We will go ahead and call the meeting to order because everybody got quiet and it is that time.

Uh first, as always, is the Pledge of Allegiance.

And uh Counselor Patton, would you help lead us?

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

All right.

Next uh we have the consent agenda, and we had one item polled for discussion, which was B for E.

Uh, do we have a motion to approve the remainder of the agenda?

Motion to approve.

Second.

Right.

All in favor of the motion, aye.

Aye.

All opposed, nay.

Right.

And that passes.

And do we want to talk about B4E?

Just had a question on this contract services.

It is authorizing a three-year contract not to exceed seven point five million with an opportunity to extend.

In the backup, it says that uh the convention center recaptures this money.

So I'm just trying to understand if this is a wash, is there actual expenditure, or we get it it is net after the clients or whoever's using the convention center get billed.

Uh so I'm just trying to understand authorize execute a contract for certain amount only be reimbursed.

So if you could just clarify that.

Absolutely.

Uh Carrie Painter Ray Convention and Performing Arts Complex.

Um, this is for five years, and um it is in three different venues.

So I know uh the bulk, it seems like a lot.

But um, it's three different venues, and what basically happens is the customer goes into conversation about planning.

We determine what do they need, how much do they need, where do guards need to be, then we create this um uh quote and plan and security plan for them.

They have to use our approved security company, and then the amount shows up later on their settlement along with rent and tables and food and all the other things afterwards.

So each customer gets billed according to usage, and um, if somebody doesn't book, then we wouldn't use all the money, but we can't always predict how many events there are either, and so it has increased over time.

So do you recapture 100% of the expenses or the city bears some type of shared cost?

Because in here in the back of it was saying that the clients are billed for the services they used, but it's unclear to me.

Are we made whole or there's still an expense from the city for this seven point five or ultimately fifteen million?

Right.

No, we're made whole.

We capture it all.

Unless something happened to go wrong and we asked for extra, and we might pay for that because we felt more comfortable with an extra person or something.

But almost always we're made whole.

It is separate from the building's security, which is our cost to bear.

So that is a whole separate set of security people in a different company.

And that's part of the process of the case.

So this contract is all clients and we bill it and we're made whole.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions or I make a motion to uh approve uh the contract services for convention center, performing arts center event, and security services.

All in favor of the motion, aye.

Aye, aye.

All opposed, nay.

All right, so that passes.

Thank you.

Uh right.

Next we have the planning commission report, and we have Vynam Walter and Nicole Bennett here.

Good afternoon, Bynam Walter, Raleigh Planning and Development.

I'm joined today by Vice Chair Roberta Fox.

Okay.

Ms.

Bennett since her chairbennett since her regrets.

She's not well.

A reminder of some upcoming September and October holidays for your reference.

We do have some public hearings scheduled, some annexation items scheduled for your next meeting.

Nothing uh related to rezoning or annexation scheduled in October at this time.

We are recommending uh well published the four items for October the 7th.

I have some updates on that.

We'll get right to that.

So Z 1324, this is just under eight acres on South New Hope Road, going from a residential district to neighborhood mixed use, consistent with the comprehensive plan, but inconsistent with the future annuals map.

And a suggested public hearing date here of October 2nd.

Uh Z 5124, this is Fairbanks Drive, just under three acres, going from R 10 with conditions and a portion of uh NX3 with conditions to entirely NX3 with conditions.

This is consistent with the future land use map and the comprehensive plan.

Planning commission recommends approval.

Again, that October 7 public hearing date is the suggestion.

Z 1025, this is under three acres on Leesville Road, consistent with the plan and the future land use map.

Planning commission did recommend approval, but suggested uh allowing the applicant time to revise conditions to limit the residential density and as well as the um some restrictions on the form of the townhouse building type.

The applicant indeed would like to defer your setting the public hearing until your next meeting that will come back to you at your next meeting to set the hearing, and I believe is looking still for an October 7 public hearing date, but would like to make some changes before you set the hearing.

And then uh finally, Z 1225, this is Peace and West Street, again under three acres, going from IX 12 to downtown mixed use or industrial mixed use 12 go into downtown mixed use 30 stories with an urban general frontage and some conditions.

Again, consistent with the comprehensive plan and the future language map, planning commission does recommend approval unanimously.

I understand from the applicant, they would ask that you defer this to your next meeting to allow them to again revise the request, and then uh would appreciate an October 7 public hearing date after they've had a chance to make revisions and are back in front of you on the 16th.

Any questions that I or Chair Fox could answer for you before you make your actions.

Councilor Jones.

Thank you so much.

Uh my question is in reference to Z5124, that's fair brain fair banks.

Uh as I was looking through the material, there were some transportation concerns, lack of suitable pedestrian infrastructure was noted in the area.

And I was just wondering if you guys uh, Ms.

Fox, if you guys spoke specifically about that, or if not, if that's something that we can make sure to bring back when it comes to council.

I just wanted to highlight transportation in that case.

Thank you, and good afternoon.

Um the only thing I'll add to that, uh we did have a conversation of what would be required during site plan review, at which time um along the frontage of a property pedestrian infrastructure would be added.

Okay, great.

Thank you so much.

Mayor.

On that traffic concern for Z 1324, I think traffic was brought up again on South New Hope.

And I know I have had previous conversations with staff about South New Hope.

