsibility to hold central office accountable and not just advocate on their behalf.

I also want to be clear.

I don't begrudge the members of the school board.

They raised their hand when no one else did.

All nine seats for an unimposed last election, with at least one district facing no challenge since 2009.

The onus is not on them, it's on us.

It's on the parents.

We must attack it.

This reform attacks it.

Our concerns, our frustrations allowed us to get 200 signatures within a 48-hour period.

And as of this morning, we have over 260.

That's a passive canvassing.

For the council members that are wary of reform and hesitant of change, you are inadvertently supporting the status quo.

And what I've seen helping to craft this proposal and gather signatures are parents that are upset and they're frustrated.

But what is scary is that most of them are just resigned to the fact that nothing is going to change, nothing is going to happen.

This is it.

We have just one shot to continue this momentum to show.

Thank you so much for your time.

If you didn't get to finish, you can also um email your testimony to the clerk, and then it'll be circulated to all of us.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Ellis Orin Brown, followed by Bill Dickinson, followed by Kathy Hostra.

And I was gonna say, I know the podium might be a little high.

Um we can also use one of these seats.

And Alice, you can press the button.

There we go.

So you can just talk right into this, okay.

And you can sit or stand, whatever's most comfortable.

Hello, my name is Ellis, and I am eight years old.

I want Braddock Road to be safe for kids and adults because I want kids to feel like they're safe on streets.

I think it would be really nice if I could ride to some of my favorite places across Radargrad Lake 7-Eleven, which has the best traits ice cream in Dela Ray and soccer fields where I like to play soccer.

I think it would be really nice if I could ride my bike there on my own without my parents, but right now I can't because Radicra, my parents are afraid that I will get her, and I'm afraid that I'll get hit by a car, which surprisingly happens often around town.

Well, thank you so much for your testimony.

I was really, really brave to come today, and you did great.

Oh, and we're done.

Okay, our next speaker is Bill uh Dickinson, followed by Kathy Hoakstra.

Uh good morning.

Uh Ms.

Mayor and members of City Council, I'm Bill Dickinson.

I'm here today representing Futureport.

Uh, an idea and a concept a number of you have heard about.

And uh would like to announce that we are now a uh we are chartered with the state of Virginia.

We are pursuing 501c3 status, we have an active board made up of all Alexandrians, of a vision, new vision and concept for Potomac Yard.

It's really not a new vision because there's a number of these ideas of futureistic museums elsewhere in the world.

And we've gone to some length to learn about them.

And we've presented it to you and to city staff.

However, we haven't heard anything back from you.

We talk to regional leaders, they're all interested, but invariably they ask, where does this where does the city stand on this?

And we have to say we don't know.

And uh we look at your budget, we don't see where there's funds set aside or even any mention of Alexandria Forward.

We believe what we've come up with fits neatly into that plan.

So our request is we'd like some feedback from you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much for your time today.

Our next speaker is Kathy Hoekstraph.

Good morning.

Uh democracy is not a spectator sport.

It's one of my favorite things.

It's why I'm here today.

Um, but we get spoiled in Alexandria because we have this opportunity to speak and online.

We view later meetings, we can write comments.

But what about all those other boards and commissions and council meetings that you attend or send representatives to attend?

How do they respond to the public?

Are they welcome to the meetings?

Do they get to speak at the meetings?

Can they write comments and be heard?

So you probably want specifics when I'm giving making these comments.

So I'll highlight two.

That's not meant to be critical of those.

It's just to provide you examples of what I'm talking about.

When I was in the EPC chair, um, we wondered about what other jurisdictions were doing.

I found out that the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government was a good place to find out uh what other jurisdictions were doing.

Some of the committees were really good in giving me access to those meetings, some not so much.

So the BEC, the built environment and energy advisory committee was wonderful.

Gave reminded me of emails, gave me access to the meetings.

I got the ability to chat with people that were at the meetings and fully function.

Seeep C the Climate Energy and Environmental Policy Committee, not so much.

After meetings being virtual or giving, you know, hybrid meetings virtual, suddenly this time, the most recent meeting, they decided to have it an in-person only meeting.

And I didn't realize that until I went to sign on online, and they told me, oh no, it's only an in-person meeting, so you had to be here.

Why?

Is this democracy or maybe not so much?

Another example was a meeting I went to at Nova Parks.

I went to a board meeting.

They looked at me like I was an alien from outer space.

Uh, what was I doing there?

Uh so that was kind of weird.

Uh, most recently I went to another board meeting that they held out at Winkler, and they had an extended executive closed session, and I got to sit outside in the cold for half an hour because they made no account for anybody who wanted to attend a meeting, but was obviously excluded from the executive session.

So, my ask of you is can you follow up with all the boards and commissions and councils meetings that you attend?

Ask them.

Do they welcome members to their public meetings?

Do they accommodate them fully?

Do you treat them well as well as you treat your staff?

And look around at the meetings you attend.

Do you see any members of the public there?

If not, why not?

Maybe it's because they don't welcome us.

Thanks very much.

Thank you for your time today.

Um, Miss Hokesha is the last speaker of this public discussion period.

May I please have a motion to close the public discussion?

So no.

That has there's been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilman Chapman to close the public discussion period.

Any discussion?

Okay.

Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

I got it.

At this point, we will go into our roll call consent.

There has been there are two speakers signed up for item six, so we will move that one.

But I will take a motion to move items five and then seven through ten.

There's been a motion by Councilman Chapman and a second by councilman.

Oh, eight people too.

Yeah, eight.

All right, and my apologies.

There's speakers for eight as well.

So it would be a motion for five, seven, nine, and ten.

There's been a motion by councilman Chapman to do so, and then another uh second by councilwoman Green.

Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote.

Please call the roll.

Councilman Chapman.

Councilwoman Green.

I mayor Gaskins.

Aye.

Vice Mayor Bagley.

Aye.

Councilman Nicky Ray.

Councilman L.

Newby.

All right.

The ayes have it.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Development special use permit 2026-10002, 3908 and 3910.

Elbert Avenue.

No, item six.

We just passed five.

Vacation 2023-00004, vacation 2025-0009, Kent Place and Russell Road.

Planning Commission Action Recommended Approval 7 to 0.

Okay.

And then we will go into public testimony.

Just to keep things moving, I'd like to invite the two speakers, Patrick McLaughlin and Susan Robinson.

If you are here, let's go ahead and have you come and we can put them in the staff seats in the front, just so we're able to go right into the discussion.

With that, I'll turn it over to Director Stroudd.

Hi, good morning.

I'm Brian Dolphemeyer with Planning and Zoning.

And we have a joint application for a vacation of an unused right-of-way that is located between 2702 and 2800 Russell Road.

In the presentation today, we will show the vacation area on a map, provide a summary of both the request and staff recommendation, explain the background of the right-of-way, describe the requested vacation, staff analysis, and then make the final recommendation.

The site is located in the North Ridge, Rogemont small area plan.

Excuse me, small area plan off of Russell Road.

On the map, Kent Place is shown as a partially improved right-of-way and ends in a Stubb Street adjacent to the area of vacation.

The requested vacation area is shown in green and is 7,620 square feet of unimproved wooded and steep right-of-way that connects the Kent Place stub to Russell Road.

Both properties fronting the right-of-way have requested the vacation to the center line, and each proposes a 10-foot-wide public access easement.

In the staff analysis, the potential future use identified is for a pedestrian connection through the area.

So the applicants are proposing in total a 20-foot-wide public access easement.

While the city has no immediate plans to install a trail, the proposed easement would allow such an investment in the future.

Based on the analysis of the applicant's proposal, staff is recommending approval.

The city considers vacation of right-of-way applications to allow adjacent property owners to acquire unused or unnecessary public land.

The land associated with this application is the connection between the Kent Place Street stub and Russell Road.

The view here is showing the end of Kent Place where the road improvements stop and the vegetation begins at the top of the hill.

From this point, the land slopes down to Russell Road in an 8% grade, which would be considered steep for a street.

The right-of-way here is 40 feet wide and 190 feet long.

The proposal here shown in blue would vacate half of the requested area to 2702 Russell Road to the south.

The remaining half in red would be vacated to the north property owner at 2800 Russell Road.

Each applicant is proposing a 10-foot easement along the property line, which together would create the 20-foot wide easement for the city's future use.

Both applicants are requesting development rights for the vacated land, and both lots would be eligible for subdivision under the current zoning regulations based on the lots created with the vacation.

The application was reviewed by interdepartmental teams from transportation and environmental services, recreation parks, and cultural activities, and planning and zoning using the city council established vacation criteria listed here.

The interdepartmental team identified a pedestrian trail as a future public use with the provision of the public access easement.

The city's current and future potential use of this right-of-way for a pedestrian trail would be retained, and therefore the vacation would have no negative impacts on the identified current and future uses.

There would be no public or private property access impacts since all of the adjacent lots have access to the existing right-of-way, and the city's right-of-way does not become landlocked.

The proceeds from a vacation are deposited into the city's open space fund to allow for future improvements.

In addition, vacating the right-of-way would transfer maintenance responsibilities to the applicants, allowing each owner to maintain the vacated area as they would the rest of their yard.

Within the public access easement, the applicants would not be allowed to install any permanent features such as fences or walls that would prevent the city and the public's future use of the movement across the easement.

The city would maintain any pedestrian connection that the city installs within the easement in the future.

Staff is recommending approval of the application request and is available to answer any questions.

Are there any clarifying questions of staff at this time?

Vice Mayor Bagley.

Thank you, Mary Caskins.

Um, you mentioned in the context of the presentation that the both parcels would be eligible by right for not by right, but would be eligible for a subdivision request.

Could you also just um clarify what would be the by right building options on these parcels once created?

And then so these the the by right building options would be the same things that would be available for any other residential lot, such as a uh single unit home or the up to for the four-unit homes under the uh the zoning for housing.

Okay, so subject to the same setback FAR, other requirements.

Okay.

Um, just wanted to clarify that because the reference to subdivision, you know, sort of implies that that's where this is going, but there are other buy-right building options on these parcels potentially as well that would not require uh further action by council for housing to be built.

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

Are there additional questions?

Councilman O'Nuby.

So can you just clarify?

So, if what would be the difference between what they can do with the vacation and without the vacation?

Let's let's say the vacation is not approved.

What can they do then?

And if the vacation is approved, how does that change anything?

Got it.

So with uh the 2702, it meets the current requirements for a subdivision based on the zoning.

So it could move forward potentially with the subdivision with or without the um the vacation for 2800.

It does not meet the width requirements.

And so it could still be eligible for a vacation with as a special consideration, but not um not by right subdivision.

Got it.

Thank you.

Okay.

Seeing no additional questions, we're going to then move to the public comment period on this item.

And our first speaker is Patrick McLaughlin.

Mr.

McLaughlin's online, he just needs to unmute.

Um, I'm Patrick McLaughlin.

I live at 2912 Russell Road, Alexandria, six houses down from the subject property.

Uh, the two property owners have requested the city grant them ownership of this strip of land.

It's a decades-old road right-of-way.

I believe it might have been established in the 1940s.

Starts at the end of Kent Place and runs to Russell Road.

This land is now wooded.

I am not advocating that a road be built.

I feel this land is a community asset that should be preserved.

I would suggest the city council suggest using this land as a pocket park for the community.

This pocket part would incorporate a naturalized walking trail that would cut a shortcut from Argyll Drive to Russell.

That would be especially helpful for people traveling to and from George Mason school facilities.

I am asking, therefore, today that the city council delay the vote to vacate this valuable land until the city staff meet with the local community groups to discuss the further use of this land.

I have reached out to several community members in my neighborhood who are surprised by this action and are they're interested in taking this forward with the city uh staff to determine if there are better uses of this land than just vacation vacating the land to the adjacent property owners.

Um there are many locations within the city, as you know that small parking pockets exist that are under 10,000 square feet.

For instance, at 2304 Randolph Avenue Park in Del Rey, it's only 3,920 square feet.

However, if after further discussions, and there's no interest in the community or the city to use this land for public benefit, I highly recommend that deed restrictions be placed on this land transfer, placing the land in a conservation easement.

So it does not allow this land to be subdivided or developed except for a public trail.

Thank you so much for allowing me to speak.

If you have any questions, please ask.

Thank you so much for your time today.

Our next speaker is Suzanne Robinson.

Good morning, Mayor Gaskins and members of the city council and my fellow Alexandrians.

My name is Suzanne Robison, and I live at 310 Kent Place, which is the last.

Thank you.

The last property on the right hand side as you face the cul-de-sac.

And a piece of my frontage is about part of that public land.

Um 81.

And I have to say that it has been a pleasure to live there.

Mostly because of the area being used by children.

There is no traffic that goes through.

I cannot tell you how many overlapping generations of kids have learned to ride their bikes in front of my house with maybe a scraped knee, but nothing else, um, detrimental.

I feel that um putting in a path from Alex from Kent Place to Russell Road might um cause parents to some disquiet because their child who might be playing in the street could possibly wander down to Russell Road, and that's a very active street.

Um, also from a privacy standpoint, if that is an open um footpath, any number of people can come up that area while children are playing in the street, and I think that might cause concern for parents who cherish the privacy as I do.

Also, that area has been a wildlife sanctuary for years, and it's unofficial, but it is quite remarkable.

I have seen wonderful odd birds that come in and out of there, and it's really quite delightful.

And it has also offered a visual visual buff of her privacy.

The clarification that I seek is if I understand correctly, I'm not a real estate person, nor am I a lawyer.

I do want you to can you summarize your last question just so I can make sure we do clarify when Absolutely.

Absolutely.

So I understand that there is a section between the end of the pavement and the beginning of the vacation area that would is still city property.

And that is the area that is closest to me.

I am wondering what the city plans for that area, particularly in that so much of the vegetation would be uh erased in that vacation.

And thereby severely affecting the privacy up on Kent Place.

So I'd like to know the plan that the city has near term and far term for that area that abuts my property and the property across the street.

Okay.

Um thank you for your testimony.

I'll give staff a little bit of time to kind of look up that area, but we will get we'll get you an answer.

It's my understanding, I only had two people on my list, but the manager's any more people have signed up.

So Madam Clerk, do you want to call the next two?

Amanda Rudolph and David David Schammelitz.

Good morning, Mayor Gaskins, and so all the city council.

Uh my name is Amanda Rudolph.

I actually represent the homeowners of 2800 Russell Road.

Um, and I just wanted to provide a few points of clarification.

Um, some neighbors have reached out to us and uh some have already voiced their concerns.

So I just wanted to make sure the city council has at least the um the mindset of 2800 um so that you all know what the idea is moving forward.

Um, so the first thing is is that the the owners are um in LLC, and um part of the reason why we were looking to do this uh vacation is for development purposes.

However, I want to make it very clear because there was um some misunderstanding that this is not going to be multi-use um kind of looking after for residential purposes.

Uh the owners are looking purely to subdivide and make two single family homes.

So if we are granted the vacation, that is what the game plan would be moving forward.

So there's been some circulating misinformation, and I want to make that very clear that there is no multifamily use going in there that the developers are seeking.

Uh number two is um there is no road that is being sawed um throughout this process.

We've talked with the city, and um the the plan is for a 20-foot-wide easement, uh, so purely for bike and trail purposes.

And that's uh if and when the city decides to utilize that easement, that's what it's there for.

Currently, the city to our understanding has no plan to use it, but it's there if and when the city decides to use it.

Uh so that's uh all I have for you for for now.

But if there's any other questions that should arise regarding 2800 ownership, I'm happy to address it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And our next speaker, David Shamelowitz.

Good morning.

My name's David Shamelowitz.

I'm very pleased to represent 2702 Russell Road, the uh co-applicant on this.

I'll just take a second of the council's time.

Um I didn't even intend to speak this morning.

We're very happy to have a 7-0 planning commission vote in favor.

We would ask you for the same, um, just briefly to address the two uh speakers' comments.

I believe the gentleman on Zoom um wanted connectivity between the two, at least pedestrian.

Um, this application provides that by giving the city a 20-foot um easement, as my colleague just said, if the city ever chooses to create a pedestrian pathway to be used for bicycles, also um and uh I believe the following speaker didn't want connectivity.

Unfortunately, the city could do that now anytime it wanted, um, could extend Kent Place all the way down to Russell Road.

So, you know, that isn't something that's affected in one way or the other by this.

And then there would be a pedestrian pathway only, an uneasement over the middle 20 feet for a pedestrian pathway only.

So again, that offense effectively forecloses the ability to ever connect uh Russell and um Kent with a roadway.

So I think those would be my only comments.

We'll ask for your approval uh in the same way that we were very pleased with a 7-0 planning commission approval.

And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much for your time today.

Um Mr.

Shamwoitz is the last speaker on this item.

Is there a motion to close the public hearing?

There's been a motion by Councilman Aguirre and a second by Councilman Chapman to close the public hearing.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

The ayes have it.

We'll now begin.

I do want to just give staff really quick.

Can you just um comment on the city's near term or future plans as it relates to this area?

At this point, we do not have a plan to construct anything in this area.

And then if there were to be any plans for that, there would be public engagement prior to finalizing or constructing anything.

Okay, thank you.

I want to open it up to my colleagues.

Um, Councilman Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um I I certainly appreciate the the premise that staff has in terms of not having anything planned.

But I think for me, the the idea that we have to have a plan for every every piece of land right now doesn't necessarily sit well uh for me.

Um if we have parts of the community that uh have a little strip of of land that has not been planned out through open space master planning, that does not mean uh if somebody comes forward with action, we now have to kind of move forward on that.

That's not something I I think I think staff has a certain capacity for the open space planning that we're doing.

We're making plans, we're funding those.

But if there's a strip of land sitting somewhere in in the city that has not been identified for being part of that plan, I'm not necessarily comfortable with saying, okay, we don't have a current plan for this, and so we can offload this.

Um because that seems to be kind of it seems to be the position that we're kind of taking.

