Fayetteville City Council Regular Meeting - January 26, 2023

The Fayetteville City Council met for its regular meeting on Thursday, January 26, 2023, at 7:00 PM in the Council Chamber. The meeting included approval of a consent agenda, discussion of legal representation for two police employees, and a public hearing on text amendments to regulate community reintegration centers (formerly halfway houses). The meeting concluded with adjournment after a motion carried.

Consent Calendar

• The consent agenda was approved unanimously, with the exception of Item 7.019 (Request for Legal Representation of City Employees), which was pulled for separate discussion. The consent agenda included approval of meeting minutes (December 28, 2022 Special; January 3, 2023 Work Session; January 9, 2023 Discussion of Agenda Items), seven rezoning cases (P22-46, P22-49, P22-50, P22-51, P22-52, P22-53, P22-56, P22-58), adoption of Capital Project Ordinances 2023-13 and 2023-14 (Lake Rim Park and Reid Ross Track improvement projects), adoption of Capital Project Ordinance Amendments 2023-19 and 2023-20 (Dam Safety and Preservation Program), adoption of Capital Project Ordinance 2023-15 (Airport Improvement Program Grant for AFFF testing), adoption of Budget Ordinance Amendment 2023-10 (First Responder Grant), adoption of Budget Ordinance Amendment 2023-11 and Special Revenue Fund Project Ordinance Amendment 2023-4 (NRCS-EWP bank stabilization), adoption of Budget Ordinance Amendment 2023-12 (Spring Lake Recreation Facility operating budget), revision of Millennial Advisory Commission Bylaws, demolition recommendations for four uninhabitable structures, approval of Extended Jurisdiction Agreement with Fayetteville State University Police, approval of Federal Action Plan FY 2024, lease of Suite 301 of R.C. Williams Building, and consideration of Cumberland County's Sales Tax Distribution Interlocal Agreement.

Discussion Items

Item 7.019: Request for Legal Representation of City Employees (Ryan Haddock and Amanda Bell)

• The council debated whether to approve legal representation for two police employees involved in an incident. City Attorney McDonnell explained that state statute and city ordinance allow representation for employees sued for actions within the course and scope of their duties. The city manager confirmed an investigation had been completed and appropriate action taken, but personnel privacy laws prevented disclosure of specifics. Councilmember Benevente raised concerns about accountability and the need for transparency, noting past instances where representation was denied for actions outside scope. City Manager Hewlett outlined three policy changes instituted in response: (1) improved complaint process with written timelines, (2) enhanced notification to him and the police chief about complaints and video evidence, and (3) creation of a new city manager's office position focused on public safety oversight. Councilmember Thompson asked whether the actions were illegal or just poor judgment; the city attorney declined to opine in open session. Councilmember McNair clarified the criteria for denial. After discussion, a motion to approve legal representation passed 6 to 4, with Councilmembers Hondros, McNair, Jensen, Dawkins, Hare, and Thompson in favor, and Councilmembers Benevente and others opposed (two opposed, but tally showed 6-4; the transcript indicates six in favor, four opposed).

Item 8.01: Public Hearing on TA23-001 – Text Amendments for Community Reintegration Centers (formerly Halfway Houses)

• Dr. Newton presented proposed amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance, including: (1) changing the name from "halfway house" to "community reintegration center" to align with federal terminology; (2) limiting allowable zoning districts to only Community Commercial (CC) and Mixed Use (MU) instead of the previous broader list (removing Office Institutional, Limited Commercial, Downtown, and Mixed Residential); (3) capping the number of residents at 30 if within a half-mile of single-family residential, or 40 if within 500 feet of multifamily (with ability to exceed these caps via special use permit if located outside those radii); (4) retaining the existing half-mile separation from other similar uses (therapeutic, group homes, etc.). No members of the public signed up to speak. Council discussion focused on distance requirements, security, and notification language. Councilmember Hare made a motion to adopt the amendments with modifications: (a) apply the half-mile distance to both single-family and multifamily uses (instead of 500 feet for multifamily), (b) require that security provisions be part of the application, and (c) include a description of the facility's population (federal inmates) in public notifications. Councilmember Ingram seconded. Councilmember Benevente argued that overly restrictive rules could hinder reintegration and increase recidivism, and preferred leaving details to the quasi-judicial special use permit process. Councilmember Thompson shared a personal anecdote about a friend's successful reintegration. Councilmember Jensen stressed the need to decide that night. After debate, Councilmember Hare withdrew the security component, leaving the half-mile distance for both residential types and the notification description. The motion carried 8 to 2, with Councilmembers Hondros and Benevente opposed.

Key Outcomes

• The consent agenda was approved unanimously except Item 7.019.
• Legal representation for two police employees (Ryan Haddock and Amanda Bell) was approved by a vote of 6 to 4.
• Text amendments for community reintegration centers (TA23-001) were adopted with modifications: a half-mile distance requirement for both single-family and multifamily residential zones, and a requirement that public notifications include a description of the facility's population. The security provision was removed but staff indicated it could be addressed administratively. The final vote was 8 to 2.
• The meeting adjourned unanimously.