If we can just have some more, some backup information of what the plans are and also what um this applicant will have to do on their frontage, that would be helpful as we lead up to this.

You can bring that to public hearing, yes, sir.

Thank you.

Counselor Potton.

Um, two quick ones for me.

I think they're in here, but I had a chance to read this thoroughly.

On this one, there's a condition that says something like hookah bars and vape shops are prohibited, but this does not stipulate other retail uses selling such products.

Can you speak to like the enforcibility of that?

And then also like is there some magic definition between a vape shop versus a retail shop that also sells vapes?

Yes.

So this uh condition was offered by the applicant, I believe, in response to some neighbor concerns.

They did revise in response to some comments from the city attorney's office.

I don't know if um city attorney's office cares to comment further.

Um, but felt like what the applicant was offering uh because uh the condition does not entirely prohibit the sale of tobacco, that it it can be achieved under some uses that that was within our purview.

There are significant limits on how we might regulate the sale of tobacco.

Uh and then your question about is there a definition of a vape shop or a hookah bar?

No, there is not.

I would say um, like all like so many aspects of enforcement in Raleigh would be complaint-based, and I think a determination would have to be made at that time as to whether or not is this a shop that also happens to sell vapes or is this a vape shop?

Okay.

So that would so that would be like an administrative decision if a complaint came in.

Okay.

Got it.

And then um Peace and West.

It looks again, I see that there's an answer here, but I haven't had a chance to read it thoroughly.

But I know there's a condition on the Peace and West case that says something about like heights as it relates to whatever is designated as the primary street.

But do we so we don't know which will be the primary street?

Right.

So right now there are what uh more than uh more than a half dozen parcels there.

Uh if they were developed individually as parcels, the street determination would be one scenario for each of those parcels.

If they are recombined, the street determination would be a a different uh answer based on the administrative objective criteria.

Uh and so we don't really know that that's not something that we can say with great confidence now in advance of uh uh lot disposition subdivision.

Right.

And so the 20 feet that they are adding in the event that so it's uh you know if if it's if West Street is the primary street, then it's 240 or 26.

It's 240 if West is not, 260 if it is.

What they are navigating is that the uh site, the high point of the site is up here at the north end, and it's about 30 feet higher than the low end down here.

And the way that building height is measured is from the um grade of the primary street.

And so they they don't know either.

It sounds like they don't know what their actual lot disposition will be, and so they're trying to cultivate some flexibility there for design.

Okay.

Thank you.

That's helpful.

Any other questions?

Oh yeah.

Yeah, and on Z 1225, I want to follow the um applicant's wish that we do not set the public hearing yet and defer that setting till our next meeting with anticipating it to be on October 7th.

Yep.

Okay.

I'll say the same thing for uh Lilliesville Road.

They wanted to defer that and then but still have it for October 7th.

Great.

Okay.

Um so do we have motions on the remainder?

Do you want to move to say the public hearing for um items C2A and C2B for October um 7th?

C1A C1A and C1B.

Okay.

All right.

All in favor of the motion, aye.

Aye.

All opposed, nay.

All right.

So we've got those two.

Um appreciate it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for serving.

We haven't had you here today, but I know it's a lot of time.

So we'll turn it over to the city manager.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council.

Just two items today.

Um, one is the resolution of support for NC DOT naming of Lewisburg Road Bridge, and we have Michael Moore from the City Manager's Alphas here to present this item.

Good afternoon.

Again, I'm Michael Moore, I'm one of the assistant city managers with um in here.

Um this might seem a little familiar having done this a little bit in the recent past, but I'm here today to share a resolution of support of naming the Lewisburg Road uh US 401 North Bridge for Dr.

William Hedrick.

Um Dr.

Hedrick Um as soon as I get that to work.

Dr.

Hedrick is a Raleigh native.

He has uh operated a solo medical practice in the community for over 60 years until he retired in 2023.

We're doing this today in that the uh Wake County has also uh passed a resolution of support for this, but in doing so found that part of the bridge actually lies in Raleigh, and the other part lies in Wake County, and under the NCDOT rules, it requires us to um also pass a resolution of support.

Um Dr.

Hedrick crossed this bridge upwards of 40,000 times over his career doing work here uh with the in the city and providing medical care to our citizens.

I'm happy to say Dr.

Hedrick, his wife Mary and his uh daughter Sally, who drove in from Manio this morning are here with us this uh this afternoon.

Here are just a few of Dr.

Hedrick's accomplishments.

There are many, many more that are listed in the backup materials that you have got there.

Um this is not the first time the City of Raleigh has honored Dr.

Hedrick.

Uh we recognized him in um July of 2012 as Dr.

William Hedrick Day, and we've also honored him and his wife for their support in helping uh develop Horseshoe Farm Nature Preserve.

Dr.

Hedrick and his wife Mary, uh though this is the Dr.

Bill Hedrick and Mary Hedrick Homestead at Horseshoe Farm Nature Preserve.

They donated 23 acres and did a reduced sale of the property for us to develop this park.

Just a little backup on what the NCDOT process looks like.

Um again, we've done this before, so it's it's one where we're just uh we'll resubmit this uh back to the state uh transportation board.

And with that, I'd like to ask your consideration for this resolution.

All right.

Thank you.

Any comments or do we have a motion?