Um, and so I think for me and and to my colleagues, I think that's where I'm kind of settling on this.

I'm not necessarily uh comfortable with a vacation just because we don't already have a plan on it.

Director Stadic.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh Paul Stoddard, director with planning and zoning, uh, happy to speak to that.

And um, I know we didn't do as much of a an explanation as in the in the in the presentation today, but we do have some more of this in the in the staff report.

So uh when uh planning and zoning, RPCA tests uh receive these vacation requests, uh, we do take a deeper look at what are the other policies on the books and even what are some of the potentials that are off policy.

Um the standards we apply when we review each of these applications are pursuant to uh set of standards that were put in place by council in the early 2000s.

Uh what I'm hearing partly in the conversation today as well as leading up to today is whether we need to revisit those uh standards.

Uh we are working on an update to the open space master plan uh uh coming up shortly, and that may be an opportunity to check are we are we applying the right standards?

Um that being said, when we were looking at this particular application, uh, as you said, we looked at the open space master plan and we didn't see anything on there.

We looked at the mobility plan and we didn't see anything on there, but we do know that um pedestrian and bicycle access uh and especially access to schools is an important aspect, and that's why staff is proposing the the 20-foot reservation for future ped bike access.

Uh, but I think what I'm hearing today is that there's also an interest maybe in in reserving for maybe other uses as well in the future.

I guess one thing I'm curious about is when was the last time we made those criteria updates?

I feel like we I feel like we recently went through setting a standard for how we look through vacations, how we map this through.

And that feels to me I I was on council, so it feels like it was fairly recent since we went through this.

Yeah, and then so we did uh create the encroachment criteria recently.

And then so that that was not a document before.

And so with with um work on staff and then with council's um input, we also updated that, but then this vacation criteria did not change at that time.

Okay.

Um that's that's helpful to understand.

I think that as a council, maybe we need to give more specific direction on that.

We seem to have a number of these cases, and each time they come up, these similar questions um come up.

And so I'd love to figure out, Mr.

Manager, maybe what we can do uh to ensure that when we're doing this update, especially since those two types of processes are quite linked.

Like, how are we making sure that we're holding the overall vision for the city and we're not, you know, we're not doing some of these actions prematurely when we might want to do something later.

I understand the staff collaboration.

I think that's really important, but I think the more we can codify things and criteria and checklists and things that you know give us a standard that we can evaluate all against is really important.

Other uh let me go to Councilman Chapman and then Vice Mayor Bagley.

And I appreciate the the mayor's comments.

I just want to kind of twist something, not that she said, but just something I'm kind of thinking of.

I think my my concern is if we put things in a plan or or in a particular box, I think I would love staff to have a conversation with us when it time comes, what happens with things out that are outside of that box?

Like I don't want staff having to go through every inch of the city to find every piece of of land and be able to say, okay, this is either this is in the open master, excuse me, open space master plan, and so it's accounted for, but you know, the part of the criteria should be what happens when those things are not within the plan, um, with that not within funding, um, and how do we then deal with them?

And so as we talk about that, let's I don't want to have staff push everything into the plan.

Uh I I do want to have maybe another set of of thoughts uh around things that aren't already accounted for.

All right, Vice Mayor Bagley.

Um thank you.

And um, I want to also just commend everybody on all sides of this issue has spoken today.

I think it's been a it's been a nice example of sort of Alexandria talking about something that we have different opinions about and um, but it's been a respectful conversation.

So I just want to express that I I appreciate all sides who have spoken today.

So thank you.

Um can staff um speak to what is currently by right at 2800?

Because my understanding is 2800 is what kicked off the process.

So um what is currently by right on 2800?

Uh thank you for the question.

So so right now it is a uh a single residential lot.

And so by right would be anything that would be approved with a grading plan, which would be a single family home uh or a single unit uh home or up to the four unit um like what is the R designation of that lot?

Like not to be totally wonky, but what's the I'm sorry, I should have had it pulled up myself, but it's R8.

Okay.

Um, and the same thing with 2702 or what's across is it 2702702 across the street?

What what's currently, you know, by right on that lot with administrative reviews and construction management and all of that, but but what's by right?

And then and that would be the same um a single unit uh dwelling or up to the four.

Okay.

Um with the note that that one does have uh the width and the area that would make it eligible for vacation.

Uh I'm sorry, subdivision, thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

So 2702 already could be all the things that fit within sort of the footprint of um of us of a single structure uh or a subdivision.

It could apply for a subdivision on 2702.

2800 could accommodate up to theoretically four units, you know, again, all the construction management, FAR and setback and or another, you know, a single family home, everything within that, the thing it can't do at present is subdivide.

And once subdivided, what are the size per what would those two lots be zoned as?

Before you get there, can I just ask, can we go back to the visual?

Um, the one that has the first slide.

Thank you.

That's helpful then.

Yeah, it's just easier to do.

Yeah, no, no, that's helpful.

So I was just asking, like, once subdivided, what would the classification of 2800 and 2802 be?

And and they would be the same zoning they they would.

They'd retain the same eligibility for the size of the resulting uh buildings.

Yeah, just to clarify.

So um it's a good question, right?

So a subdivision is a separate action from a rezoning.

So a subdivision is setting that uh, and I realize the the council is familiar with this, but I want to make sure I'm level setting for everyone.

Uh so a subdivision changes the the property boundaries, it doesn't change the development rights that are on the property itself.

Uh and so the development activity is is guided by uh setback restrictions about how close things can be to the property lines as well as FAR restrictions about how much building square footage can be um uh attained on that, uh as well as height restrictions.

Um so the height restrictions wouldn't change, the setbacks wouldn't change, the FAR wouldn't change.

Um so whether the properties are subdivided or not, there's a certain allowance for development on that.

And I I guess with but that the each subdivided lot would be smaller and thus closer to its neighbors and they would be, but still governed by the same setback restrictions that apply um to every parcel in the city.

So this isn't changing the rules for this property, it's just applying the rules on the books.

Right.

But the but the the rules as applied would potentially result in a smaller building, right?

On each of the two subdivided parcels.

You could potentially end up with two smaller buildings instead of one larger building.

That's what I was trying to make sure I understood.

Okay.

Um and I I want to second in a way, I think what my colleague, and I want to make sure I understand my colleagues' concern, Councilman Chapman.

This concept that simply because we haven't yet planned for it indicates a disinterest or a lack of value in sort of unplanned green space or sort of natural space in the city.

I I understand that and I hear it and appreciate it because planning has costs and planning has time, and we do you know, prioritize sort of the higher larger impact spaces.

Um having said that, I I am weighing on the other hand um the prospect of connectivity.

I it there's no uh the the road concern, sort of the vehicular traffic concern.

I I don't have a lot of at the moment, just to allay sort of the neighbors on that, but the connectivity of being able to, you know, walk through or bike through, potentially um, to Russell, ironically, could maybe lower some traffic on Russell if people rather than you know driving out of Argyle or Kent or Monticello can walk through or um and and make their way down.

Um I uh I'll I'll I don't have another question for staff, but I think what I am sort of weighing is the cons the comment made by councilman Chapman, which I I fundamentally sort of agree with that unplanned space is not unimportant space.

Um also what the downstream impacts are of subdivision versus the potential retention of the current boundaries.

And on newbie.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um to follow up on that.

The what came up in the public testimony, the pocket park, is that something we evaluated or looked at?

That concept?

Yeah, so certainly popular uh pocket parks can be really important for uh sort of neighborhood gathering spaces.

Uh and uh often you'll see them uh in um maybe tighter neighborhoods where the lots are a little bit smaller.

There are more homes within a five, 10 minute walk of the pocket park.

Um so often parking parks uh like the one mentioned in Del Rey get high utilization because of the number of people in close proximity or because they're co-located with some other facility.

The pocket park in Del Rey is just just south of the library.

Um and so it has an opportunity for a lot of foot traffic and pass by traffic.

Um this area uh when we looked at it didn't have quite as many of those features.

Uh and so we thought there, yes, there could certainly be public investment, although that that hasn't happened yet, but that doesn't mean it can't happen in the future.

Um, but it doesn't seem to be as close to some of those other sort of civic draws uh that make other project parks successful.

The characteristics of the property itself potentially it could the surrounding neighborhood, right?

That the the lots are a little bit bigger than they are in Del Ray, the the other things that are nearby, the other cities.

No, I'm talking about the piece of land that we're vacating.

Like it's it's 40 feet wide uh and about 190 feet long.

Um so it it the pocket park may or may not extend for the entire sort of depth of the park.

Um, but the 40-foot width, you could accommodate a pocket park within that.

Um, but it would certainly be that a pocket park, not a sort of a larger neighborhood facility.

Got it.

Thank you.

Um on the subdivision piece.

I let me make sure I understand this because I'm a little confused here.

The applicant said they want to build two single family homes.

So they need to subdivide to do that.

So if we don't grant this vacation, they can't subdivide and build two homes, but they can still build um a duplex or other things, right?

Can you just validate then explain?

Correct.

So right now, if there is no subdivision, right?

The lot is as it is, it would be because it's too narrow to subdivide right now.

We're trying they're trying to get this vacation so it's wide enough that they can that it can be subdivided.

Correct.

So post-vacation would uh would give them a wider lot, which then would meet the subdivision requirements.

Okay.

And if they don't like if and if they if the if the vacation is not granted, then what are their options?

They could develop administratively, such as uh a single unit home or up to the four units in a single building.

Um then I believe there is there's possibly um an exception to the width, right?

That they could ask for in the subdivision.

Yeah, there can be situations where people can ask for a subdivision with variation, uh, although that's a discretionary decision uh on the part of the commission about uh how it fits within the neighborhood character.

Uh the other question that was raised was the idea of uh uh how do we hold that because there are a lot of trees within this existing right-of-way.

So there might be a question as well about how do we hold on to the existing trees.

There was mention of uh of a conservation easement.

Uh what we're proposing in the staff report is uh a reservation of a pedestrian access easement.

Uh we could potentially expand that uh to be not only pedestrian uh and bicycle sort of access, but also conservation, so that there couldn't be land development activity in that area.

So I'm not sure I heard the answer to the width exception.

There's a width exception, so even without the vacation, there's a width exception they can they can pursue and can still subdivide, but it would be done on smaller lots, I guess.

Yes, that is done on a case-by-case uh basis, and it's in response to an application.

So it involves uh an analysis of what are the widths in the immediate neighborhood, and we don't have that analysis on hand.

Uh so we would have to review that if an application filed.

Gone.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Okay.

Um, I'm gonna go to Vice Mayor Bagley.

Let me know if anyone has any other clarifying questions.

I'd like to get to a motion.

Um we can get away.

Yeah, no, no.

Uh Vice Mayor Bagley.

So I I think um I I'd like to put a motion to approve the vacation on the table.

And um, that's after I hope everybody hears sort of the seriousness, first of all, with which I think we've examined this and the the relative um balancing um of uh the reason why I, you know, I'm so I'm moving to approve in part because a half of this impacted area is already you know suitable to this purpose.

And I actually think that by granting the vacation, we will potentially my hope is we will actually see some you know improvement into that space.

Um and I would I I I pick up on some nods from the applicant's attorney as I said that, but but I think there's an opportunity there for the neighborhood and for the adjacent owners to be a part of that potentially.

Um, and that's something they can work with staff on, you know, as the development process moves forward.

But in light of the fact that half of this parcel could already apply, move forward, build to the other side of the parcel, could already be building a multitude of things if the vacation simplifies the process, moves it forward, creates housing potentially, hopefully, um, and spurs um some uh green and passive, but but use of the space, it is with those hopes and understanding that I'm gonna put a motion on to approve the vacation.

Okay, is there a second?

Okay, there has been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilman Agiri to approve vacation number two zero two three-zero zero zero zero four and vacation number two zero two five-zero zero zero zero nine.

Is there any additional discussion?

Councilman Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Uh, I would I would say I think the my concern still uh is here.

Um as we uh as the vice mayor noted, um kind of unplanned for space is not necessarily uh thrown away space or uncared for space, but I I think the problem with us moving forward with this action kind of steps in the face of that, right?

We can say that, but then you know, as we take uh an action to do the exact opposite, I think folks can kind of question that intent.

Secondly, I would say to the idea of having uh pedestrian access, having uh actually uh a pedestrian pathway um or a bike pathway uh is really gonna take the the city's intention.

Uh and staff can correct me if I'm wrong.

Uh even with this vacation, that does not necessarily happen.

The city still has to plan and fund something.

And so uh to me, uh I think this vacation doesn't necessarily move us forward in actually that direction, because even with what we have now, we could plan and fund something.

Um if we want a pedestrian pathway, we could put that in next year's budget and have staff execute that without this vacation.

Uh and so the vacation for me doesn't doesn't kind of justify the idea that we're going to have a future pedestrian uh or bike uh way because we could fund that and do that now uh without said vacation.

Uh counts Minnegary.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um understanding what um the residents on or resident on Kent Place was was uh talking about.

Um essentially, if we're giving this vacation, you know, homes are gonna be there and people are not likely to walk through someone's home.

So in terms of there being access from Russell to Kent, and as uh Councilman Chapman alluded, unless we were intentional about it.

I mean, it's essentially not happening.

Um I I agree with uh the vice mayor's assessment that you know maybe somebody would get out of their car to cut through down Cunt Place and walk to Russell.

Um without the intentionality of the city trying to create that.

I mean, that's just not gonna happen.

So uh and and the route to uh George Mason, in my opinion, is is already heavily utilized.

Um and I don't recall it being on the safe routes uh that needs to be updated unless I'm way off base there.

Um we have pretty ample sidewalks on both sides, um, and we have uh speed bumps along Monticello.

So uh I feel I feel pretty comfortable uh with this and allowing the the two homeowners to then decide what they're gonna choose to do with their land.

Okay, seeing no additional discussion, there has been a motion and a second.

Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote.

Please call the roll.

Hi, Councilman Geary.

Aye, Mayor Gaskins.

Aye, Councilman Chapman.

Oh councilman El Nuby, no councilwoman Green.

Aye.

All right, the motion passes.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Public hearing, second reading, and final passage of an ordinance to amend and reordain article D, House numbers of chapter two streets and sidewalks of Title Five Transportation and Environmental Services to add section five-2-9-4.

Okay, we will begin with a brief staff presentation and then we will go to the speakers for this item.

There's a speaker.

Apologies for the delay.

We're moving staff through the room to in sort of light of of um the um the good democracy that's happening today.

All right, good morning, council.

Uh I'm Tony Lacola, division chief with the Department of Planning and Zoning.

Sorry.

One second.

Councilman Agary.

My apologies, Madam Mayor.

My apologies, Mr.

Lakola.

Do we do we need a presentation on this?

Does everyone need a presentation?

Are you allowed?

We don't need a presentation.

We'll go directly to um public speakers.

Just gotta make sure everyone's on the same page.

With that, I um I actually don't have this one on my oh, yes, I do.

Oh, okay.

There we go.

Sorry.

Our um speaker is Darren Tillingas.

Good morning, Madam Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the city council.

Uh you've heard from uh I live at 3600 and a half Russell Road.

Uh I cannot stand a disinterested party in this particular measure.

I want to thank each and every single one of you for your collaboration, your work and diligence in helping us work through this process.

Uh I just wish to briefly speak and say that the circumstances that brought this entire process in motion have not abated.

So we stand firmly in support of this measure.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you so much for your time.

At this time, I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing as well as a motion on the item.

So uh Councilman Alnubi would you say something?

Oh councilman El Nubi is are you also making a permanent?

I wanted to give he worked on this very hard.

I wanted to give him the opportunity to take credit.

Uh with that, there has been a motion by Councilman El Nubi to close the public hearing and to move item eight um two six-0884.

And there has been a second by councilwoman Green.

Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote.

Please call the roll.

Councilman L newby.

Councilwoman Green.

Aye.

Mayor Gaskins.

Aye.

Vice Mayor Bagley.

Aye.

Councilman Ageary.

Aye.

Councilman Chapman.

The ayes have it.

And um, I need the vacation viewers.

I'm sorry.

Yes.

That's my call.

Um, well, the ayes have it, and item eight passes.

Since item six passed, I need to uh appoint vac viewers.

And so I'm going to appoint Don Solomon, Janet Skew, and Michael Porterfield.

Okay.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Public hearing on the FY 2027 City Council preliminary add elite proposals in the city management managers proposed amendments to the FY 2027 proposed budget.

Okay.

This time we are back to our next public hearing item.

The same rules apply as in the beginning.

We are going to try and keep the process moving.

Three minutes each.

Um, please be respectful of the person in front of you.

And again, um, I will call multiple names.

We ask that you not stand in the room, but there will be staff to um receive you and work with you on in in the waiting room.

I still see some movement.

Okay.

That our first three few three speakers are Daniel Gordon, Angela Spate, and Sean Casey.

Sheriff Sean Casey.

Good morning, Madam Mayor.

Members of city council, I'm Dan Gordon.

I'm currently serving as the under sheriff of the Alexander Sheriff's Office.

I've served the city for uh as a law enforcement officer for over 20 years.

The last three of them, I had a direct responsibility for the jail.

In two decades here in the city, I've never seen this office treated with disregard and apparent disdain that has been on full display during this budget cycle.

And I'm angry about it.

Behind me other staff members who ran the jail last night, who staffed the courthouse yesterday, who provided rehabilitated programming, and who professionally served this city.

The Alexandria, the city of Alexandria community, despite being referred to as a partner agency, locally subsidized state agency or whatever the flavor of the day may be.

They are here on their own time, and I want council to see them.

These are the people that your decisions affect.

This agency already has a jail staffing study, and the city also already has a feasibility study for the facility itself.

Our study cannot be dismissed as a simple head count.

It examines how the facility actually operates, post by post and shift by shift, and concludes that we are understaffed.