Yeah, I am grateful to the Hedrick family for their contribution to our park system.

I begin all my greenway journeys at Horseshoe Farm Nature Preserve, so I'm pretty personally grateful.

Um then also thank you, Dr.

Hedrick, for your service to our community through your practice.

So with that, I motion to adopt the resolution and direct staff to transmit the resolution and supporting materials to NCDOT for their consideration.

That's it.

All right.

Uh all in favor of the motion.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, nay.

And the motion passes.

And again, we appreciate uh Mr.

Moore and the Hedrick family for all of you your contributions.

Thank you very much.

Awesome.

And if probably if you would stand up, Dr.

Hedrick, not to put you on the spot, but you've done some amazing work.

Awesome.

Thank you so much.

And the next item um long-awaited Favil Street skate plan update.

We have Ken Bowers from Planning and Development here to present this item.

And as many of you all know, we have worked um tirelessly over the last several years to make sure that downtown is an inviting and safe environment for everyone.

And so Ken is bringing the next step in that process, um, the street skate update forward.

Thanks.

So um before I get started, just wanted to recognize that the project manager from our office, Dylan Brook Allison working with Dylan um Danya Sandeep, who have been managing this project on behalf of the city, and then Dave Tons from McAdams, who is the lead consultant on this, is also present and available to answer questions if needed.

So I'm going to give you a brief overview of the project, um, why we're doing it, uh, what kind of engagement there's been to hear from the public and stakeholders downtown about the future of Fayetteville Street, and then I'm going to present to you the proposed design changes and a phased implementation strategy for your uh response and feedback.

So Fayetteville Street was a major capital project.

It's now almost 20 years old, open in the summer of 2006.

I had just gotten here and they were still laying pavers.

And I remember we had the celebration uh planned right wide Raleigh wide open for a few days, and I was looking out my office window.

It's like it's not going to be done, it's not going to be done.

But they finished it in time and it was open and it was beautiful when it started.

But it's it's now almost 20 years old.

There's been a lot of evolution on the street.

And there was never an actual formal streetscape plan adopted for it.

So any time someone has asked to make a change to the streetscape, whether that's to alter a piece of street furniture or do anything else, there's been no policy guidance against which to review it.

So we are filling that gap with the street streetscape plan.

We're also proposing some improvements to the street to help it function better in light of where downtown is today.

And so that's uh looking at the subsurface utilities and a capital improvement plan for it.

And then the consultants have also developed a longer-term concept design for improving and activating City Plaza that builds on some of the work that we have done recently to improve the furnishings and introduce shade structures into the plaza.

There are four major things.

One is embracing flexibility.

So the uses at the ground level, the front on the street are constantly turning over, and uh uh new use patterns are emerging.

We want a streetscape that has fewer fixed objects in the way and more opportunity for flexible deployment of activation, placemaking, and outdoor commerce.

And a lot of that is refreshing the aesthetics of the streetscape.

We want to have a very vibrant public realm.

This is not just Raleigh's Main Street, but arguably North Carolina's main street as North Carolina's capital.

We want it to project during the day and night uh a vibrant public realm full of people enjoying themselves and going about their business.

And then it should celebrate Raleigh because it is Raleigh's most prominent street.

So, what sort of engagement we've done?

We've done a large number of stakeholder meetings.

The ground floor business owners, particularly in the food and beverage space are a key stakeholder here.

Um we've also looked at all the event organizers because Fayetteville Street and City Plaza in particular are often closed for events.

We need to make sure whether it's parades, music festivals, bluegrass, that the redesign Fayetteville Street works for all of those users.

Then we did general audience engagement for interested citizens to come back, um, come out and give us our opinions.

We'd had an open house event at the City Museum.

We did ask a planner events, we did uh uh folks just stationed out on the street uh where passers by could stop by and talk to staff.

We did an online survey, we deployed our social media, and then also did door to door canvassing of the ground floor businesses.

We heard a lot of stuff.

Umlined in bold is probably the number one ask of the downtown merchant community and food and beverage, which was for the outdoor dining, which is currently located away from the building face across the pedestrian way to actually be relocated to the building face for easier serving.

Um we had requests for public art.

The view shed between the two neoclassical buildings that frame the termini of Fayville Street is obviously critical.

It's our signature downtown urban design move is to have all these tall buildings stacked along that view shed with those with those columns of the uh historic statehouse and the performing arts center down at the southern end.

The street trees have done wonderfully.

We've put a lot of great infrastructure in place at the time Fayville Street was installed, and as a result, the trees have thrived, and the tree canopy is one of our greatest assets.

Not a single tree is to be touched with any of these recommendations.

We want to put in place the infrastructure for special events, and there is talk about you know potential could we bring back some sort of water feature to City Plaza.

So this shows the current allocation of space along the Fayetteville street streetscape.

Starting from the curb and working inward, you've got a five-foot buffer that allows people to step out of their cars.

That is unusually wide for such a buffer, usually two to three feet is sufficient for an open car door and for pedestrians to alight on the sidewalk.

Then there's this 12-foot furniture zone.

A lot of it is filled with these fixed planners, the pots, the planning beds, the benches, the seat walls, um, and the tree pits, of course.

There's uh an eight and a half foot pedestrian path, and then along the business frontage is about four feet of business spill out, just enough for a two-top table.

So, how are we proposing to reallocate this?

What we're proposing to do is to create an eight-foot business spill out zone.

Now there'll be room for four top tables directly outside the businesses.

The eight-foot walking path would then be relocated a little bit outward, and it would cut into what's currently the furniture zone.

The furniture zone would be about as large as it is today, but it would be programmed differently.

It would be more flexible, have fewer fixed um objects in it, more opportunity for temporary installations and activations.

And then we would have a two and a half foot buffer for the step out zone.

This shows the same thing in plan view, and this shows sort of the long-term vision for how the streetscape is going to evolve.

And I know at this scale it may be a little bit hard to see, but you've got the expanded business zone here.

The furniture zone becomes an activation zone, and the tree pits get enlarged to create replacement planning beds so that there's more room for more green within this, and in between each of the tree pits become individual areas that can be activated in different ways.

This is a shot looking at the south on the uh 200 block of Fayetteville Street showing the existing condition.

And I think this highlights a couple of things, one of which is outdoor dining currently accommodated in the furniture zone has to compete with these large um permanent installations of planner beds and pots, leaving little space left over.

And then there's um these uh these benches, which are not really being used much or activating the street, also within that same zone.

Depending on where you are, sometimes there is more space, sometimes there is less within that zone for outdoor dining.

This would provide a consistent outdoor dining.

This is the proposed condition, consistent outdoor dining along the building frontage, an expanded serving area.

The sidewalk then becomes a clear uh eight-foot clear path to accommodate pedestrian flows, and then a variety of different activations could be done in between the tree pits.

And this is just a partial list of that.

You could have fixed seating options, movable seating.

You could have even more outdoor dining, you could have retail kiosks or displays, temporary workspaces, interactive art, lawn areas, all sorts of things could go within that.

And it would be a very flexible approach to how the street could be programmed and evolved over time.

And then lastly, showing city plaza, this is expanding on some of the work.

Again, part of the view here is to remove some of the permanent features and planting beds to create more flexibility, replacing that with more shade installations, uh, the opportunity for uh trees and pots to create some shade in that manner, and then maybe long term we'll look at whether it's feasible to add some sort of flush water feature that could be on uh during the warm weather months and off for special events and in the cold weather months.

So I promised an implementation strategy, the phased implementation strategy, phase one is subtract and reallocate.

So as to do the minimal amount necessary to implement that reallocation of space that I showed in the earlier slide.

So you establish a new outdoor dining zone against the building face and a new walking zone.

Currently, there are things in the walking zone, primarily these uh benches and some seat walls that are orthogonal to the direction of travel.

Those would have to be removed as part of that.

There are no um uh electrical service or water service within those structures, so removing them should be relatively low cost, although we don't have a final cost estimate yet.

Um then any uh gaps would be filled in with with pavers uh to make sure there was a continuous sidewalk experience.

But we wouldn't be changing the materiality of the street with this uh short-term thing.

The other aspect of this is to do something with the news racks.

So as part of the study, we have determined that that complete removal of the news racks is not um viable at this time.

And there are some utilities that are uh uh contained within these cabinets, but the larger uh shelter that creates a larger obstruction in the streetscape would be removed.

These have not held up very well.

There's been a lot of they tend to attract graffiti during parades, people sit on them, which they really weren't designed for.

Um so by removing them, we can reclaim a little bit of space but still keep those essential elements of the consolidated news racks and utility cabinets in place.

Phase two would obviously be a much larger investment, and this would involve changing the paving pattern to reflect the reallocation of space.

It would include looking at the intersections to create special paving treatments to highlight um where every cross uh street intersects with Fayetteville street.

It would be uh removal and of the uh existing fixed installations for planting beds and pots that do include electrical service and water and making sure that those uh utility hookups are available through other means.

Um and it would also uh enlarge the tree pits, pushing them outwards towards the curb to create replacement planning beds that utilize the existing tree pits and to find those individual activation areas.

With that, that concludes my presentation, and I would be happy to take any questions.

Thank you.

Uh questions.

Um, let me start with uh Councilor Branch, and then we'll go to Councillor Silver.

So definitely thank you for the presentation.

Um I'm gonna start off with the one thing that I hope we don't do again.

And that's the water feature.

And only because I live through the issues of challenges with the water feature.

It's great the first two years.

But when we start getting a year 10, year 15, we start looking at maintenance and a lot of other concerns.

We start looking at the fact that the plazas on top of a parking deck and water leaking down to the parking deck.

Um those are concerns that I don't feel future councils should have to deal with.

So that's my three cents on that water feature.

Um couple questions.

Um as far as you mentioned the planting and the bedding, um, is that removing because uh walk Favelish Street in some of the areas where we used to have plants?

We no longer do.

Are we talking about removing those?

Yeah.

So um on this uh thing, these things here.

Okay.

Under the long-term street, not in the short-term implementation, but long term, we would consider moving the removing these to create a more flexible area between the tree pits.

Okay.

On the two I call them corridors near um going to the Go Raleigh Transit Center.

Um what's the plan there of at cause you mentioned Favor Street, but Favor Street has a connection to Go Raleigh Transit Center.

And there's a lot of you know, I walked the other day where I guess it had rained the day before and it was muddy and and what can you do to act.

Exchange and market plazas.