The reason we cannot close this gap is compensation that has not kept pace with comparable just jurisdictions and a work environment more demanding than other public sector work in the city.

The shortfall is absorbed through overtime, paid to the staff that are all sitting here behind me because properly staffed in the detention order, this detention center is not optional and is a matter of law safety and the humane treatment of those in our custody.

This ad delete proposal did not appear in a vacuum.

It arrives in a budget cycle in which this office has been in an open disagreement with this council on matters regarding law and policy.

Members of council are entitled to disagree with us.

You're not entitled to use the budget to punish us for it.

The three council members who introduced and signed on to this ad delete owe an explanation of what exactly a second study is expected to find that our own does not.

And why the funding must come from the agency being studied when the council has other means and available to pay for this?

These are not rhetorical questions, they deserve answers on the record before a vote is taken.

Members of this council speak often about taking care of the workforce, about giving public safety the tools it needs and equity and inclusion.

Those are the exact words used from this dais.

I would ask council to measure this specific ad-delete proposal against its own words.

Frequently, when this office raises concerns, those concerns are dismissed as a misunderstanding on our part.

There is no misunderstanding.

We understand the budget.

We understand the process, except for when the process is quietly changed, unbeknownst to us.

We understand exactly what is being proposed.

And our disagreement is not a failure of comprehension.

Rather, it's a disagreement of the merits, and it deserves to be engaged on the merits.

I ask any member of the city council who has not yet committed to this reckless and wasteful proposal to vote against it.

Madam Mayor.

Uh Councilman O'Gary.

Under Sheriff Gordon.

Yes.

If you don't mind.

Sure.

Uh, first of all, thank you for uh for your service over several decades.

Okay, we'll continue.

All right.

Um, so when you say that the folks here are here on their own time, so that means they're off the clock.

That's correct.

Yeah.

That's the important thing.

Um is it is it typical when you're off the clock to be wearing uniform?

It is today.

Okay, so it's not typical then.

Just just it depends on the situation.

Okay.

But I see where your priorities are, yes.

So this 200,000, how does it affect compensation?

How does it affect compensation?

How does it affect compensation?

The sheriff's office is historically underfunded.

We have you had a letter yesterday from the uh sheriff, which lays out historically underfunded by the city or by the state.

It's under share under underfunded by the city.

By the city.

Here we are again with the same conversation about whether a city, state, and otherwise, right?

And that's the point that we're trying to point point out here.

You try to simplify, oversimplify these things.

200,000, how does it affect compensation?

Within the last two weeks, we've been brought, you know, it's been brought to our attention that our budget is now a whole number as opposed to personnel versus non-personnel, which is historically has been.

So it does affect so how's the 200,000 dollars affecting your staffing?

Who is not getting paid because of that?

Well, the theoretically, it hasn't even been approved yet, right?

So we're still sitting here right now, but the budget is a whole city manager told us that last week.

So as a whole, so that means that 200,000 doesn't necessarily come out of compensation and salaries or even positions, it could come out of something else.

Correct.

So I would just I would just say you brought up compensation, and I would disagree with your statement around compensation and everything that you mentioned around compensation, simply because that 200,000 is not about compensation.

I don't think you you understood what I just said.

The city manager just told us last week that it's one full budget.

Correct?

Correct.

Is that correct or not correct?

There is one full budget.

Correct.

So if you're taking 200,000 out of a budget that is already underfunded by the state.

Again, if that's no the percentage that the city subsidizes the sheriff's office.

I don't have the percentages, but I know the numbers, the the numbers of the amount of money, yes.

But again, this is you're you're you're sitting here putting me on the spot about whether whether the state or the city is responsible for funding.

This is a legislative.

Oh, you have very strong words for us under sheriff.

I understand.

And they're acting is true.

Well, my words are true as well.

Okay, well, we can agree to disagree on that.

Very well.

Thank you.

All right, thank you for your testimony.

Um, I've got a few additional comments from councilman Al Nuvi and then Councilman Chapman.

Actually, cluster per hour stuff.

Um, can you tell us how much was like the percentage um in the budget cut to the police department under the fire department and to the sheriff's department in this budget so far with the uh deletes?

Because I believe the sheriff has the smallest number of cuts or the smallest percentage of cuts less than one percent.

Is that correct?

Versus more than two percent for police, and that's correct that it's a smaller percentage.

I don't have the exact numbers.

We'd have to get back up.

We'll probably have a bunch of speakers go.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um to to staff, uh, to our budget staff, I want to be clear um because this has been a uh not this particular issue, but the the issue of state versus locality funding has been a particular issue of mine, not particularly for the sheriff's office, but for department of health for our schools, um, and the role of the state in funding those items, and particularly as we talk about department of health, uh sheriff's office, and any other uh state aligned um departments that they fund.

Um, I I want to be clear, and and the under-sheriff brought it up, and so that's why I want to make sure I address it.

Talk to me about how those structures are working.

Are those are those state funded things that we then add a supplement to to find frankly keep up the cost of competition in the region, or is there something that I'm missing here?

Because I don't want it to be said by anybody about uh I don't want misinformation out there about how these structures work.

Certainly.

Um, and let's talk specifically about the sheriff's office because there's different relationships with schools and courts and and and I think your general statement applies to all of those, but the the relationship works differently in all cases.

Um, in the particular case of the sheriff's office, the state has a number of sheriff's deputies that they will fund, um, but they fund them at a lower level than we pay them.

And so what that means, and we also have more sheriff's deputies than the state, the the state funds.

So we have deputies that are funded by the state, which the state does not fully cover the cost of those deputies, and then we have additional deputies that are funded entirely by the city.

So I raise that because I I want to be clear with with everybody, um, regardless of uh employee, community member, or whatever.

I think the number of jurisdictions and not Alexandra's not special, but Northern Virginia jurisdictions by and large are looking at the state and have been looking at the state in the last few years about our relationship with them regarding funding.

Again, that's not specific to sheriff's office, but it is and we are going to, and I'll I'll tell you, I'm going to continue to use the words that we subsidize because the state is not, in my honest opinion, taking up the level of funding they need to for a number of things.

Um, and so we continue to be challenged locally about making sure that we fund schools, we fund all these different departments that the state has a hand in, and they need to up their game.

Um, and so I'll be very honest with anyone.

I'm going to continue to use that until hopefully my state partners kind of come with a higher level of basic funding for the work that they're doing around the commonwealth.

I'm not seeing it, but I continue to advocate it and can will continue to speak for it.

I guess lastly, I would just want to clarify that when we give funding to any department, department, quasi-agency, so forth.

There's one budget.

We give you a budget to make decisions within that budget, whether we're transferring to the schools, AEDP, the sheriff's department, how you choose to allocate those resources, that is a decision that I believe is made within that department.

Is that correct?

You may have sub budgets.

You may have this is for compensation, this is for vehicles, this is for different things, but there's one budget.

Okay, thank you.

I just want to make that clear.

How you classify it, how you classify it.

There's one budget.

We're gonna go to our next speakers.

We have Angela Spate with Sheriff Sean Casey and Jada Jada Rose.

Madam Mayor.

Yes, Council Department.

Well, the next speaker's coming up.

Um Director Route had previously provided us some information.

So the city provides about 57% additional funding to the sheriff's office.

Thank you, Councilman Gary.

Uh, we'll now turn to State.

Good morning, everyone.

I'm Sergeant Spade with the Alexandria Sheriff's Office, and I've been with the office since 2018.

And some of you may recognize me from the several community events that I've participated in with you all.

I've truly enjoyed enjoy the time I've spent interacting with the public.

It's one of the few positives of being in law enforcement.

While I denounce personally what ICE has done to spread its agenda of fear, xenophobia, and outright unprofessionalism, I can't ignore the law.

It's part of the oath I took when I graduated from the academy to faithfully and impartially discharge all duties incumbent upon me, so help me God, and to the best of my ability.

Simply put, I'm compelled.

My colleagues are compelled to obey the law, despite our personal agree disagreements.

In my time in the office, we've always been underfunded.

During COVID, there were many times we were dangerously understaffed, meaning staff in positions outside the ADC to include the courthouse and civil process had to be pulled in to ensure minimum staffing.

And there were times where even that was not enough.

As the former inventory deputy, when I was working in facility services, I can personally attest to the cost of keeping the ADC running.

It was my responsibility at that time to ensure we had enough clothing and clothes for those in custody, enough basic hygiene items, cleaning supplies for this facility, and sanitary sanitary equipment during and post COVID.

That was in addition to the times where I had to leave that position and assistance to the security division because we didn't have staffing.

The system the city has consistently expected us to do the same amount of work with the same quality with less resources and less staff.

And that's not been fair.

This time, not only is it not fair, it appears to be a little bit more biased.

Speaking to the disagreement about ICE.

In order to ask a law enforcement agency to break the law, is asked and I, and it's no different than asking the fire department to stop putting out fires.

To threaten to cut funding truly shows how little you not only care for us as city employees and law enforcement officers, but it also shows the true colors of how this council and some of the city of people in Alexandria feel about those in custody.

You all have had access to the public comments section over the past couple of weeks where the many services and programs that we provide to those in custody have been explained to you.

Outside of our volunteer program, none of those programs and services are free.

Speaking to the issue of immigration, it's not new, and I think we all know that.

It's only come to the forefront because of one agency using the cover of law enforcement to treat people in an inhumane way.

I urge folks to take a stand against it and to help change things in a lawful manner, of course.

But further cuts to the ASO budget is not the answer.

The cuts mean you want us to work with even less, and we're already working with the bare minimum financially.

These cuts could call could, well, I'll take that back because we already had the discussion about compensation.

But these cuts will eventually at some point start affecting the security in the jail.

It'll affect the courthouse, the less time spending doing our community partnerships, which I've attended with you all, and less home away checks with our which our field opposite deputies deal with, and overall less public safety.

Thank you so much for your time today.

Madam Mayor.

Councilman Agarry.

Jay, I just like to remind the public, uh, Councilman O'Neobi brought this up.

So we asked all the departments in the city to take a 1% cut.

And so this is in alignment with a 1% cut.

So I would not say that there is a bias.

If anything else, it's actually looking at the departments equally and saying we need to take a little bit more.

Um just just want to put that out there for everybody.

Thanks, Mayor Bagley.

To that end, um, Director Route, who is Bulbul Khan?

Do you know who that person is?

Um, he's a fiscal officer within the sheriff's office.

And did he submit um any proposals as part of the budget process this year?

Um the office, the sheriff's office submitted um proposals, yes.

Yes, and and roughly what did those proposals total?

And I'm not trying to like pop quiz you here.

I know the answers and I'm happy to proffer them, but in the format we use.

I don't know off the top of my head exactly.

But there was this uh uh reduct couple of reduction options and some current service adjustments and the supplemental requests.

Right.

And would it sound uh like it would it ring true in your ears if I told you that he he provided cuts uh that totaled 351,446.

That sounds right.

Okay.

So the sheriff's department in alignment with every other office in the city was asked to look at their budgets and find the 1% of cuts they could find that could continue to support their legal obligations and meet their staffing needs and deliver on the you know the salaries committed to, and they did that in the those, and Mr.

Kahn, the CFO for the sheriff's department complied with that request.

They submitted reduction options, yes.

They did, and those reductions totaled 351,446, and none of those reductions, and I can go over what the three were, but none of them related to compensation or positions for staff.

They did not relate to compensation, yes, that's correct.

There were none of them related to staff.

There was the GED program, that's a contractor.

Um I think the other ones were non-personnel as well.

Okay.

Um you're right.

Um, we did take uh in the proposed budget, there is one vacant deputy position that is removed.

Right.

But there was $351,000 of other suggested cuts.

Correct.

That did not touch uh staffing or salaries.

Correct.

Okay, just again, and they were again found, identified, and submitted by the CFO of the sheriff's department, just like every other department had, you know, Miss Garvey and DCHS and Miss Maclvain at housing all underwent similar processes.

That's correct.

Thank you.

Um, and just so we have the same numbers, because I don't want uh Morgan and Amanda to have to keep looking.

34 departments were asked to take a 1% cut.

Of that in the manager's proposed budget, 21 departments received a full 1% cut.

Um, of that, 26 departments received a cut of any size.

So 21 at the 1%, and then five with less than 1%.

The largest department cut of any department was 10.6%.

As it relates to public safety, before the ad was proposed, police are being proposed at a 2.8% cut, fire at a 1% cut, deck at a 0.9.

And again, this was before the uh proposed ad, sheriff at 0.3.

So we all have the same numbers.

All right.

I need to call the next three.

We have Sheriff Sean Casey, we have Jada Rose, and we have Danita Green.

Uh good morning, uh Mayor Gaskins, Vice Mayor Bagley, and uh council members.

Uh just one point of clarification for the budget.

I think to be clear on this, that while we only took a one deputy reduction in the city manager's proposed budget, there were no additional funding for the 400,000 450,000 in continuing services, which include our medical contract, our uh um our food contract, uniforms, basic things like that.

So that's money that we'll have to find in our flat budget.

So while it's not technically a reduction, it shows it does feel like one for us.

Uh but what I'm here to talk about is I do oppose the $200,000 being taken from our budget to conduct the study.

Uh we conducted a comprehensive study, a six-week staffing study that to be uh of that with the National Institute of Correction, who's partnered with the DOJ.

Uh that study was provided at no cost to the city.

It uses nationally recognized data-driven methodology that resulted in a 67-page report.

It's been provided to the city manager, it's been provided to all of you.

The study confirms what we already know is that we are understaffed in the jail, and that it does make it clear that in May population numbers don't dictate the number of staff that you need in a jail.

Uh staffing's not a logistical one, it's a legal one without sufficient staff.

You all are aware that we could be subjecting our inmates to inhumane conditions, inadequate medical care, and sufficient inmate supervision.

These aren't theoretical, they're real concerns, and they expose both the city and my office to civil rights liability.

As we've managed to deal with those staffing things through overtime and through budget uh challenges, um the taking of 200,000 more from our budget will exacerbate those issues.

And historically, while the city has realized these issues throughout the budget years and provided us funding in order to ensure that we can provide our inmates proper supervision and proper staffing.

Um, you know, that is in question right now.

But however, I did speak to the city manager recently, and I'm hoping to have a meeting with him discuss that further uh to address these issues because what's going on right now really can't continue.

Uh, I think we're at an inflection point.

I think this conversation, what we've gotten to is the question really for the city and for you is to say, do you want to be in the jail business?

And what I say that is that if you are going to be in it, you've got to make sure you're fully prepared to fund the safe and lawful operation of the jail.

Uh because continuing what we've been doing really isn't an option.

It's not fair to the staff, our inmates, and the community.

And as you consider that question, I want to be clear that we operate a high performing, efficient, nationally recognized jail because of the professionals and dedication of my staff who are all here on their own time today.

In closing, I do oppose the $200 being removed from our budget for the studies.

It duplicates work that's already been done and diverts reforce resources from an already unfunded operation.

If you do choose to move forward with the study, I'd ask you to take it from somewhere else.

And lastly, I'm ready to set politics aside and have a um uh transparent conversation about the future funding of the jail and the office, and I respectfully be request to be part of that discussion in the upcoming uh ad delete work hearing.

Thank you.

Thank you, Sheriff Ketzing.

Madam Mayor.

Sheriff Casey, first of all, thank you for your longtime service.

Um, you are greatly appreciated in this community.

Um, and I don't necessarily disagree with you, right?

I I do agree that your department is understaffed, and it's not fair to all of your folks that you have here that are working in the jail or in the in the um in the courthouses or doing the administrative work.

Uh I do agree with that.

I I think part of what, at least in my opinion, the city is saying is that you know, we're struggling financially as well.

And it frustrates me to Councilman Chapman's point, you know, we are going to advocate at the state level, and we we try to every single year.

Uh the state's sitting on some surplus money.

And the state needs to step in and give some more money because they have more money to give.

And right here at the at the city level, I mean, it in a later item, we're gonna be discussing raising another tax, right?

One of which, you know, we're we're basically at the highest level tax rate for just about everything you you you can think of.

The only thing that we're not the highest of is this finance people category that we're gonna talk about that we're getting pushed back on as well.

Um, so again, it's it's not that I disagree with you with the understaffing and the compensation for for your deputies.

It's it's the financial straights that we are in.

Uh Councilman Chapman.

And just to add on to my colleagues um kind of point, I think one of the other challenges with the financial picture is that for the taxes that he mentioned, and you can see this in the city's budget book every year.

The state imposes a ceiling for what's for most of these taxes.

And so, you know, we can't just tax to to high heaven.

I don't think we would want to.

Um, but I think that the challenge and the conversation um around state funding that the under-secretary, uh, the under-sheriff, I'm sorry, the under-sheriff mentioned, um is is a real one.

Uh, and I don't, again, the reason I I clumped the sheriff's office and with Department of Health and Department of Education is because uh the school board, excuse me, um, is because I do think these are all things that each of those departments and offices has to have a coordinated effort with the city to advocate to our state legislature about, you know, we have a certain number of delegates and senators.

Um I don't hear them talking uh about that issue strong enough.

And I really want them to uh and hopefully gain some other advocates in Northern Virginia on the school side.

Uh, the school departments or this the school districts have joined together to do joint uh reports about their underfunding.

Uh, I would hope that maybe in the future we can talk about how departments, uh sheriff's departments across the region can maybe have something similar so that we're taking a joint effort to the state to say we're not we understand state you have concerns, but we're also talking about the cost of doing business in Northern Virginia for all of these issues because that's what it boils down to, regardless of the department or compensation levels.

It is the cost of doing business in North Virginia is different than it is in Central Virginia, Tidewater area, and South Side and Southwest.

We all know that.

But the state is not moving in a direction, and frankly, the compensation board is not a doing moving in a direction where there is a different change in regional funding.

Obviously, that's probably gonna boil down to a political issue and different regions are gonna fight it out, but it is a fight that I think we have to, for the future's sake of our departments are going to have to have.

It is different to have employees here in North Virginia than it is in Roanoke.

Everyone knows that, and we have to fight for that.

So I would hope that we add that to the future conversations that we're gonna have.

May I may I respond?

Or sorry, Councilwoman Green.

I I'll just say I am not in disagreement with anything you said about state funding.

They are woefully underfunding this agency.

They've woefully underfunded all sheriff's office across the state.

And every year, the VSA, which is a very powerful lobbying agency, fights tooth and nail with the legislature just to get minor two and three percent raises through the comp board that basically just nullify, you know, the supplement you all are giving us.

So it's a battle every single year, and they're fighting it with 12,000 plus members aggressively.

So it's not that we haven't been in this fight.

And every chance, when I saw the governor, I told her we need more funding.

We need more funding.

When I was on the transition committee, I made that clear, we have to look at this issue.

We have to.

They know it's an issue, but I agree with you, we have to fight harder because it is a big issue because we're just trying to keep the inmates safe, the courthouse safe, serve our process in the right amount of time, and do what we can to keep this community uh safe with the level of service that's expected of us to mandate our keep our state mandatory responsibilities in line with what what's expected of us.

Um Sheriff Casey, I just want to close on something that you stated and make sure that it's acknowledged.

I welcome the invitation for us to change the way these conversations are happening.

I think obviously this is not the venue because it doesn't allow us to do a true back back and forth.

It is our practice for ad delete that we do not have any departments participate.

That's been the practice in which we've set up.

So that's probably not the venue either.

But I am willing to work with you to find what is the right venue where there can be, I mean, more of a back and forth and sharing of information in order to have that transparent conversation.

I welcome that.

Um councilman count councilwoman Green.

Thank you, Madam Minor.

Just very quickly, and so that I can be um abundantly clear, um, Sheriff Casey.

If this $200,000 cut is taken from your budget, where will that come from?

What how what are you going to do if 200 an additional $200,000 is taken from your budget?

It depends where it's going to come from.

And that's hopefully to have a conversation with the city manager uh in the coming days to discuss where they envision that coming from so I can better plan about what potential service reductions would exist, or we will will we be able to absorb it and continue doing what what we're doing?

What will we not be able to do?

We're still trying to determine what that looks like.

Okay.

So we don't have that yet.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Last comment, Vice Mayor.

No, and I think it's I I appreciate the mayor indulging my moment because I think the sheriff is the proper part, you know, for us to ask some of these questions too.

And so the study that's been referenced, was the fundamental question of that study, the fundamental question you posed today, which is should we be, you know, are we committed to being in the jail business in Alexandria?

Was that the focus of the study that was performed last year?

No.

Okay.

No.

And I we agree on that point, and we've had lengthy dialogue on that point, correct?

Yes.

And so I I want to acknowledge under Sheriff Gordon that, you know, and I am aware that there was a facility and a staffing study.

You know, that is a different question and a different analysis than how does the existence and legal requirements of a jail impact the city of Alexandria's overall budget?

The way I see it in a way, we take the 2025 study of staffing needs and requirements, and it informs an analysis of what does it cost us as a locality to operate a jail.

I mean, the the information in that report informs the larger analysis of is our federal contract ultimately additive or reductive to our bottom line, you know, all elements of of how we operate the jail.

So I just in the interest of acknowledging that comment and yours, there it there are two different questions being analyzed.

And so I'm not eliminating or ignor uh ignoring the 2025 study.

And I I think I just I I wanted the public acknowledgement that you and I are on the same page, read this the separate focuses that are that are happening here.

No, I I hear you.

And in the delete, it talks about is there a different staffing model that can be restructured in the jail?

And so for me, doing the analysis we did, I wish there was a different staffing model.

We went into it hoping there would be, so that we'd be more efficient, and there wasn't.

Yeah.

So I I guess that's the part, and I the other parts of it, absolutely, those are questions that we need to ask and need to discuss.

I just don't think the money should come from our budget to ask those questions and discuss those things.

And that exactly.

So we can we can we can disagree on sources, you know, and and but um the the semi-related question into the miss councilwoman Green's question to you, and so that the community also understands the trade-offs here.

One potential area for you to account for this potential reduction, should it succeed, would be the elimination of 171,000 for the inmate GED program, correct?

And that would not operate that would not impact in any way operational capabilities.

And there's also a 90K potential reduction not taken on inmate medical contracting services.

Correct.

And we're supposed to use that efficiency to pay our medical bill for next year.

I appreciate that.

But like in this opportunity we have here, you know, there are weighing of cuts.

Okay.

So I appreciate.

And then I just want to reiterate and I really appreciate them the mayor sort of throwing in some numbers earlier.

And I want to take a beat just to reiterate them, since this conversation is going to continue that, you know, uh the AS, the police, a 2% cut, fire 1%, DAC 0.9, and coming into today, sheriff's point three.

Just just for the larger universe here of what the council is working through.

So I appreciate you know your position here today, but just wanted to reiterate the options that are on the table.

Thank you.

Um, our next speaker is Jada Rose, followed by Danita Green, fathered by Maria Zay Zelaya.

Salaya.

Good morning.

My name is Deputy Jada Rose, and I stand before you today, not only as a deputy with the Alexandria Sheriff's Office, but also as someone alongside my colleagues who has sacrificed time, energy, and personal moments to serve and protect this community.

Every day, my colleagues and I show up to serve the city of Alexandria, often under difficult and demanding conditions.

We work long hours and care responsibilities that directly impact on the safety and well-being of this community.

These are not abstract duties, these are real sacrifices, and we make them willingly because we care deeply about the people we serve.

This job asks a lot of us.

It asks us to work long hours that don't always end when they're supposed to.

It asks us to show up exhausted, to push through stress, and to carry responsibilities that most people never have to think about.

And we do it, not because it's easy, but because we took an oath to uphold our office's mission to help and protect others.

It asks us to miss moments that matter most, holidays spent away from our families, empty seats at dinner tables, missed birthdays, and time with our children and loved ones that we can never get back.

While others are celebrating, we are working.

While others are home, we are out making sure that Alexandria is safe.

Those are real sacrifices, and we make them willingly over and over again because we believe in serving the city.

So when we hear about proposed cuts to our office, cuts that come while we are simply doing our duty to enforce the law, it feels like those sacrifices are being overlooked.

Because what these cuts truly mean is fewer people doing the critical work.

It means longer hours, increased strain, and greater risk.

It means asking the same people who have already given so much to somehow give even more.

However, we will continue to show up just like we always have.

We will continue to serve, to protect, and give what we can.

But there comes a point where giving more means losing something that we can't get back.

This decision will send the message about what this city values and how it supports those who serves it.

And I urge you all to recognize that before your decision is made.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Rose.

And Councilman Agary.

Just I want to clarify again that this is not gonna be fewer people.

It is not fewer sheriffs.

There are currently 13 vacant positions, and the council is not going after those 13 vacant positions.

Um my conversation with the sheriff, he is going to be filling them as quickly as he can.

Um, but again, this is it's not fewer people.

Thank you, Councilman Age.

Uh, are we finding seats?

Okay, thank you.

Um, and I and I hope I have this right, but I I wanted to take the moment.

I believe Deputy Rose um performed a life-saving um uh uh action in our community, and I'm aware of that, and I wanted to, if she's already walked out, but um Deputy Rose is a valuable member of our community who literally has saved lives with her actions both on and off the clock, and we do owe her service and acknowledgement for that.

So um wanted to pause and say that.

I will uh call the next person, which is Miss Danita Green, and we just have to morning, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, City Council.

I'm Doneta Green, a member of the community and very active volunteer in the city of Alexandria.

I'm here on behalf of the sheriff's office this morning.

We've already talked about the lengthy staffing study that was already done, and that the proposed um staff the proposed study that you're thinking about doing is looking at it from a different angle, but I am concerned that a budget cut will occur to fund another study.

The Sheriff's Office has demonstrated a strong commitment to the responsible, efficient use of taxpayer resources.

From a budget perspective, maintaining the jail in its current location is both practical and cost effective.

It reduces transportation costs, limits operational inefficiencies, and ensures that detention, court security, and inmate transport continue to function within one coordinated system.

That integrated structure matters.

It allows services to operate more efficiently and help avoid the additional financial and logistical burdens that could result from relocating or fragmenting operations.

In addition, the Sheriff's Office has worked to leverage partnerships, especially in areas such as mental health and support services to improve outcomes while reducing longer term costs to the system.

Addressing underlying challenges in a proactive and collaborative way is not only humane but fiscally responsible.

This is why I believe support for the Sheriff's Office should not be seen simply as an expense, but as a smart investment in prevention, efficiency, public safety, and long-term community well being.

Thank you very council.

Okay.

Quick quick question just for clarification.

You said transportation costs down and efficiency.

Can you just uh Sure.

So if let's let's say you decide to move the jail 30 miles from here or wherever, you then have transportation costs getting inmates from wherever you relocate them to the city jail.

I mean to the courthouse.

You have issues in transporting from hospitals to uh back and forth wherever they need to go at a time that they need to go.

But if you move the jail out of the city, you cut down on all of that efficient transportation.

I think that that would be part of the jail study because I don't think that um the staffing study covered something like that unless I'm mistaken.

So um I think part of the jail study would actually take that into consideration.

So okay, I just wanted to clarify.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time today.

Our next three speakers are Maria Zela, and I apologize for mispronouncing your last name.

Louis Estrada and Mary Beth Plaskus.

Okay.

Gracias.

Good morning, mayor and members of the city council.

My name is Maria, and I have leave in the city of Alexandria for three years with my husband and my two and my two daughters.

One attends John Adams and the other attends Francis C.

Hammum.

Today I'm here not only representing the needs and concerns of my family, but also those of many working class families who live in this city.

Rent continues to rise while the resources, policies, and programs are very limited.

Many times, in order to pay rent, we have to cut back on other essential expenses, which is very concerning.

Even though my husband and I work hard, our incomes are not enough.

This situation also affects the time we can spend with our daughters.

We don't have many opportunities to take them to the park, the museums, or simply spend time together as a family.

It's not because we don't want to, but because we need to work more to make sure we have place to live.

That is why we ask you as our representatives to support the increase of funding for rental assistance programs and to support families who are struggling to remain in this city.

We know this funding is only a temporary solution, but this will be a big relief for our families at this time.

For years, we have been advocating for affordable housing and programs that support our families.

Today we ask you to take actions.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for your time today.

Next speaker is Luis Estrada, Mary Beth Plaskus, and then Heidi Aguilar.

Good morning, Major and Vice Manager of this.

Wait.

Good morning, Major, Vice Major, and members of Council.

My name is Luis.

I'm a 10th grade student at Alexander City High School.

I'm also part of the youth led group Alexander United Teams at Tennessee and Works United for many years now.

I have spoken before when some of you came to a community and talk about the need for deeply affordable housing in our city.

But not longer after those conversations.

My family was displaced for the neighborhood we call home.

We used to live in Chirilawa, and we had to move to another part of the city because we could not longer afford the rising of custom rent.

Because of the distance, I can't participate in youth programs the same way I used to.

And it's been harder to stay connected to my community.

For you people like me, housing is more than just a place to live.

It's about stability, community, and access to new opportunities.

When families are pushed out, we lose more than just our homes.

We lose connections that help us grow and succeed.

Therefore, I'm asking you to support more funding for emergency rental assistance.

So families like mine don't have to leave what they know as home.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for your time today, Lewis.

Next we have Mary Beth Plaskus, Heidi Aguilar, Anna Santos.

My name is Mary Beth Plaskis, and I serve as the Chief Deputy of the Detention Center Bureau at the Sheriff's Office.

We've stretched resources, improved efficiencies, and maintain high standards because public safety demands it.

But while expectations grow, our resources and compensation are not keeping pace.

We are losing qualified applicants to neighboring jurisdictions with higher salaries, and we are falling behind the pay of our public safety partners in this city, despite working alongside them every day.

We welcome it.

We operate with transparency, professionalism, and integrity because public trust is not optional.

It is earned.

That diversity strengthens us.

It allows us to connect, de-escalate to problem solve, and to serve in a way that is both effective, effective and equitable.

But diversity, professionalism, and commitment alone cannot fill gaps created by limited resources.

When budget cuts are reduced or remain flat in the face of rising demand, the impact will be real.

The proposed cuts will impact us and those in our custody.

We are not asking for special treatment.

We are asking for what's fair.

But continuing to do more with less is not a long-term strategy.

It's a short-term solution, and it will eventually fail.

It's far from steady progress.

We are parents, humans, and caregivers, just like you.

Thank you for your time today.

Our next speakers are Heidi Aguilar and Asantos Lemuel Houston.

Good morning, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and members of council.

My name is Haiti, and I am a 10th grade student at Alexandria City High School.

I live in Woodmont Park apartments with my family.

And I'm also a member of Alexandria United teens of tenants and workers united.

My mom is a veterinarian assistant, and my dad works at a hotel as a cook.

They both work very hard, but even with all their efforts, it is still a struggle to afford rent.

And Alexandria, because of this, I don't get to see my parents as much as I would like to.

They're always working, trying to make enough money so we can stay on our home.

Most days it's just my little brother and me.

My mom works two jobs just to keep up after her first job.

She comes home, cooks for us, and then leaves again for a second job.

She barely gets any rest.

My dad is the same, working long hours, doing everything he can for our family.

Watching this is hard.

As a student, I'm trying to focus on school in my future, but it's not easy when I see how much my parents are sacrificing just so we can afford rent.

Housing is just not about having a place to live.

It affects our families, our health, and our ability to succeed.

Families like mine should not have to choose between spending time together and being able to afford a home.

Thank you for listening.

Thank you so much for your time today.

And next, Madam Mayor.

Councilman Aguirre.

I Heidi, first of all, thank you for your comments.

I don't have a question for you, so you're okay.

I just wanted to make a quick comment.

Um, I think it's it's pertinent.

Um, you know, this last speaker that just spoke that um she's losing time with her family as well.

And I understand the sacrifices that our our sheriff's department is making, our police officers are making, our fire department, uh firefighters are making.

Um, but there are other folks within our community that are making sacrifices as well that don't have time with their families, and and this is another right.

As a council, we are weighing things holistically.

We are looking at everything.

Again, we asked all of our departments to take a cut.

So they're trying to do more with less as well.

Um, one of the things that I always make a comment about to people is we're still operating with staffing as a city as a whole at basically like 2010 levels.

That's not fair to anybody in the city.

We have 20 to 30,000 more residents in this city, and we're still operating at staffing levels around 2010, and it's not fair to anyone.

Thank you, Councilman Aguirre.

Our next speakers are Anna Santos, Lemuel Houston, and Carlos Canas.

And I don't think there are any more seats in here.

So if you're if you're not able to find a place to sit, I'll just ask that you please go to the overflow room and told time.

My number is Anna Santos, I became the high school.

My family is much affectada for the alto cost of the rent.

Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Mayor and members of the city council.

My name is Anna, and I have live in Alexandria for 24 years.

I'm a mother of a high school student.

My family is one of many being affected by the high cost of rent.

Even though my husband works extra hours, the rent is too high for us to afford an apartment where we can live with dignity.

Because of this, we have had to live in overcrowded conditions.

Today, we ask you to support adding more funding to for the city's current rental assistance program to help working families remain in this city and allocate these funds to the program for the next five years.

We have heard directly from our community and know what is happening.

This is the moment to act and to show that commitment through your actions.

You were elected to lead and to build a better Alexandria.

This is not the time to ignore or leave behind the working class community.

I ask you to make a courageous decision and ensure that families like mine can continue to call Alexandria our home.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speakers are Anna Sant.

Anna Sant.

No, I'm sorry.

Um Lemuel Houston, Carlos Cannas, Valeria Pineta.

Good morning, Madam Mayor.

Good morning, City Council members.

I'm Captain Houston.

I'm a security division commander within the Sheriff's Office at the detention center.

I stand here in support of my sheriff, my command colleagues, my staff behind me, and the city.

Allow incarcerated persons adequate time out of their cells, and grant them access to programs or services afforded them by policy and law.

These core functions are objectives and only met with adequate staffing and funding.

For several years, the Sheriff's Office has attempted to provide these services in a detention center with an inadequate budget.

We at the detention center are currently operating with minimal staffing as is to maintain basic operations.

A proposal that will reduce or decrease our budget will invariably decrease our staffing.

Render the office incapable of providing services we're required to provide.

This would result in increasing restrictions amongst the in-made population, less time out of their sales, decreased services and reductions, and our ability to ensure a safe and secure environment.

Not for us.

It is not a voluntary function.

It is built into our policies or procedure and our oath.

I thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time.

If this council is not looking to do anything around those 13 positions, this 200,000 does not have to do with staffing.

Thank you, Councilman Gary.

Uh next we have Carlos Canas, Valeria Pineda, and Oliver Moreno.

Good morning, mayor, vice mayor, and members of council.

My name is Carlos Cañas, and I serve as a deputy sheriff here as in the city, as you know.

I'm also the president of the Axanian Sheriff's Association.

I'm here today to address a serious concern.

The idea of taking money away from our budget for doing exactly what we are sworn to do, that is to follow and enforce the law.

I also stand before you as a first generation immigrant.

My parents came from this country, came to this country from El Salvador in Venezuela in search for opportunity and a better life.

I chose to serve this community by upholding the law and protecting the public.

Values that were instilled in me through their sacrifice.

Taking money away from our budget for upholding the law is not just misguided, it is wrong.

It sends a message that enforcing the law is optional, that professionalism and accountability are punishable, and that those who serve with integrity can be disregarded.

We are deputy sheriffs.

We operate within the law, follow policy, and carry out our duties with the same commitment to the public safety as any other first responding agency in this city.

Yet despite that, we are often underfunded, overlooked, and excluded from important conversations regarding funding and resource allocation.

At the same time, we are the most diverse law enforcement agency in the city.