Correct.

Yeah.

They were not included in the study.

Um can certainly agree that they would both benefit from activation, but they are not part of the recommendations of this study.

Okay.

Is there a plan for them to be included in a future study?

Or do you need that direction?

We haven't programmed that yet, no.

Okay.

We would need direction to do that.

Okay.

Um I'll take that as a note for counsel.

Well, can I just follow up on that?

Because um uh when we you know, I am the liaison for the downtown Raleigh Alliance, and we did talk about those two alleys.

Right.

So I thought they were part of the study because we discussed it.

Um we had some ideas and recommendations coming down of DRA, so maybe we can just revisit that.

I don't know.

Possibly.

Am I confused?

I mean, I honestly cannot say all I can say is that as currently scoped, they are not included in the plaza or in this particular study, possibly because they were both refreshed, you know, within the last 10 years.

Okay.

It is probably a wise answer not to say, yes, Mayor, you're a very good thing.

No, I mean I'm saying I was not part of that particular conversation, so I have no knowledge of it.

That's uh that's thank you.

Okay.

And then we I do remember there were some recommendations in the downtown DRA's economic strategy for activation of those two plazas, though.

Okay.

And my last question is around the plaza.

Um I know we have replaced some pavers in things.

Have we thought about maybe some type of artwork or something to kind of rotate it?

Because that shot is used by all of our news agencies.

Um some way to activate it so it doesn't look mismatch.

Yes.

Yes.

There is consideration for reintroducing public art in more places, both within the plaza and along Pavel Street.

It was mentioned on an earlier slide where the utility boxes have to remain that they are a potential place for public art.

And it is interesting to recall that when City Plaza first opened, there were two rotating public art spots.

Right.

I think it was four, a total of four, um, which are still there and could be reactivated at some point.

Okay.

Um I'll stop for there for now.

All right.

Let me get Councillor Silver, then Lambert Melton, and then Harrison.

Uh Ken, good to see you.

Um, is there a budget associated with this, or at this point, it is just concepts that are being explored?

There will be a budget.

We are working on that.

I think we are going to look to refine a budget for this short-term first implementation phase.

And should the council express um support for the general concept, this would be something that would appear in a future capital budgeting request.

I think our sense of of this is that the major move here from an economic perspective is changing where the where the outdoor dining is located.

And if that starts to show a lot of benefit, that potentially creates the appetite for a larger and more expensive refresh of the streetscape.

One of the issues you have with the current um streetscape is we've we have chosen materials that are no longer available, and we have a stockpile of pavers, but eventually it will run out.

And at some point, I think the refresh of the actual material conditions of how the street is straightwalk is paved, could we need a refresh and uh alongside of that doing some of these larger moves would help with that.

I think the other thing is a decision for a future council to make once we have done the short-term improvements.

Is this something that you want to do all in one go?

Is it something that would be a phased approach?

We will do one block and then we'll do others and bite it off in discrete chunks.

Um, our sense is probably that the longer-term improvements will have a significant price tag attached to them, and so some due consideration about how to fund that is uh warranted.

Uh second question.

I did go to the open house and I got a larger presentation about other opportunities.

I definitely agree that over time, the pavers we arrived almost the same time, and I'm like, what are we doing with the pavers?

If I recall this was designed by committee, if I remember 30 to 35 people helped design this street, which is not something I would encourage or advocate.

I do like the idea about having the zones and pushing, you can't move the trees, so you are stuck with a fixed object.

I mean you can, but I would not advocate for it.

But my my my question is that if you go back a couple of slides when you sh saw the after, and this is something that I certainly want both the city and DRA, that one.

Yeah.

This is a change to more contemporary streetscape with the flexibility.

However, if you look at those street walls, those are not restaurants or eating or drinking establishments.

They're either a dentist office or a gallery.

My hope is as we work because the streetscape as designed will work so long as the storefronts or the ground floor is activated with restaurants or retail.

So I just want to make sure as we have this conversation, we need to reach out to our partners.

We can't mandate it.

These are private to private transactions.

But for this to work and for people to be excited, we have got to work on the ground floor activation, which supports outdoor dining.

Otherwise, we'll have another nice streetscape with not people.

And I think the ultimate goal is to how do we activate this street?

So uh and then City Plaza, I'm hoping we'll have a further conversation.

We're seeing this for the first time.

Want to make sure we have I don't know what the venue that is, and maybe my colleague will have a recommendation.

But certainly this is something that is needed, uh including the pavement.

Uh I don't know how long what the budget will be for the midterm, but certainly that's something that's going to help a great deal on establishing, and we're doing it all over the city, whether it's block 83 and others.

You can accomplish the same thing with concrete uh versus being in a position where some of the papers start to sink, they need to be maintained.

So I do support that long term.

I like what I see, but I'd like to have some more conversation about City Plaza and paving the intersections.

Great.

Member Melton.

Right on cue.

Um Councilmember Silver.

So I was going to actually suggest that we take this item into the economic development innovation committee.

We don't have any items pending now, so we can take it up quickly.

I think that will allow us to sort of thread together this conversation about market and exchange plaza and how it works with this design.

I'm also interested in I guess expediting these uh phase one projects, particularly cleaning up the streetscape and these sort of um high impact, low-cost options.