We reflect the community we serve, bringing perspectives that strengthen our trust and improve outcomes.

That diversity should be recognized as an asset, not overlooked.

Public safety depends on consistency, fairness, and unity across all agencies.

Undermining one agency for doing this, for doing this job weakens the entire system.

I urge this council to reject any effort to take money away from our budget for simply enforcing the law and instead stand in support of those committed to protecting and serving this community with integrity.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time today.

Next we have Ballerie Kneida, Oliver Moreno, Texas McGurney.

Madam Mayor.

Councilman Gary.

So I just wanted to comment.

Yes, I agree with you, uh, Deputy Cagnes.

Uh, you are underfunded.

And that's why the city provides 57% of the budget to the sheriff's office.

Because the state isn't providing enough money, right?

We go back and forth on that all we want, but that's a reality.

57% is coming from the city.

Um, if we give more, we would try to give more.

And I do believe that your diversity is an asset.

Um, I see it whenever I'm out, and you guys are in the community.

It's it's very evident.

So when it comes to cuts, again, uh, we we heard the numbers, APD took 2.8%, the fire department took 1%, DEC took 0.9.

Um, and this is aligning closer to 1% for the sheriff's office.

Um, Councilman Al Nubi.

Also add that, you know, someone who co-sponsored this ad the lead.

One of the fundamental questions that we're looking at here is should we continue to operate a jail that is at half capacity but staffed at full capacity?

And what can we do to mitigate that?

What can we do to have a more efficient jail?

Other jurisdictions also are running jails at half capacity.

What can we do?

So this is coming from a place of problem solving.

What can we do to run again?

Money's tight.

We understand.

So that's an that's an attempt to find money and to be more efficient of how we are spending our money.

Also, the federal contract brings less than half the money, brings 7.5%.

The jail operation is about 18%, if my numbers are right, but half the inmates are federal inmates.

So half the jail is federal inmates, but the federal government is not chip is not putting in half the money.

They're putting in much less than that.

Again, that's a fundamental question we need to look at.

And we discussed that in the work session that we had with the sheriff um during the budget conversation.

So these are the questions we're trying to look at, because we need to be efficient of how we use our money.

We need to optimize the operation of our jail as much as we can.

So these are the answers I am seeking from this sponsoring this at least, and this is the landscape in our city and in the jurisdictions around us.

Um councilman Chapman.

And I don't want to take away from the conversation, but I do as folks continuously talk about underfunding.

And my colleagues have seen me and heard me say this as it relates to schools.

I really need folks that are understanding the relationship between local funding and state funding to have the same energy for the state that you do for the uh us as in the locality.

I've said that to the school system as well.

We need if we're talking about future funding, and I'm not talking about next year.

I'm talking about five, ten, fifteen, twenty years down the road.

We're going down the same path that is going to drive dry up your department if we do not put energy into getting the state.

And I say this because you just spoke in your part of the association, and you're the head of the association.

Please work with your colleagues around uh Northern Virginia to help bring uh uh systematic focused effort on talking to the state as the the sheriff has talked about.

It is going to take a lot of effort.

It is going to take a lot of doors shut in our face.

We're seeing that on the school side, but they need to continue, and you need to continue pushing the state.

The state has to step up its level of funding for Northern Virginia, or else all of the sheriff's departments in Northern Virginia are going to struggle.

All of the school systems, all of the health departments, everything that's aligned with the state that is choosing to underfund Northern Virginia are going to fall apart in the next five to 10 years.

That is not, I'm not trying to make hyperbole.

I'm trying to be honest with everyone here about the far future of Northern Virginia and its localities.

We cannot sustain um the levels of funding that are going to be needed just on straight uh pay raises alone in the next 10 years.

That's not possible without additional state funding at that level.

And so again, this is not just for this the sheriff's department, but I do want to reiterate that because that's the conversation we're having.

That needs the that conversation needs to happen.

The energy, the the ability to work together to drive the state to a better solution needs to happen.

Uh, and so I will continuously beat that drum.

This is not the first time you've heard me say that, it won't be the last.

Um, but I know that if we're talking the next 10 years, next 20, uh, we need to get there with the state.

Great.

Ms.

Pineda.

Um, good morning, mayor, vice mayor, and members of council.

My name is Valeria Pinada, and I am a community organizer with Tenants and Workers United.

I work directly with working class families across the city of Alexandria, even though I have only been in the organization for almost a year.

I have witnessed how families are living as I go door knocking in the community.

When I have conversations with families, they tell me they've been struggling for years and that this housing crisis is not new.

As TWU, we are here to remind you that many of you, housing and affordability were on your platforms as you were running to be on council.

Now it is a time to act on it.

There is a serious shortage of affordable housing rents keep rising while the same families are forced to choose between rent, food, medicine, or child care.

While we appreciate an added consideration to allocate 450,000 into the Department of Community and Human Services Emergency Rental Assistance Program, this should have already been in the part of the process budget, but we are here once again seeking the crumbs.

We hope the rest of council members can support this added consideration.

This allocation is not enough.

There it and there is an opportunity to increase it, then so be it.

We also need this funding to be allocated into the program for the next five years.

We need all the funding necessary to keep the people in their homes.

The city-owned data shows urgency in increasing this fund.

Over half 54, 68% of residents have received this rental and utility assistance, especially those living in the 22305, 22311, and 22314 CIP codes.

As an organization, we are not here to represent our immigrant and Latinx community.

We are here to represent all black brown working class families of color because we recognize this issue is big.

Our families also know that you are considering red investing the shurest funding.

We remind you once again to uphold the values that you stand on and to do the right thing in order to protect our most vulnerable population in these times.

The shares voluntarily collaboration with ICE directly affects our constituents, creating fear, trauma, and family separation.

Unfortunately, you were not see many in impacted families speaking publicly because of the fear of retaliation and intimidation from the from those who support the shares voluntarily collaboration.

We hope that for this budget, 2027 budget, you use this critical tool and prioritize the right issue because without proper action, those families will be forced to leave the city.

We know everything is important, but remind yourself what will truly protect and support your residents.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time today.

Next speakers are Oliver Marino, Texas McCurney.

I'm sorry, not Texas, I'm sorry, Tess McCurney and Max Carpenter.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Um my name is Oliver.

I'm with ISIL of Alexandria, and I live here in the city.

Um for months, the people of Alexandria have been calling for a city council to hold Sheriff Casey accountable for his voluntary collaboration with ICE.

We all know the facts.

Sheriff Casey is transferring our immigrant neighbors to ICE custody solely on ICE administrative warrants, not judicial warrants.

He's doing this by choice.

He's not required by law to do this.

No matter what he says.

Sheriffs in Virginia are doing this.

They are requiring judicial warrants for ICE transfers.

Sheriffs across the country are doing this.

This is the choice that Sheriff Casey is doing.

Last year he transferred 54 Alexandria to ICE.

Since been he's since he's been in office, he's been he's transferred 142 people.

We don't know the numbers for this year, but if the trends continue, this will increase.

Legislation recently passed by Virginia, uh, the by the Virginia General Assembly has failed to address this jail transfers.

It's clear that it's up to localities like Alexandria to step up and limit this collaboration.

And this is why we're here.

Our tax dollars should not be going to fund ICE collaboration or a sheriff's department that has ignored the council statement to stop this practice.

Thank you, Councilman Aguirre, Councilman Al Nubi, and Vice Mayor Bagley for introducing a delete for an efficient efficiency study for the sheriff's office and acknowledging that, and I quote from the delete the city is spending more to operate its jail than necessary.

Well, it's not the delete number that we had hoped for.

We know it's an important step to bring transparency and accountability.

Our tax dollars again should not go to fund programs that turn our community members to ice where they face danger and oftentimes life-threaten um situations.

We should be funding affordable housing.

We hope that the other council members also add their name to this uh delete.

And lastly, I just want to acknowledge the more than a hundred community members who are not here in this room, but they're in the overflow room.

When they came into this uh room, they were met with a room full of um sheriff deputies.

They wanted to sit, and as you can see, they were not able to do so, but they're here and they're supporting this delete.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time today.

Our next speaker is Tess McCurk McGurney, Max Carpenter, Lawan Harding.

Barely good morning, Mayor Gaskins, Vice Mayor Bagley, members of the city council.

My name is Tess McEnry.

I'm an Alexandria resident, and I'm here on behalf of the Ice Out of Alexandria coalition.

As you all know, I was here in March, and I told you that this city budget was funding Sheriff Casey's voluntary collaboration with ICE through non-judicial administrative warrants.

So I'm back again today to urge all of you to vote yes on the 200,000 budget reduction to the sheriff's budget of 32 million dollars.

I am not here today for myself, but for my neighbors.

As Oliver said, I'm here for our many immigrant neighbors, over a hundred of them in the overflow room who are here today who believe the same on voting yes on this reduction.

We're all humans here.

We're all entitled, every person in this room, regardless of affiliation to show up and speak their mind.

I did want to point out that there are dozens and dozens of sheriff deputies in their uniforms with their arms on them.

Where public residents are coming, and as a former civil servant myself, I want us to all just think about appearances of and where and how you're showing up to deliver comment or deliver support.

Today I'm asking you to act on what you've already proposed.

I know that 200,000 is not the answer.

It's not a lot of money.

It's certainly not a fear-mongering amount that affects the operations of the jail or the staffing of the jail, as you have said repeatedly, and this is in fact, as you have noted, a lower budget cut than several other agencies in the city.

So a vote for this sends a message to Sheriff Casey and also to the immigrant families in this city and filling up the overflow room that Alexandria City Council means what it says.

So vote yes, reduce the sheriff's funding by 200,000 for a study of the jail, and know that our advocacy won't end after budget season.

We will keep showing up.

We will keep speaking out, and we won't be intimidated.

We will continue to show that Alexandria wants ice out of Alexandria.

Thank you for your time and for your service to this city.

Thank you for your comments today.

Our next speakers are Max Carpenter, La Juan Harding, Meredith Condren.

The city budget is a mighty tool in the hands of the council.

It is the apportionment of funds among the priorities of the city council and the people that elected them.

So the city council is a very important decision in front of them.

They can either accept or reject the proposed $200,000 cut to the sheriff's budget.

And by extension, they can either accept or reject the demands of the people of Alexandria, and they can accept or reject democracy.

We have many supporters here today, many of whom, as you've already heard, are in the overflow room, and many of whom are with Tenants and Workers United.

We all want a community for everyone.

In this regard, we should all remember the heroic legacies of great Alexandria civil rights leaders such as Samuel Tucker and Charles Houston, who work tirelessly to create in Alexandria for everyone.

Allowing our tax money to fund a department that continues to voluntarily collaborate with ICE is smashing the legacies of the of those great leaders and desecrating their gains.

Budgets are moral documents, but we can't treat morals as abstract things.

They are based on our real actions and real interests.

I would rightfully be called a hypocrite if I said that, for example, I hate bullies and then do nothing to stop someone from being picked on right next to me.

In that situation, I am clearly not actually opposed to bullies.

And similarly, it would be ridiculous of you to say that you value our immigrant neighbors while funding the sheriff's office, who is collaborating with ICE and actively harming our valued community members.

This is literally about putting your money where your mouth is.

An estimated 70% of ICERS nationwide result from a detainer and transfer from another law enforcement agency.

So think of the jail to deportation pipeline around the country as a literal chain.

The sheriff represents a link in this chain of oppression.

As with any chain, if you break one link, the entire thing is weakened.

Therefore, ending the sheriff's collaboration with ICE not only significantly weakens the jail to deportation pipeline here, but also across the country.

In other words, an action here causes a reaction everywhere.

If ICE is able to continue its campaign of terror here, it is empowered to do the same elsewhere.

Alexandria welcomes our immigrant neighbors on this matter.

There must be no debate.

Their struggles are our struggles, and so an attack against one is an attack against all.

Despite what seems to be most of the sheriff's office showing up here off the clock, armed and in uniform, the popular power from which the city council draws from so that they are able to govern does not emanate from the jails.

It does not emanate from the sheriff's office, and is does and it does not emanate from terror.

It emanates from the people and the people alone, of whom immigrants make up a significant number in Alexandria.

All that, all that is why the only correct choice of action is not to yield to ICE thugs and their collaborators, but to cut this $200,000 from the sheriff's budget, sheriff's budget, as it is important and necessary, as it is an important and necessary step forward in the right direction toward accountability and getting ICE out of Alexandria.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time today.

Next speakers are La Juin Harding, Meredith Condren, Madison Coyne.

Good afternoon.

My name is La Janay Harding, and I have served with the Alexandria Sheriff's Office for 18 years.

I'm currently a captain at the detention center, and throughout my career, I've worked in the jail as a deputy and a sergeant responsible for maintaining the safety of staff and inmates, many of whom are family members of Alexandria residents.

I've also worked in the courthouse, protecting judges, jurors, attorneys, and the public.

I've served protective orders, civil capiases, and jury notices, ensuring that residents are safe and properly informed of their court dates.

The community expects their cases to be heard in a secure environment, and the sheriff's office deputies are the ones who provide that safety.

I've personally conducted safety checks at judges' homes after threats to their lives and have been assigned to monitor their security.

Despite these responsibilities, our agency continues to operate without sufficient funding, and the proposed budget reduces resources even further.

Last year I was involved in a staffing analysis study that was conducted with the National Institute of Corrections.

They confirm what we already know.

We are understaffed and need additional staff to safely operate the jail.

Limited resources and ongoing cuts make it harder to recruit, retain, and support our staff.

Our inmates participate in programs that help them re-enter the community successfully, including earning certifications like serve safe.

These programs reduce recidivism and strengthen our community, but they cannot continue if staffing and funding decline.

Cuts lead to increased lockdowns, which harm inmate mental health and create a less safe environment for everyone.

We are one of the most diverse law enforcement agencies in the city, reflecting the community which we serve.

Reduce uh reducing funding harms not just our staff, but the residents of Alexandria as a whole.

Thank you for your time today.

Next, we have Meredith Condren, Madison Coyne, Melissa Albert.

Is Meredith online?

I do not see Meredith online.

We're gonna move forward.

We have Madison Coy, uh, Melissa Elbret, James Page.

Good afternoon.

My name is Madison Coyne.

I stand before you today, not just behalf on an agency, but for people, for futures still being written.

We do not come to work simply to wear a badge.

We prevent, we rebuild, we step in when others step back.

Every day, we work to break cycles, not with talk, but with action.

A 2023 jail study confirmed what we already know.

This work matters, but it requires the staff to do it.

Since that time, we have averaged housing 287 inmates.

But what defines us is what we've done with that time.

And here is what will be impacted.

159 individuals participated in GED.

Thank you, Ms.

Sophonia.

54%.

234.

I'm sorry, 156 participated in English as a second language, 54%.

234 completed OSHA certifications, that's 82%.

253 became certified flaggers.

That's 88%.

45 completed serve safe training, which is 16%.

Since July 2024, 148 individuals, which is 52%, have gone through re-entry, returning to society with structure, skills, and hope.

This is rehabilitation.

This is prevention.

We take people written off by the system and give them a real chance through education, job skills, accountability, and hope.

We reduce crime at its source.

That is impact, and that is what it's at risk.

You are not just voting on finances.

You are voting on people.

You are deciding whether this work continues or is stripped away.

Behind this agency are people who sacrifice their time that they will never get back.

Holidays, birthdays, times with their families, who also carry the weight of this community long after their shifts end, and who choose service every single day, no matter the cost.

And today we are asking for you to choose it too.

We are not asking for more.

We are asking you not to take away.

Because when you cut prevention and rehabilitation, you don't save, you create gaps, and those gaps will cost more in crime, in broken systems, and in lost lives.

This is a defining moment.

Stand with us, please.

Stand for the people every day to that try to do better.

Because community is not just a word, it is a responsibility.

And right now, this responsibility is yours.

Thank you and thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time today.

Madam Mayor.

Uh, Councilman Aguirre, one announcement first.

I am going to ask that speakers not line up.

So we have Melissa Elbert first, and then we have Mr.

Page, but just so I can maintain compliance with our fire safety.

Uh, Councilman Gary.

I see just to say again, we we are in agreement um with staffing and being underfunded.

Um, with the services being provided.

I agree.

I believe our jail provides some of the best services in the entire commonwealth.

You could probably compare that to some of the other jails in the country in terms of um what the deputy was just mentioning, serve safe, GED program, ESL.

Um, and again, this 200,000.

It's it's one budget.

So then it is up to the sheriff and his team to decide where exactly they're gonna take those cuts from.

Um, and that will be their decision.

Thank you, Councilman Akeary.

Um, Miss Elbert.

Hi.

The ACLU did an extensive report on conditions at Fort Bliss, the largest ICE detention facility in the country.

This is a tent camp that's built on a former Japanese interment camp.

The report details multiple deaths, a homicide, tuberculosis, and measles outbreaks, a severe abuse of detainees by guards.

It talks about chronic food shortages and food that is spoiled or partially frozen, causing widespread vomiting, diarrhea, and rapid weight loss.

Detainees are deprived of basic hygiene and languish in tents and bathrooms flooded with foul water mixed with urine and feces, creating squalid and unsafe living conditions.

The report describes violent assaults by officers, including sexual abuse.

They report officers crushing their testicles during beatings, a tactic used while people are already restrained.

They report being slammed and stomped on or beaten.

The report concludes that these are not isolated incidents, but reflect a pattern of brutality.

Amnesty International released a new report documenting cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment at two other immigration descent detention centers.

People reported torture, including being put in two by two-foot cages, sometimes for hours at a time, exposed to the elements with hardly any water.

Sheriff Casey chooses to hand people over to these concentration camps.

Sheriff Casey would never tolerate this in an Alexandria jail, or would you?

Sheriff Casey implies that handing people over to ICE, the agency that neglects tortures and kills people, somehow keeps us safe.

History tells us the opposite.