And I think we could do that in committee and uh produce some um maybe actionable uh recommendations with uh budget items attached to them.

Um then also I do think that the city plaza does uh warrant a greater discussion, which we we could have in committee about what is ultimately going to be done there, whether it's a water feature or something else.

I I would like to take it into EDI if uh I guess that's my motion.

Yeah, second.

All right.

Um Council Harrison.

Yeah, I'll just continue on that.

I think it would be great to have uh discussion in committee.

Um a couple items that just hit me initially.

I love you know the dining opportunity here, being close to the buildings.

I'm curious what does it look like when we don't have a restaurant?

So even if there is ground floor retail, you know, are we gonna have benches?

Are we gonna have other opportunities?

So it's not just dead space.

Also curious if we have to move the benches that are currently there.

Do those get reused quickly?

Do we lose a lot of seating space initially?

How do we ensure that we're not losing that?

Um I'm also curious about the furniture, if it's movable, and there are a lot of different, you know, configurations, who is managing that?

Um, how do we ensure it's uh taken care of and can endure?

Um I second um council member branch about those plazas.

I think they're really important, especially the one to the bus station.

There's a large structure there that I don't know what it's for.

Maybe it had a great purpose in the past, but I couldn't say today what it's for.

So there's definitely some opportunities to uh reconfigure.

I had heard mention, I think, of public art on sidewalks or um on the road.

That's wonderful.

I'm curious if that is going to be an issue ongoing legally.

I know there have been some challenges to sidewalk art in the state of Florida and it could come on the federal level.

Um I hope not, because I think it's a great thing.

Um the water feature, is there a way to keep it simple that was something we can manage?

You know, I'm thinking of something that is like a spray that comes out but not something huge.

Um water would be great if we can figure it out.

Um then I'll just finish.

Um anything that we can get done quickly and move this along the better.

So thank you for the presentation, Ken.

Counselor Patton.

Yeah.

Hi Ken.

Um Yeah, I feel like from the time we saw the DRA economic development plan.

Now we've like, I feel like several times we've seen a presentation with these, like these very similar pictures.

And I feel uh feel like we've kind of endorsed like, yes, take out the news kiosks.

Yes, take out the benches and relocate them.

Um it almost feels like stuck in a loop.

And it and as I was preparing for this meeting, it seems like even as we provide feedback today, there's still more regulatory work to do to actually like accomplish some of these things.

And so I wonder like I guess I'm just kind of echoing like let's do the let's do the thing that's needed to move the benches and maybe like we can paint things and while we await for repaving or um like maybe we can allow private use of public space and that we allow proprietors to paint their spillover section and we can do that without having to find budget allocation or something like that.

Like let's let's do do the thing.

No, I was just gonna go ahead and renew the motion for committee.

I agree.

I think it's time to I think there's gonna be more work long term, but for short term, I think we have sort of consensus on what we want to do.

And so I'm ready to just act.

So if we take it into committee, I think we can move out some action items and also tie in some of the mayor's questions about these other corridors.

And so that would be my motion is to send this to EDI.

Yeah.

I was gonna just comment.

So uh just to give the council feedback on the the downtown Raleigh group.

Um I thought uh this is well done, uh Mr.

Bowers.

I like the simplicity of your uh explanations and the diagrams.

The the general consensus from downtown Raleigh was they did not want to go blow out some massive budget.

They felt that vertical elements were more important than horizontal.

So I would say for me, I am not fully bought in to the paver situation.

I I think we all agree let's get rid of the first wave of stuff.

But in terms of pavers, because there's been conversations uh on painting or color, like how might that fit in versus some really expensive, you know, repaving um to delineate these different zones.

Um then we did talk about uh so I think the functionality and a low cost kind of way.

And then we did talk about really preserving the avenue to Wilmington Street from Fayetteville Street as it connects to the bus station, and uh using similar sort of art, color, removing some of these structures that are not functional.

Um so there was a good amount of conversation there that I think again doesn't have to blow out you know a budget.

And then finally, uh we had talked about a stage or semi-permanent, you know, something uh down on the plaza as opposed to the water feature.

They were more inclined to go with the sort of performing and activation.

Um I think that there's a lot of alignment uh both with what I'm hearing here and and on uh the downtown Raleigh Alliance and appreciate all the work going into this.

So um I'm happy to call the vote for it to go to committee um with the idea of expediting this do the thing phase one.

All right, so all in favor of sending oh yeah, uh of the motion, I.

All opposed, nay.

All right, so do the thing.

Do the thing.

And then I see Mr.

King out there.

Well, could you make sure to be at our committee meeting so we can capture all the DRA feedback and do the thing?

Thank you.

Well, we've done the thing, and that concludes my report today.

All right.

Thank you.

Um so we have only one item scheduled for public hearing, and I know uh it had been double scheduled for both the afternoon and the evening.

So it's my understanding, uh Ms.

Reckell's coming down that we are going to open the hearing now and then leave it open for this evening.

Yes.

Okay.

That's right.

Did you want to um talk through it at all, or we're just gonna open it with no commentary?

Given that no one has is here to speak believe.

We can have the whole conversation this evening.

So I'm going to open the hearing for Z5224 Tryon Road and uh leave it open.

And we'll talk about it tonight.

Uh okay.

So that is that.

Next we have uh reports of committees.

Um there were there was nothing in the first two uh.

I'll go ahead and announce the meeting for this month now that we have an item.

So economic development innovation will meet on uh Tuesday, September 23rd at 130 p.m.

in the city council chambers and we'll we'll take up the only item we have, which we just saw.

Okay.

Uh growth in natural resources, nothing currently.

Yeah, no report.

All right, and counselor uh branch.

Yes, um, do have one item that we've reported out around um Safe Environment Committee met.

We discussed our digital signage and digital billboards, and in that conversation, um, we talked about how this came before council before, but there was never really a full conversation as far as size, as far as um locations, expansions.

Um, a number was given to council, but that number included all possibilities without really defining what actually could be done if if one is set is is done from a digital standpoint going forward how far apart.

So out of that, the committee talked um longer than I thought we were going to.

I think we took almost 45 minutes on this item.

Um and we were reporting out to authorized staff to draft a uh tax change and referred to planning commission to allow the digital bullet boards as proposed by external um industry representatives with modifications to address the following.

Increase um bulk, meaning size and height.

Um right now I think we limit 300 feet.

The state has a 400 foot limit.

Um, so they'll have that conversation.

Location and expansion, separation between signs, the brightness of signs, also requiring the removal of existing signs, meaning there will also be a cap on the number of signs, digital and non-digital, were part of the conversation that we had.

Um board members, is there anything else we missed?

I got back to Raleigh at 10 o'clock last night.

So I want to make sure.

Well, I would just say that the tone of the discussion was we felt this was worth having a conversation.

We're not saying we're all for this.

Correct.

We just think we need to revisit because we've allowed the digital signage on the street level.

What does that mean?

And we also are sensitive to the fact that these signs have been stacked in council branches district primarily, and a redistribution with a cap on the same number again is a conversation worth having.

So I just truly this is just to have a conversation.

This is not saying we're going to change the policy, but we've not had that conversation to date.

Um so this is an opportunity.

And also we were we're able to give planning commission some direction.

They were actually in audience at the time of the meeting, so they heard some of it.

Um, but it also gives them a chance to, we've kind of given them direction on what to look at as far as a reference back to us because they did not have that prior to the last test change.

So that was the motion as printed that I read.

Great.

Second.

Okay.

Uh counselor Harrison.

Yeah.

Um I just want to put out a few concerns, and I think um, I mean, maybe guardrails that I'm thinking about with this conversation.

Uh with the billboard proposal as is, when I look at the staff presentation, um, it's pretty wide open.

So there is um a slide that talks about current, you know, uh restrictions or limits on the billboards, and then proposed.

I find the proposed ideas vast potentially in terms of where it could be permitted.

And I have concerns just about maybe losing our own control in this particular situation.

We had some conversations, I know, in closed session about making changes to this ordinance, and I don't know if it's appropriate to talk about those to now or if it would be something that we need to talk about as a body because when we make changes like this, there could be other implications.

I know there is some information shared from that past conversation.

Um I just I have a little bit of a yeah.

Yeah.

And also when this um the last time this came before us and brought this up in committee, um, there was also a state bill that was out, and that was one of the reasons why as a council we said we were going to wait and let the state bill go forward and see what happens with that state bill.

Um and I think that has already ran its course.

Um so I think gives us a better idea to have those very conversations.

Because in our committee meeting, we even said and uh and mentioned the staff that based on the information provided, this is a vast area.

But once you realize why that information was given to us, then we had a better understanding.

Um yes, it says it looks like it'd be all over the city, but the way is limited and the way they're spread apart, it does limit that footprint, but staff stated they could not limit that footprint because they don't know what the first one will be planned down place first.

And once they have that information, then they can determine how many could be and where.

In terms of who would decide that, I mean, that's a private business decision within the zoning does areas, right?

Our zoning.

Our zoning determines where that would be placed.

But those are conversations that planning, our planning commission will have, it'll come back to us from planning for us to have more conversation to then determine if we want to move forward or not.

Yeah.

I do want to note we went through this process last term.

So I we did have the text change forward.

And planning had a recommendation opposed to the change.

Planning's recommendation came to us, it was denial, and it also stated they didn't know what to approve.

So that's why they denied it.

Yep.

Okay.

Yep.

Any other comment?

Yep.

Yeah, I have a lot of concerns about this.

We did last time.

Um we did already do this process when we opened it.

I mean, the first time we opened it up, it was like, okay, well, we're going to do a public process.

We'll hear from the public, which we did.

Uh there was a lot of community concern.

I don't think that if we reopen the conversation, we'll have a different reaction from the community.

Um the streets that are particularly targeted to open up access, like as opposed to capital, which also carries a lot of the water for the for the billboards in the city when and is in my district, where there is no homes fronting on Capitol on Hillsborough Street, Wilmington Street, and Atlantic Avenue, there are homes that both that front or back up to on these corridors.

And you know, so I I just think, yes, we could provide so much prescriptive guidance that says, well, don't let it back up to a home, or don't let it like we could get that prescriptive about it and hope that it holds.

But one thing we were also presented with was the way different municipalities sign ordinances have held up or not held up in court over the past years, and ours has held up.

And so I think there's questions about what like what would happen if we move the goalpost.

Um we could ask staff to get so prescriptive and hope that it holds, but I just wonder like if we are asking staff to spend their time on something, it should be something that's in line with our priorities, right?