I am the descendant of victims of the Holocaust and daughter of parents who escaped brutal state violence.

I know collaboration with fascism when I see it.

The Alexandria community does not want a single penny going towards an office that sentences anyone to this barbarity.

Human rights are universal and they belong to everyone, whether they're in a jail or outside of jail.

I want to invite you to reflect on the 60,000 people in ICE detention who must endure the horrors I've just described.

They pay the shameful price for our collective failure as a society to stop this madness.

Alexandria will not tolerate Sheriff Casey's collaboration with human rights violations, whether intentional or the result of some misunderstanding.

We will not stop.

We will not rest.

What will you do, City Council?

Thank you for your time today.

Our next speakers are James Page, Alyssa Rumsey, Dane Lordson.

Again, please don't line up.

Thank you.

Good morning, Mary Gas and City Council members.

Jim.

My name is Jim Page.

I'm a longtime citizen here in Alexandria.

I I had prepared marks.

I'm not going to give them.

I just want to share something with the council in the city.

I'm an advocate for community safety, education, mental health, and good citizenship.

I've heard comments this morning that resonate with me, coming from my friend Abdul.

We need to have a good conversation about what we're doing.

And I think the better the city understands how the council works and what the council can do makes the conversation in the community better.

For example, looking at the budget, how it works, who pays for what makes it easy to understand what we can afford.

So I think our emphasis should be on that road to Richmond.

How do we get down to Richmond and have the state come and play?

The trip across the 14th Street Bridge, having the federal government pay their full share.

So let's take collectively our talents, our skills, and our passion, and have those folks who control the big budget give us the amount of funds that we need.

We have too much talent in this room to be at each other.

I'd rather take that time and spend it with Sarah or with Jacenta or with the sheriff saying, let's make our budget work for us.

So when we have these conversations, it's easy to beat each other up, but I'd really like to spend some quality time as a convener convening, looking at what we really need.

San Diego, California has a good jail system.

So does Greensboro, North Carolina.

So does Arlington, Virginia.

So when we look at Alexandria, let's not look at it as an isolated city.

People who live in Springfield who work here.

So my plea to the count to the council and to the city is that let's take advantage of this window of opportunity, where we have a great city council, a great city manager, and solid citizens with a passion for doing well, even when we have councilmen who come in late at times.

So my my ple my plea is to convene and figure out how we get to Richmond and make our budget work across the state.

Thank you.

Thank you, Colonel Page.

I didn't hear a great mayor in that.

No, I'm just saying.

I'll give you another 10 minutes.

I'll take 30, 30 seconds.

Uh one thing I would like to offer, I got 10 seconds left.

There's a there's a lady and in our live, her name is Dr.

Gashahn Mance.

She works at Howard University.

She runs the mental health department at Howard University.

But the last two years, she and the sheriff and the police department and the fire department have been doing mental health services in our community for free.

For free, because of the innovation from Chief Smedley, Sean Casey, and police chief Don Hayes in the past.

So there are opportunities for private sectors to come in and help us with our budget with GED and those kind of things.

So let's not discount the private sector helping us with our budget.

Thank you.

Um Councilman Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I just want to provide clarification that we do have a large monitor in the back, and I was watching your full testimony.

But as I told staff, as I told staff back there, I did not want uh a stern talking to after this meeting if I had not been here uh in person to hear the rest of your comments.

Well, Councilman Gear was covering for you.

All right.

Okay, our next speakers, Alyssa Rumsey, Dane Lordson, Katherine Schulman.

Starting my timer now, my three minutes.

Um, thank you so much for allowing us the opportunity to speak today.

Uh, my name is Alyssa Rumse, and I'm here uh to talk about docket number 11, and I'm opposed uh to funding this new study.

Uh who am I?

Why am I here?

Uh that's a quote by Ross Pros, former running mate, in case anyone recognizes that statement, probably not dating myself.

Um again, my name's Alyssa Rumsey.

Can you hear me?

Okay, good.

All right.

You didn't miss anything.

Uh those first few seconds.

Um, I recently retired from the US Department of Justice in October of 2025.

I joined the department in 1997.

So spent almost 30 years at the Justice Department working on detention and corrections issues.

So I have a lot of experience in jail uh operations, jail safety.

Essentially, my job was to travel across the United States and monitor jails for conditions of confinement, making sure they were constitutional.

Uh so I'm here today as a private citizen, but I come with that background.

Um my computer is gonna work for me here.

I essentially grew up in jail too.

My mother was a jail uh worker.

She ran a psychiatric hospital in the Sacramento County jail.

So going to mom's office meant going to a jail.

I also have a family member that was incarcerated.

Um so I come with that perspective too, somebody who knows how important it is to keep jails safe and secure for the people that reside within them.

Um specifically as it relates to the Alexandria jail.

I was fortunate to be a member of the community academy.

I'm a 2024 graduate.

It's a great program.

I highly recommend to anybody uh who wants to know about know more about how jails function and actually go within the jail and see for yourself what is happening on a regular basis.

I cannot say more great things about Sheriff Casey, and again, I say that as someone who's been in many jails.

I've been in many unsafe jails.

He runs a tight ship.

He is an incredibly smart person who has a heart and has compassion, not just for his staff, who I think you see that by the fact that they're all showing up here today, uh, but he has a heart for the people that are actually in custody, trying to do the best that they can with very little funding.

Why am I opposed to this study?

The study has already been done.

Uh, when I first heard that there was a study proposed, I thought, well, that's interesting because there's already been a study and a study done pretty recently in 2025, a study done by my former colleagues at the U.S.

Department of Justice.

So when you hear NIC, that's not some uh sort of uh ad hoc institution or nonprofit, nonprofits are great, but it is part of the U.S.

Department of Justice and it's a part run by career staff with decades of experience in in custody issues.

So that study is a good one.

I urge you to read it.

Uh, like you, mayor, I am a paper person.

I brought lots of paper.

I have the executive summary here.

Oops, there's my timer.

Um, because I, you know, I have read it, and I think it's a great study and will be of great value to this conversation.

Thank you.

Um, I do believe we have received copies of the study, but if you want to give just a summary to um our officer over here, you can pass it to the clerk, and copies can be circulated.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time today.

We now have Dane Lordson, Katherine Schulman, and Dan Moschenberg.

Hi, I'm Dane Larredson.

I'm going to keep this brief.

I'm here on with Ice Out of Alexandria.

Sheriff Casey is voluntarily collaborating with ICE.

He is shipping dozens of people to an agency that is torturing and killing at least one inmate per week for the last year.

And we are complicit in that by allowing and transferring people to be tortured, killed in ICE custody, and we should stop.

I support the 200,000 study, and I support cutting Sheriff Casey's budget.

This is a moral decision.

He doesn't need to cooperate.

And he undermines our community trust by continuing to ignore and spite the community and transfer people into ICE custody where they are facing human rights violations.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time today.

Our next speakers are Catherine Shulman, Dan Moschenberg, Victor Ignacio.

Hey, good afternoon.

I commend the decision to delete 200,000 from the sheriff budget.

Because in my community, we have a word for people who collaborated just a little tiny bit with the Nazi Gestapo force who just were like, we're only following the law.

That word is Nazi.

I don't see a distinction between anyone who fully collaborates or just collaborates a little bit because they feel compelled to.

Morality is morality no matter what the law is.

And if this is hurting our immigrant community, I've lived in the city my entire life.

The immigrant community has incalculably enrichment with the food, the exposure to different languages and culture knowledge, and any collaboration is a validation of ICE in our city, and any collaboration of ICE is intimidating.

That beautiful immigrant community.

We're losing so much economic activity because people are afraid to leave their houses.

People are afraid to go to restaurants in Chiharagua.

Now they losing all this profit.

Restaurants probably gonna go down.

Like all of it is just any kind of validation of ice, anything legitimizing that organization makes it more of a threat to our community, my community.

And they're right, everyone's right to be scared of them.

I've seen them try to hit people with their cars in this city.

Two people I know, uh, they kidnap people from bus stops, they snatched those roofers up a few months ago.

Like who's next?

And then nobody knows what's going to happen to them.

Will they be disappeared?

Will they end up in a torture facility?

Like, who knows?

We can't work with these people at all.

So, yeah, I commend taking a little bit of a tiny sliver of the budget to put a little bit of pressure on them for to stop this voluntary collaboration.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time today.

Our next speakers are Dan Moschenberg, Victor Ignacio, and Frederick Apathonim.

This is the hardest part of the job.

So I'm doing my best.

Or something.

Good afternoon.

My name is Daniel Moschenberg, and I'm here with Ice Out of Alexandria.

In 1983, we moved to Alexandria and have stayed here ever since.

I am here before you today to speak in support of the delete to Sheriff Casey's budget.

I support this particular delete for two main reasons.

First, though not in order, any step that brings greater clarity to the sheriff's budget to any public agency's budget is welcome.

Second, and specific to Sheriff Casey's budget, along with many other residents of Alexandria, I've watched with alarm as Sheriff Casey has followed a policy of voluntarily transferring people to ICE.

In 2025, 54 people were transferred from the Alexandria jail to ICE, all without a judicial warrant.

Since taking office in 2022, Sheriff Casey has transferred 142 people.

Although this voluntary collaboration could be terminated at any time, Sheriff Casey has refused, even after Mayor Gaskins and City Council spoke out against the policy.

Alexandria has prided itself on being a welcoming community.

As the quote says, the stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens.

You shall love them as yourself, for you too were strangers once.

Alexandria welcomes and supports our immigrant neighbors, but Sheriff Casey continues to voluntarily collaborate with ICE.

The proposed delete is a tool and a first step to hold him accountable.

This for me is a personal issue.

As I said, in 1983, my wife Sammy, our son Simon, and I moved to Alexandria.

Decades earlier, my parents and I moved to the United States.

We came as displaced persons, survivors of the Holocaust.

As immigrants, we have been welcomed and have continued to contribute to the prosperity and well-being of the nation and of our local community.

As you have heard before, and as you already know, a budget is a moral document.

Public policy is a moral document as well.

Real substantive response to immoral action gives all of us a ray of hope in these troubled times.

I support the delete, and I hope it's but a first step.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you for your time today.

Our next speaker, it's Victor Ignacio, followed by Frederick and then Morgan Waite.

Good afternoon, uh Mayor Gaskin and members of the council.

My name is Victor Ignacio.

I've been with the city for 35 years.

Um last seven with the sheriff's office.

Uh I'm an immigrant.

I wasn't born in this country.

I came here at the age of 15.

Um, I have written a statement, but pretty much as I listened to my colleague, every every time when they spoke, I said, I was gonna say that, but I'm so I'm not gonna repeat that.

Um since uh I started with the uh Alexandria Police Department, now with the sheriff's office, I worked hard to build relationship with my community, the immigrant community.

Uh we are trusted.

They they're shown by the fact that they invite us to several events and they want us there, they feel safe when they're around us.

Earlier in 2025, we attended many meetings, including the sheriff, myself, and all the members of our staff.

Uh to speak to some of our community members that were rightfully so, scared they didn't know what the year was coming, uh was bringing.

And we went out of our way to ensure them that we were not enforcing immigration laws.

We don't do that.

The police department us.

We also make sure that they were familiar with our uniform to make sure that hey, any anytime you see one of the police us, you don't have to worry because we're we're not enforcing those laws.

We even passed out cards telling them what their rights were.

So they trust us.

Um, how do they trust us?

As a matter of fact, yes, yeah, yesterday, one of our local groups was in the need of a grill for a cookout today.

They called me.

And up until five in the morning this morning, I was working with some of our staff trying to get them a girl, which we did, so they can use today.

Okay.

Our uh, like I said, I don't want to take a whole lot of your time, but the fact is that when you talked about 1%, 1% is a lot.

And you you compare it to the uh police budget, which is a lot bigger than the sheriff's office.

But what you also have to realize is that 2.7, let me tell you, and I being a former police officer, they deserve whatever they get on a lot more.

But the fact is that the police department just got a 17.2% starting salary, which means their salary is going up to 75,000, it's gonna make it easier for them to hire and retain our office still in the low 60s, high 50s, which is one of the reasons why we're having a hard time filling those 13 positions.

And when you speak about not staffing, which I agree, it's not about staffing, it's not about pay.

The 200,000 has to come from somewhere, and it's gonna fit affect the people that we're there to take care of, most likely the immigrant, um not the immigrant, the inmates that we take care of.

And having being the commander of the uh civil process unit, we do all the transports.

And I can tell you, you should take the time.

You can finish your sentence.

Yeah, you should take the time to speak to some of those in me with transport that have been another facility, and they will tell you that Alexandria treats them with respect.

And they are glad to be there.

So if every once in a while, we have images that are acting up as we're bringing them over, and this inmates that have been in our facility coming down.

So you're coming to Alexandria, they're gonna treat you right.

And that's what we do.

Thank you for I see a comment.

Vice Mayor Bagley.

No, I uh I just I wanted to take uh the opportunity.

I think while we are having such a lengthy discussion about the Sheriff's Department today, and thank you, Deputy Ignacio, for your long service and in the community.

Um, you encouraged me in mile 12 at the Alexandria Half Marathon last year to finish.

So I remember seeing your face.

But I wanted to um just mention we do have a sheriff's academy as well.

I know Miss Rumsey mentioned the community, just the General City Academy.

But um, while the the community is a part of you know, having this discussion, I would encourage people to um to consider doing the sheriff's academy and and actually you know seeing the work that is done and the way that it's performed in the community.

Is there one a year fair?

There's two a year.

Do we have one coming up on the fall?

Yeah.

Okay.

So just uh Google Alexandria Sheriff Academy, and you'll probably you know see the information you need.

Okay.

We don't take comments from the crowd, but thank you for the suggestion.

Moving forward, we um have Frederick, and I'm not gonna say his last name again because I heard giggles, so that must means I got it pretty wrong.

Uh Morgan Waite and Emma Wallace.

Good afternoon, everybody.

I'm Frederick and Ponsum.

And I'm a lieutenant at the Alexandrian Sheriff's Office.

Um, been there close to 11 years now.

And to be candid, as Vic stated, I'm sitting back there and I'm going through my phone looking at my speech and everything I wanted to say.

My friends and my bosses have already stated it.

So I'm just gonna um I live a little bit here, so please bear with me.

So I've heard different things about 2% and 1%.

But if we're being candid here, someone's 2% is different from another person's 1%.

If I'm already operating at my bare minimum, you take 1% from me.

That hurts for us as a person who has got room and you take 2% from them.

We work very, very hard.

For 11 years, I've come in day in and day out.

I've seen my peers do the same thing day in and day out, work very, very hard to put ourselves in a good position to have a safe environment, respectful environment, and to make sure that everybody from staff, inmates, civilians, volunteers, everybody is safe.

We've done this through shortage of staffing.

Um may intricacies and the complexities of MA supervision has increased.

I heard you ask earlier if the inmate population has decreased, why does it require so many people to still supervise them, to still manage them?

Truthfully, we've never been at full capacity, so your statement was wrong that we were at full capacity with half the MACs.

But the intricacies of MA supervision has gone up over the years.

The way the MAC used to be supervised, and the way it is now is totally different.

Um think about a good 50% is foreign-born.

Um you can go back there and take a look.

I myself are a product of that, uh, from Ghana, West Africa.

Our sheriff is just doing his job.

He's enforcing laws.

We can't be in a position where we're being inconsistent with the things that we are doing as law enforcement agency that debunks the whole purpose of being law enforcement.

Um, I respect this perspective for all of us to exchange our perspective.

I'm sorry, this platform so we could all exchange our perspectives, even the opposition.

But this whole notion that we're being punished or we're being asked for our budget cuts because of immigration related enforcement, that's pure naivety.

Again, our boss is just doing his job, and all we're trying to do is make Alexandra safe for all of us.

We come to work, many of us.

If they'll be honest if you're walking around with back problems, toe problems, foot problems.

Yet we come back daily.

We come back.

We are committed.

We told a line, and we put our best foot forward despite all of the challenges that we go through each and every single day.

That 200,000 cut is going to hurt us.

All we are asking is to leave that alone.

Please give us the resources that we need to continue to supervise the MAC adequately.

Thank you so much for your time today.

We are now gonna hear from Morgan Waite, Emma Wallace, and Sylda Nikkay.

Uh hi, my name is Morgan.

I'm here because I'm strongly in favor of cutting care um Sheriff Casey's funding for his cooperation with ICE.

And no, I don't think the current cut of 200,000 is serious, but I'll get to that.

Immigrants clean my house and take care of my yard.

Immigrants build my roads and drive my US and serve me food and carry my trash.

I have no sympathy for Sheriff Casey, and I cannot fathom how cooperating with lawless and unconstitutional federal agencies could possibly keep me safe.

Casey could choose not to follow administrative warrants, but he doesn't want to, and that is unacceptable.

As for the 200,000 dollar cut itself, which isn't actually going to public services, such as education and social housing.

I'm extremely doubtful Casey's behavior will change.

We're following a fiscal year where Casey had 35.8 million dollars.

200,000 is one 179th of 35.8 million, a little more than half a percent.

What happens if the study concludes Casey's office needs more money?

I'm not a policymaker, and I don't know what's best for the budget, but I know immigrants need support.

And I know social safety nets prevent crime from happening.

There's no need to settle for the new and improved jail system if we decide low-income families are worth it.

Don't give 200,000 back to Casey's jail.

Spend the money on public services people actually need.

There are plenty of alternatives to the jail study.

I've already mentioned education and housing.

In fact, I think a lot of people here have mentioned housing.

Defund Casey, ICE out all power to the people.

Thank you for your time today.

Our next three speakers are Emma Wallace, Sylda Nakai, and Hilary Tomney.

Hello, uh, can folks hear me?

Okay.

Okay, sorry.

Uh okay.

So uh my name is Emma Wallace, and I am a resident of Alexandria, and I'd love to continue to afford to live here into the future.

Um, so I've been volunteering with ISO Alexandria, Grassroots Alexandria, and Tenants and Workers United for the last several months.

Um, new to the community.

I love living here, and um, I love that we have a strong immigrant community uh and they make our community really unique and amazing.

I'm here to voice my support for reducing the sheriff's budget by 200,000 to fund a jail operational efficiency study.

I support this budget cut as a direct criticism of the sheriff's office volunteer voluntarily collaborating with ICE, an organization that has been consistently um violating human rights and terrorizing our communities.

Sheriff's office does not have to cooperate with ICE, and yet they transferred 54 people from the Alexandria jail system to ICE custody in 2025 alone, all without a judicial warrant.

They legally do not have to do this.

Um, neighboring cities do not do this.

Each uh act of collaboration causes immeasurable harm to and impacts families in our communities and it um encourages and emboldens the actions of ICE.

$200,000 um budget reduction is very small, but important step in the community showing our opposition to this collaboration.

Um, this is only a 0.5% decrease, and it's not even um being redirected to other community needs, such as affordable housing, um, rental assistance and education.

If the sheriff's office believes in serving and protecting communities, upholding due process and protecting human rights, I really don't understand the current continued collaboration.

Showing up to these budget hearings and supporting these budget cuts is how we, as community members, can put pressure on the sheriff's office for voluntarily collaborating with ICE.

Um, just because the sheriff's office is treating inmates better than other places around the country, that doesn't mean that you are free from criticism.

Um we can all, this is how we can improve as a community.

Sorry, I'm really nervous.

That's it.

Thank you so much for being with us today.

Uh at this time we have Sylda followed by Hillary, followed by Zara Hussein.

Hi, thank you for this opportunity to speak to you.

Um, my name is Silda Ninka.

I am an economist who consults uh different government agencies on workforce optimization, helping state and local governments find efficiencies and reduce costs where possible.

I've previously held positions as a labor economist for the National Institute of Health, and then as an economist, as a senior economist at the government accountability office, which is the counterpart that audits all other federal agencies to find efficiencies.

I want you to hear my comments from this background that I bring as an expert in these areas, and also as a resident of Alexandria that just wants to see this community thrive.

Um my professional experience, the evidence does not support cutting Alexandria's uh sheriff's office budget.

Doing so would impose real harm on deputies, inmates, and the community.

The sheriff's office costs 296 dollars per inmate per day to operate.

This is less than Fairfax, less in Loudoun, less than Arlington, uh PW, and then Hampton Roads Regional.

Um, this is not um a comparison you'd expect to find if there were, if there was, in fact, wasteful spending or inefficiencies in their operation.

The agency is running lean by every regional measure, and it's already carrying significant vacancies in their workforce.

Detention is one of the hardest environments in law enforcement to staff.

Uh, I've had many experiences over the past fall to talk to uh like detention facilities in South Florida.

That's where my work took me, but this is true throughout the country.

Deputies spend 12 hour shifts inside a locked facility managing the population in crisis, already short staffed on mandatory overtime that they did not ask for, right?

Because the sort it shortage is so severe.

Cutting further makes an already strained workforce less safe.

The people housing the facilities are basically people from our community, somebody's parents, somebody's child, um, our neighbors.

When a jail is understaffed, an Eighth Amendment violation is not just an abstraction.

I it's an inmate that didn't get medical caring time, a person in mental health crisis left alone, or somebody that's assaulted when a deputy is holding four other situations.

Cutting the budget in the name of efficiency while eliminating the GED program, the vocational training, the re-entry services that low-income residents in our community depend on.

Um, is a direct contradiction of what you guys over the last 10 years that I've lived here have stood for.

Um the courts, which the sheriff protects, 48,000 proceedings a year, serve the tenants who fight evictions, crime victims who want protective orders.

How is that?

Thank you so much for your time.

Um councilman Gary and Vice Mayor Bagley.

Give me a question.

I just want to add you a second.

It's not against your cutting.

Let's ask you a question then.

Okay.

And I am going to ask you a question.

So then you'll be able to speak some more.

Sure.

Um, so you brought up other jurisdictions for effects and somewhere down in Tidewater.

Was it Hampton?

Uh Hampton Roads regional.

Do you know the budgets for those jurisdictions?

And not off the top mind.

Do you know the budget restrictions that they have?

Not off the top.

Do you know the issues that we're having here at the city?

I realize, listen, I realize that we this is part of a longer conversation.

So I don't want to give you the impression that like a two-minute speech in front of you guys is gonna actually do and do this.

And I realize that you're making hard decisions in doing so, but you need to also realize that like these things that the deputies are coming in for, they're not abstractions.

This is actually happening.

I understand that, ma'am.

And my thing is you're coming in and saying that you're a professional within this space.

So I want you to understand that your words, hold on.

That your words, I take seriously.

And so when you're bringing certain things up, I'm gonna bring certain things up as well.

Because we need to understand what's the budget of Fairfacks County, where are the budget constraints that they have there?

What are the budget constraints in Hampton Roads?

What are the budget constraints we have here?

Additionally, when we talk about it.

We this $200,000 cut.

It is a decision up to the sheriff and his staff whether or not they want to go after the programs that you were listing, because nobody up here is contesting that those programs aren't valuable.

We all agree that those programs are valuable.

Very much so.

And I previously just said that we have one of the best jails in the state, and if not in the country, with what we're doing.

Is there a question?

No, not anymore.

Okay.

All right.

So I have Vice Mayor Bagley.

I was just gonna ask if you had a copy of your comments.

Yeah, I'm more than happy to provide a copy and thank you for the opportunity to actually do this.

Uh, like I said, I do not believe the the fund should be cut, and I think it would hurt.

Yeah, and we can get some figures down.

So if you could just copy with the clerk or email them to it, that'd be absolutely thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Hilary Tomney, Zara Hussein, and then April Breslau.

Uh good afternoon.

My name is Hillary Tomini.

I am an Alexandria resident, and I'm here on behalf of the Alexandria Arts Alliance today.

Um, thank you, Mayor Gaskins, Vice Mayor Bagley, and Councilmember Aguirre for advancing the proposed $30,000 increase to the arts grant for the fiscal year 2027 budget, representing more than 60 member artists and arts organizations.

The alliance sees firsthand how these grants directly sustain local creatives, helping artists produce new work, remain in Alexandria, and continue contributing to the city's cultural and economic life.

This investment will have an immediate and meaningful impact supporting working artists, expanding access to arts programming across our neighborhoods, and strengthening the cultural vitality that makes Alexandria a vibrant place to live, work, and visit.

Arts grants are a high return investment.

They leverage additional funding, support small creative businesses, and ensure that residents of all ages and backgrounds can participate in and benefit from the arts.

We respectfully urge the council to adopt this addition and continue prioritizing the arts as an essential part of Alexandria's economic health and community well-being.

Thank you for your leadership and commitment to our city's creative future.

Thank you for your time today.

Next we have Zara Hussein, April Breslau, Krista Young.

Hi, my name is Zara Sen.

I'm a community organizer with the ICE Out of Alexandria Coalition.

And I'm here to support the cutting of the sheriff's budget to demand an end to his collaboration with ICE.

I think the 200K is a good start.

I think it could do more.

We've had a lot of officers here today talking about their essential work and their duty to protect and serve.

And they managed to take time out of the really, really busy like their schedule to come here armed and in uniform to push back against a proposed cut of less than 0.5%.

All right.

And it's not even that this money is being reallocated for housing or for school or anything else or any other social service.

It's being used for a study of the jails.

Anyways, for months, nearly a year now, ICEOut has been working nonstop to try and get ICE out of this city.

And it's been a collective effort.

And I want to say thank you to everyone that has been a part of this work, regardless of what the outcome will be after this budget season.

I want to say thank you to the council members that have been working on this, and I want to say thank you to those who've been meeting with council to try and push this forward.

I want to say thank you to those who have helped hack the room time and time again at public comment.

Thank you for sharing flyers and writing emails, making phone calls and having these tough conversations to put this campaign to the center stage.

If you want to talk about protecting and serving, that's the place to start.

I want to say thank you to those that have attended know your rights trainings and to those that have shared that know your rights info with local businesses, community centers, places of worship, schools, hospitals, all in the effort of keeping one another safe.

I want to say thank you to those who have joined local mutual aid networks to help with groceries and child care and hygiene supplies, who've been able to go out and get groceries for those who no longer feel safe to do so because of ICE presence in our city.

I want to say thank you to those who are checking on their neighbors and helping create safety plans and keeping track of emergency contacts in case the worst happens.

And being public facing can often mean being made a target.

So I want to say thank you to those who are working behind the scenes to keep this afloat.

So many people in that overflow room did not feel comfortable with the sheer amount of officers here.

And I think that's something to think about.

How people in our city don't feel comfortable coming up to speak because they're being intimidated.

I want to say thank you to our immigrant community because the city has not done nearly enough to welcome and protect you, to protect our most marginalized, and not just during this administration, but in previous ones as well.

And I think this budget cut is an important first step, but our work here is not done.

Our work here isn't done until the sheriff commits to ending his collaboration with ICE.

It's not done until ICE is off our streets.

It's not done until all Alexandrians feel welcome and safe.

And I hope other organizers can keep this momentum going and keep fighting with us for a better Alexandria.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time today.

Next is April Breslau, Chrissa Young, David Paladin.

I made some notes to myself.

On the legal side, I really want to underline.

I'm sorry, I'm not in the microphone, sorry.

On the legal point, I really wanted to underline that there is no law, no law, federal or state, that requires local law enforcement to turn people over to ICE without a judicial warrant.

There is no law that requires that.

Doing that is a choice, and it is a choice that other communities have decided not to make.

For example, both the Arlington and the Fairfax Sheriff's Offices have made a different choice.

I want to be very clear.

No one is asking uh the sheriff's deputies or the sheriff to break the law.

We're asking the sheriff to make a choice not to make a choice that many object to the budget.

Um during a recent public meeting, Sheriff Casey acknowledged that he's received advice from a private attorney about cooperation with ICE.

In that previous meeting, the sheriff would not name the attorney and would not provide details about how the attorney was compensated.

With respect to the budget, I urge you to remove any taxpayer funding for this purpose.

The proposed study should take this into consideration.

If the sheriff requires legal advice, he can make use of the city attorney, the Commonwealth attorney, or the Virginia Attorney General, especially since a wide swath of the Alexandria community and this council disagree with the choice to cooperate with ICE that the sheriff is making based apparently on the advice of this private attorney.

So thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time today as well.

Next we have Chrissa Young, David Paladin, Jonathan Kral.

Last time I spoke, I expressed my support for city council funding ACPS by classification.

Since then, my support has only grown.

I want all I also wanted to voice my support for the parents calling on city council to overhaul the structure of the school board.

I sign their petition and feel as if their message reflects my own.

City Council understands that the people they represent are struggling.

School board was given warned that tough times are coming, and yet they are unprepared.

When asked to make ends meet, the school board's rhetoric does not match their actions.

Their rear priorities are reflected in the areas of ACPS they choose to cut.

I went into the budget book to try and understand where the funds are going.

I cannot share everything I found, but I'm worried that funding by classification may not be enough.

When looking at the instructor's portion of the budget, I saw an increase of funding for teaching specialists and instructional coaches, but a decrease for instructors.

While it appears instruction is not losing money, funding is being allocated away from teachers.

In the past, the school board decided not to give educators a step increase at least three times, which is why it is no surprise that the school board's solution to budget constraints is to use healthcare offsets to completely reduce any pay increase for educators.

When we put educators last, our students suffer, showing educators are not the only ones being set up to fail.

Middle school sports is still a new initiative at ACPS, but it has been an unequivocal success.

Students have to maintain their grades to participate.

Why risk stifling the motivation of students whose athletic passion fuels their academic improvement?

Why take away the opportunity to translate that discipline and apply it in the classroom?

We are all about to find out if the school board gets their way.

Now our students will be less competitive and less prepared, putting Alexandria farther behind our neighbors.

And the comparison remains salient.

Beyond managing the same departments with less funding and more staff, Arlington made strategic cuts and eliminated vacant central office positions to efficiently reduce expenditures.

So we should be setting the standard for excellence in Northern Virginia.

Virginia Alexandria could follow their lead.

Currently, ACPS has six central office positions open on their website.

I calculated the total cost based on averages, and these positions will cost ACPS half a million dollars.

About the same amount of money that would be saved if middle school sports was cut.

If half a million can be made up in just six unfilled positions, then imagine the savings that would come from shrinking central office, all without affecting teachers and students as school board says they want.

After all, if the frameworks given to teachers by support specialists were effective investments, then that would have been reflected in test scores by now.

The current postcuts are not only harmful to educators and students, but also inefficient.

I asked around and compiled the list of over 30 additional areas of excess in the budget and was happy to share them with the school board chair, but I never got a response.

The fact that none of these options were researched, proposed, or implemented before beloved educators were cut shows me exactly how dedicated school board is to their staff and students.

The culmination of these facts leads me to one conclusion.

School board cannot be trusted to craft a budget that gets funds to educators.

So City Council must front ACPS by classification, but I fear that will not be enough.

Funding by classification.

Thank you so much for your time today.

But you can also send us your full testimony.

Our next speaker is David Paladin, followed by Jonathan Krawl, followed by Michelle Evans.

Good afternoon.

My name is David Paladin Fernandez, and today I am here to address the ongoing budget and collective bargaining negotiations between this council, ACPS, and the EAA.

For weeks, I've been hearing elated announcements about how this historic collective bargaining agreement is all but finalized.

But there is one problem.

I and every union member I have spoken to have no idea what is being negotiated.

What should be a collective process has been anything but collective in practice.

And yet, the truth is I want to support this.

By all accounts, this should be a victory I celebrate on a daily basis.

I fought for a collective, I fought for the collective bargaining resolution.

I spoke at school board meetings for years because ultimately ACPS is long overdue for a CBA that delivers for every educator in Alexandria.

But this deal was made about us without us, and we have no idea if it reflects our needs.

When I reach out to EAA leadership, my emails go unanswered.

When I ask them in person how to get answers, they tell me it is my responsibility to reach out to them.

I am on the collective bargaining committee.

I have acted as a silent observer during negotiations, despite being as active as I possibly can, despite taking responsibility to seek information like EAA leadership demands, I still have no idea what is being proposed.

The only confirmation I have about the deal is that some issues important to members were not included.

And why?

Due to a survey with an unignorably low response rate, the EA claims it's a foregone conclusion that issues like bereavement leave are at the bottom of the list and therefore off the table.

Any further updates about this tentative agreement are sparse, vague, and have primarily come from ACPS, not my union.

Now, I must ask myself at what point is this dictation, not collaboration.

Because I feel as if my passion, my advocacy for the hard working employees of ACPS is being hijacked.

I want members to have a historic deal.

But make no mistake, my wanting something and fighting for it for years will not be twisted into voting for a secretive deal that is historic in name and not practice.

That is the definition of political games, and I refuse to be a pawn.

I saw an article in the Alexandria Times going over the CBA and the funding needed to enact it.

In that article, I read confirmation of the rumors.

Educators are considering voting no on the CBA, and I cannot blame them.

I have to wonder how long will we have to review this legally binding agreement before we are asked to vote on it.

And the reality of it is that educators have been put in into an uncomfortable position again by leadership which has refused to include us from the beginning.

I sincerely hope that we will get a deal worthy of going down in history.

Good day.

I will see you next time.

Thank you so much for your time today.

Madame Councilman Aguary.

So for those from the sheriff's office that are still present, um, I think this is another poignant item for those of you that have been in the city or serving in the Sheriff's Office for a long time.

Um, you you know typically some of the situation with our school system.

Um, if you're a newer or you know, you're busy with your life and you didn't you don't really know what's going on with the schools.

So uh the schools are asking us for 12.7 million dollars.

Um frankly, you cannot provide to them.

Uh they came in 5.7 million dollars, I believe, over budget uh with this ask and with their collective bargaining agreement, which again I want to acknowledge.

I know that you are not able to collectively bargain, which would deeply help um in terms of compensation and salary.

Um it's 12.7 in the first year.

Uh and then they're asking for we we don't know what potentially in the second and third year.

And again, I just want to point to um all of the things that we have to take into consideration uh when we're when we're looking at our budget and what we have to deal with.

Our next speaker, Jonathan Kroll, Michelle Evans, and then Bill Clavely.

Mayor Gaskins, Vice Mayor Bagley, members of City Council.

Good afternoon.

My name is Jonathan Kral, and I am a member of grassroots of the grassroots Alexandria Steering Committee.

I am here to speak in favor of raising money for housing assistance.

I favor the proposed tax.

If a different tax is needed, I'm in favor of that.

Because there is no perfect tax that everyone will agree on is fair.

I ask that you pass any tax that can get four votes and invest in housing.

Invest that money in housing or in transit.

I am also here to speak in favor of moving money out of the incarceration budget in order to fund a study on how we can further reduce the cost of running a jail.

I hope you will ensure that the scope of the study includes the fact that we and many other cities waste amazing amounts of money locking up people that wouldn't be in jail if we were a normal country instead of a country that locks up people at five times the worldwide average rate.

If Virginia was itself a country, it would have the highest per capita incarceration in the world.

Higher even than the terror state of El Salvador.

We arrived at this situation very slowly over 45 years of law and order following the launch of Ronald Reagan's Southern strategy.

Because we arrived so slowly, this is considered normal and therefore acceptable.

During the George Floyd protests of 2020, we tried to do something about mass incarceration, but to little avail.

Now we have a new wave of mass incarceration called ICE.

Thankfully, the sudden expansion of detention centers is not considered normal, and people are opposing ICE, including yourselves.

But you are supposed to be leaders.

I am asking you to lead.

Please expand the scope of the study to include alternatives to prison that reduce incarceration and health-based responses to public safety that treat poverty and mental illness instead of criminalizing them.

Because our sheriff refuses to act to reduce the number of people handed over to ICE detention centers.

Please involve the Commonwealth attorney, the chief of police, and the head of and the head of the health department.

Please find out what they have to say about ongoing mass incarceration.

Please report their views to the public.

We want to know.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Thank you for your time today.

Next, we have Michelle Evans, Bill Cleveland, and Tony Mashler.

Good afternoon.

This is the first time I've ever testified before counsel for those of you that know me.

Um I work for the city for 37 years in the city manager's office.

And I was involved in with the sheriff's office all the way through.

Five different sheriffs.

Horrible.

And it really took us until 1987 to open the current adult detention center.

And in order to plan that center, I was part of a team that worked with the National Institute of Corrections, a member of City Council General Services, the sheriff, the architect, myself.

For a week, eight hours a day, we were trained on the rules and regulations for modern jails.

We visited jails around the country, did the best we could and arrived at the detention center that you know now.

I'm here today to support the sheriff.

He was elected by the citizens of the city to run the to run the jail.

And I'm not particularly in favor of the study, but I know the way things go here, and I'm pretty sure it's going to happen.

So if that's the case, one of the things that I want to say is a thing I saw in today's paper, uh written by George or a headline in the post that said this would rain in unintended consequences.

And what I mean by that is when you do this study and you look at possibly closing a floor of the jail, contracting with Fairfax, contracting with Arlington, all these different things have to be looked at in the context of the other things that happen.

For example, if we go to Fairfax and have to bring people back and forth every day, 12 miles, 12 miles, 12 miles in an hour each time because of the traffic.

So we have to be practical, and I'm in favor of practicality.

I want to make sure that the sheriff is involved.

He needs to be a part of the study.

I know you're studying his operation, but at least he can make everyone aware of what are the standards.

What do we have to do?

What can we do?

What can't we do?

Um, I'm I really want to thank the members of the sheriff's office.

Their jobs are not easy, they work hard, and I respect each and every one of them.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for your time today.

Next, we have Bill Cleveland.

My name is Bill Cleveland.

I'm a Vietnam veteran, and I'm also a retired United States Capitol Police Officer, and I spent 55 years in the city of Alexandria, so I'm a resident of the city of Alexandria, originally from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Alexandria is better.

I know the city council, I would say would like to do the right thing.

The right thing is to re is to back the sheriff.

Back the blue.

We need a safe city, and we have a safe city, and it needs to stay safe.

And it needs to stay safe.

Don't play games.

Don't play games with law enforcement.

Give them what they need.

Stand up.

Stand up for the sheriff's office.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much for your time today.

And our last speaker of the public hearing is Tony Mashler.

Madam Mayor, Madam Vice Mayor, and City Council members.

I want to thank you for your public service and careful consideration of the city's needs in amending the budget.

I want to thank Mayor Bag um Vice Mayor Bagley, Councilmember El Nuby, and Councilmember Aguirre for their support for the proposed delete from Sheriff Casey's budget and urge the mayor and other council members to join them.

I love Alexandria.

I have resided in the city continuously since 2007 and in the 1990s when I taught at Hammond and worked for the Northern Virginia Urban League.

I am proud to live in this multicultural, multilingual city with longtime Alexandrians as well as relative newcomers from a wide variety of backgrounds.

As you know, Sheriff Casey has voluntarily been handing over members of our community to ICE based on so-called administrative warrants that do not contain probable cause or the signature of a judge as required by the Fourth Amendment.

I am brokenhearted that our beautiful and diverse city is doing this.

My opposition is based on my family history as the daughter of refugees, my work as a teacher with ACPS, and my um profession as a retired immigration and asylum lawyer.

As a as an immigration lawyer, I spoke to and also vainly attempted to speak to many people who were detained by ICE and then transferred from place to place, making legal representation rely on a game of whack-a-mole.

The conditions violated and continue to violate both U.S.

and international standards and do not support the rights to due process or counsel.

Forty-seven people have needlessly died in this administration's ICE custody, and countless more have been denied potable water, edible food, and hygiene supplies while separated from their families and attorneys and unable to seek relief in court.

The barbarity of detention conditions, frequent transfers, and lack of access to phones is part of the implementation of so-called re-migration of people of color in our country, discussed in a report I would like to provide to council.

As a teacher, I am aware of the stress that our minority and immigrant students are experiencing and their worries for themselves and their loved ones.

I assure you, there is no trust in the sheriff's department.

I am sure Sheriff Casey is weighing many factors and believes he is doing the right thing.

But voluntary collaboration with ICE is not the way to protect and come our and serve our community.

And the family who hid my mother to permit her survival.

As a postscript, while listening here, I've heard a lot of comments about the obligation of the Sheriff's Department to follow the law, which I totally understand, but I did not hear one mention of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Fourth Amendment.

If the sheriff and the deputy oath does not include following the Constitution, something is very wrong.

Thank you so much for your time today.

We appreciate your testimony.

That is our last speaker.

I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

Okay.

There has been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilwoman Green, which is say um, as you know, today we don't make any final decisions.

The next step will be the ad delete work session, and then budget adoption will be on the 29th.

Madam Clerk, this is a roll call.

Yeah, you're name.

This is uh not a roll call vote.

And so all those in favor say aye.

Aye, any opposed?

All right, the ayes have it.

We are going to take a 30-minute rate, 30-minute recess for lunch and reconvene at 136.

Do I need can I get a quick motion to go to recess?

All right, there's been a motion by councilman Aguirre, a second by Councilman Chapman.

All those in favor say aye.

Any opposed?

Ayes have it.

We're now in recess.

Please call the next item.

Public hearing of an ordinance on the proposed real and personal property tax rates and proposed affected tax rate increase for calendar year twenty twenty-six.

Okay.

Um, since we have no speakers on this item, do we just need a motion to close the public hearing?

Okay.

There's been a motion by Vice Mayor.

I'm sorry.

There's been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilman Aguirre to close the public hearing on item twelve.

All those in favor say aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

The ayes have it.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Public hearing of an ordinance to amend and reordain section three dash two dash three five four of article as payment and contest and enforcement of parking citations.

There are also no speakers for this item.

There's been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilman Gary to close the public hearing on item thirteen.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

The ayes have it.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Public hearing of an ordinance to amend and reordain section five dash six two three three stormwater utility fee.

And we do have one speaker for this item, and that is Mr.

John Hill.

So thank you.

Today, fourteen of those are complete, and the remainder are either in design or under construction.

And the biggest project, it's 70 million at uh Commonwealth and Glebe is well underway and construction will start soon.

Even in my neighborhood around Hoof's run, the aggressive program of maintenance and repair has really kept that area dry during storms that in the past would have flooded it.

That's the good news, and we should be proud of it.

But now let me talk about the challenges that lie ahead.

We have discovered uh that there are certain flood-prone areas of the city where there is no single project that will stop the flooding.

If we see the kinds of rains we saw in 2018, 2020, and 2021, and undoubtedly we will see again.

The original flood action plan had a about a 50 million dollar project to reroute twelfths run, another 25 million for Pitt and Gibbon, and we're discovering those projects won't solve the problem within the budget we have, or they are just too complex from an engineering point of view.

In our annual report, which we've shared with you, we propose two recommendations.

I'll summarize very quickly here.

Expand the flood proofing grant program.

Provide uh incentives for those homeowners and business owners in the most flood-prone areas to invest in floodgates, raise entries, and so forth to solve the problem at the property level.

I think we all believe that will be not only more efficient from a cost effective point of view, it will also be a faster solution.

Now, the second recommendation is a little more subtle.

Flood action program is now five years old.

We know more now than we did when we started back in 2021.

We've learned that some projects are infeasible.

The net result is we have a large unexpended balance in the stormwater fund.

Now is the time to revisit the list of projects and think about including uh some of those projects that didn't make the list in 2021, specifically projects perhaps around Braddock Road Metro, and even in the combined sewer area near the waterfront, stormwater, not tidal water.

Um, and and think about including those in the in the in the lineup.

In closing, again, thank you for your unwavering support.

But let's all remember that uh climate change does not stop in 10 years.

It doesn't level off, it just gets worse and worse.

So this continued investment and interest in flood mitigation is very much appreciated and necessary.

Thank you again for the opportunity to speak.

Thank you, Mr.

Hill.

I believe there are two questions for you.

I'll start with Vice Mayor Bagley.

Uh thank you for your service to Alex Renew and for the um testimony here today.

It's it's a bit of a question actually for the city manager, but I but it derives from the testimony.

I'm curious expansion of the flood grant program.

Um are we bound?

Would that have to happen through increases to the stormwater um charges?

Like is that a one-to-one dynamic, or can that expansion happen out of the general fund?

Um I think we would probably recommend it through the stormwater fund, and it would involve reallocating funds within that because that you know funding source goes to support staffing, non-personnel projects, and so it would probably be a reallocation within the stormwater.

Okay.

And where I'm getting it is I know that there are state like Dylan Rule and you know, and legal issues as to as to that program and what allows us to do it.

And so the question, I think, for Mr.

Hell and related to the suggestion is do you all have you all worked up internally?

You you gave some kind of generic some parameters, but is it in your work plan or does your board have a oh okay?

Does your board um can you work towards more concrete recommendations that could inform the FY28 budget with regard to changes potentially to our stormwater fee schedule and or uh balance?

You see what I'm getting at like exactly.

I see exactly.

Um, yeah, we're working very directly and very productively, by the way, with city staff.

It it's a hard issue because anytime you create a grant program, you want to make sure it's both equitable, but at the same time, really targeted.

It's got to be targeted at those areas that have flooding and not somebody who wants to do something way over here that not in a flood zone.

So uh we're working with city staff, but it it's gonna take another year of hard work, I think.

Yeah.

Councilman Chapman.

Yeah, I will say to my colleagues, um, I did think about trying to do an ad delete for that expansion, but I did kind of realize that.

We need a little bit more conversation with staff, and I think one of the things that um I I know the the commission and a couple of committee members who have reached out to me are very interested in is is putting uh as you suggested kind of some real detail to kind of the future, but also I think there's a couple of folks, um, Mr.

Drudi in particular that's very interested in looking at kind of I wouldn't say right sizing what we do, but as uh as Mr.

Hill mentioned, you know, we have some additional funds or some funds that have are out there and there's some projects out here.

And so realigning that is I think a primary thing that the uh commission is very interested in.

Yeah.

I have to say the partnership with the city is working very well.

It is.

It is okay.

Well, um, Mr.

Manager.

Can I just did you want to add a little bit more to the thought process behind some of the projects that really aren't feasible that were on the plan and how we're adjusting?

Sure.

Um thank you.

Uh see manager Perajan.

Um Hi, everybody.

I'm Camila Linetsky, a professional engineer with the Stormware Management Division.

And uh yes, we are kind of going through both planning, design, and construction and through planning.

Sometimes we do see that we no longer need a project that has been thought of.

Um, and so then we do change those funds from what we budgeted and had secured for that project and move it into another project.

We also do get grant money.

Um, so there's some projects that we've been able to move up.

And uh as we are kind of going through the process of you know, assessing the increase in stormware utility, we are also going through the process of seeing like what spot projects maybe are near bigger projects that we can kind of combine to find synergy.

Um, we are also looking for synergy with uh parks as well.

We have another project that we are synergizing with them.

So we're definitely looking to really make it an efficient um plan.

And so that's just kind of a process.

And as we're going through that with um Mr.

Hill's uh commission as well, just to make sure that things are streamlined.

So we do hear back um what you all are saying, and I will continue to uh push your comments.

I will let um the rest of my team know them on Monday so that we can ensure that we're doing the best.

Um, that council and the residents and public would like us to thank you so much.

Um, with that, Mr.

Hill is the last speaker on this item.

Motion to close public hearing.

There's been a motion by Vice Mayor Bangley and a second by Councilman Aguirre to close the public hearing.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye, any opposed?

All right, the ayes have it.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Public hearing of an ordinance to amend and reordain section five-eight-nine three parking meters, hours and days of operation.

Okay, and we have one speaker signed up for this item, and that is Maria Firoki.

Good afternoon, Madam Mayor and members of city council.

My name is Maria Shirockey and I'm the COO of the Alexandria Chamber of Commerce.

On behalf of the chamber, representing nearly 1,000 businesses, we are here to express our opposition to the proposal to implement metered parking charges on Sundays.

While we understand and appreciate the need to address budget challenges, we do not believe this measure is the right solution right now.

The recent economic update showing the meals tax and transient lodging tax revenues are running negative year to date in fiscal year 2026, underscores the risk of placing additional burdens on residents, visitors, and local businesses during a period of economic softness.

Free parking has long supported the business community on Sundays in Alexandria by encouraging residents and visitors to dine, particularly during the bet the busy brunch hours that are vital to our restaurants, shop and participate in community events.

Sunday mornings are also when many people across our city attend religious services, making free parking especially important.

Imposing parking fees on Sundays could discourage this activity at a time when key revenue streams tied to hospitality and tourism are already underperforming.

On behalf of the chamber and its nearly 1,000 members, we respectfully urge the council to consider alternative approaches to closing budget gaps that do not risk dampening economic activity or reducing accessibility to our business community.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

That's been a great hey Maria.

Sorry to drag you out on a Saturday.

Happy to be here.

Um so one of the things that we're one of the levers that we have to pull is potentially raising the parking ticket fee.

Um I think we're right now at 40.

I think 50 is what most people are at, but we would potentially be looking at 55.

You know, we still a lot of conversation that needs to happen.

And one of the other options is also raising the cost of the parking meter.

So I'm not gonna put you on the spot right now.

But if you guys want to, you know, socialize that with your membership and see some reactions because those are some of the options that we're gonna have and would appreciate some feedback.

No, absolutely.

And so obviously I know that there's lots of conversations that are continuing to happen on these items, and we're absolutely happy we are having those conversations anecdotally every time we're out in the community or or hosting an event, asking those questions.

So we will continue to do that and provide feedback as needed.

Wonderful, appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I was just checking um yeah, I was just checking my phone to make sure I had the right date.

I know it's a short turnaround, but when we do our ad delete, that'll be on the 21st.

So if there's any of that preliminary feedback that you guys could provide by the 21st, that's when we're gonna go deep into the different options available to us.

Sure.

Absolutely, Madam Mayor.

Uh Vice Mayor Bagley and then councilman on Newbie.

And if you don't know today, if you're gonna provide us other feedback, but but generally speaking, on behalf of those a thousand businesses you represent, what's their best day of the week in terms of revenue and sales?

For restaurants and just whatever categories you're able to speak to.

I'm not sure that we have those numbers exactly.

Okay.

If it's something you you you can gather or your membership is able to sort of volunteer that information, I'd be curious to know what that when their best revenue days are.

Thank you.

Sure, absolutely.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, question for staff.

Thank you.

Appreciate your testimony.

My question is is for staff.

Um there's that view that paid parking on Sundays will will make it easier to find parking for people coming to the city because there's gonna be a turnover.

Can you talk about that a little bit and tell me if there's any data that supports that or what did we look at?

Um sure, thank you.

Hillary or deputy director of transportation.

Um, yeah, so a lot of studies have shown that when you have paid parking, it's going to increase turnover on the street.

And and really the the goal is that you have about one space per block that is that is vacant.

So if people are visiting the businesses, you want that that vacancy that they can find.

But there's other benefits as well.

So it also helps to reduce circling and congestion, which is something we we hear about a lot, um, particularly in the old town area.

And it also uh helps kind of move the people that want to park for a longer period of time to our garages, uh, which also have a have a low rate already.

Um, but that also helps to get some of the parking out of the the residential areas when we have more people that live there that are home and parking on the streets.

And and you mentioned studies, these are studies um that we did or studies that were done nationwide.

Do we have any local data that validates any of those studies?

Well, we don't charge on on Sunday, so we don't have any local studies now.

We can certainly look at we could we could come up with a way to evaluate um the success of this if that were to move forward at a local um from a local perspective, but generally when we're talking about studies, we're looking at more national studies.

Gotcha.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Um, Councilwoman Green.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you, Ms.

Orr.

Um, question on the um the meters.

Some go from 8 a.m.

to 6 p.m.

and some go from 8 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

Can you tell me which ones are the 8 a.m.

to 6 p.m.

versus the 8 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

I thought for some reason a couple of years ago, I thought everything went from 8 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

I could be wrong.

Yeah.

I don't know off the top of my head which blocks there's each block is signed in in a specific way.

I do think we have different time periods.

Um, and some in in different areas of the city, we have different time periods.

So not all of our meter parking is right in old town.

I don't know off the top of my head, but we can look and I could get that information to you.

Okay, that'd be good.

I just I thought I heard discussion or was in a meeting where it was discussed where everything went to 9 p.m.

But all man counsel would know.

Oh, you thought so too.

Okay.

I think I can double challenge.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Yeah, experienced.

Um further comments on this.

Vice Mayor Bagley.

I have a question and then I'll put a motion.

But um the uh I I thought my colleague was asking a slightly different question.

So uh I thought he was asking just generally, do we have studies on parking turnover?

Not specific to Sunday, because obviously we don't have it, but we've examined this issue regionally, like the concept of turnover and what it does on the other days of the week.

Yes, we we have parking occupancy data.

One of the challenges is that, and particularly where we have paid parking is we know that we have people parking in paid zones that are not paying.

You know, people park for 10, 15 minutes, and to them it's not worth it to pay.

And so we're not capturing all of that data.

Okay.

But the the concept of turnover, you know, the broad principle of turnover has been studied sort of in the local setting, just not on Sundays.

Yes.

Okay.

And so the semi-related question is there is already paid parking on Sundays in our retail corridor, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

And so in our residential pay by zones and in other, you know, other areas that aren't specifically these meters, people are already paying on Sundays to park.

That's correct.

And our garages.

Okay.

And so I'll move to close the public hearing.

Bye, Vice Mayor Bagley.

Is there a second?