It should create more housing, create more affordable housing, serve climate goals, create public safety.

I think last time we were also presented with um research on road safety, and it was inconclusive at best, I think was the takeaway.

Um and it according to the answers we received, it looks like there's traditionally eight slots of advertising on each digital billboard.

So unless you had an eight to one retirement rate, you would be putting net more advertising into the world.

You would have a fewer physical structures, but you would have eight times more actual advertising.

And when we think about what's on a billboard, it's DraftKings, fanDuel, only fans, lotto, keynote.

It's a lot of things that I don't necessarily and we can't control for that.

We can't regulate the content of these signs.

And so I just wonder like what's the public benefit to asking our staff to spend time on this.

So I don't know that I'm even in support of reopening the door.

Uh Mayor Portel.

Well, we we've already got an email about this from somebody from the public who weighed in the last time we proposed this.

Um I definitely want to see us have um some pretty rigorous um public engagement around this conversation.

Um I remember some of the commentary from folks about distractions on highways and uh just not necessarily wanting to see the you know our community quote unquote littered with digital signs.

And I do think there's a distinct difference between you know what we've done in the downtown area versus what would be done across the cities and different um parts of the uh of the area.

So uh I hear you, Councilmember Patton, but I definitely want to make sure that the public is well aware that this conversation is um being revisited and that um there's a uh a pretty rigorous opportunity for community engagement.

And I see uh Ms.

Hinton back in the back with her group, but uh certainly want to make sure that we're getting um commentary from the community, um, not just our staff presenting something to the planning commission.

Yep, Counselor Silver.

Yeah, I I certainly want to hear from the community, but I also want to hear from the industry.

Uh we want to make sure we're balanced as we do our outreach uh during the committee meeting.

I asked a lot of questions about the state law, what is prohibited and what is uh prohibited and what is allowed.

And this is whether people like it or not.

Bills boards are permitted, in some cases grandfathered.

And so I just want to make sure that we have a conversation with all parties involved, both on the business side and the community, so we can hear what they have to say.

I think Councilmember Branch uh summarized it quite well, what the committee discussed, uh had concerns about proximity to residential areas in terms of location, separation, brightness, you know, all that I think are very important to have a conversation.

Uh I I can't I was not here as part of the previous conversation, cannot jump to a conclusion unless I deliberate and hear both sides.

Uh to me, that's how I want to make a decision.

I want to hear from the industry, business community, but I also want to hear from the residents.

And after hearing both sides, I feel as if I'll be able to be in a position to make a better decision about what is the appropriate path to go forward.

Okay.

Yeah, I just want to be clear.

I'm not going to support the text change proposal as is.

It just feels too vague at this time.

And I feel like we did address these topics in the last term.

And at the end of the day, I don't anticipate the residents that I represent having an interest in this.

Can I ask one question?

Is there something, and this is for all council members, is there something else you will want to see at it or address in order to have the conversation?

And all I'm saying is just to have a conversation.

What else would you want to give direction to for.

I I personally feel like if we're going to initiate the text change, I would rather it be a little wider because I think that gives our staff and the planning commission and the public some flexibility to be more prescriptive with their feedback.

And so to Councilmember Silver's point, I mean I was on council when this came up last time.

I honestly don't remember that much about it.

I did read the memo that we had from closed session.

Um I would rather um I don't feel like I can give direction on that right now.

I I would rather it go out into the process um sort of open-ended and then allow the uh community and the experts to sort of tailor it for us.

That that's my position.

And uh I understand some folks may not support it.

I will vote yes to initiate the text change.

Well, and what I'll say, Councilmember Silver, the industry is the one that requested this text change.

And so they are the ones that are driving force requesting this to make these changes, which is why I'm saying make sure the public has an adequate opportunity to weigh in because the industry is the one warning the changes.

Yep, Councilor Chung.

I just wanted to add um after sitting there and being having gone through it last time, uh I did ask the industry to meet with CACs to start how do we build that uh connection point with the community outside of uh our staff.

And they have met with them and they are now scheduled to meet with individual C They met with the entire group, the RCAC leadership, and they are going to now meet with uh individuals.

So if you are a part, and if you are not, you should definitely be part of your CACs.

This should be coming your way uh sh soon prior to this ever being decided on.

So that is just one piece that uh I want to be able to heal from more that are outside of just emails, because I think the majority of people that we heard from last time was through emails.

And um and I want to make sure we have a wider base of not only opinions, but also understanding and hearing directly from the uh community, the business community, the industry who is putting this in front of them.

You know, it's it's kind of their job to sell it.

So uh that's what I am trying to make sure they have that platform to speak to the community as well, and they have agreed to that.

And counselor branch, to your question, I guess I would understand and the current signage, are there residents, you know, residences that are exposed to the current situation?

Um I know there are, because down on South, you know, South Saunders, there's some houses.

So, you know, and then if we were going to think about uh redistributing away from the uh key corridors, and you know, maybe it's uh uh Counselor Patton and and and yours.

Um I definitely think you know these trying to get it away from residential and the rest of it.

But um I just I just think the more specific we can get around current sign and what is going on with those uh might be helpful to inform the future conditions.

Okay.

All right.

Um I can just add one more thing.

Um I want to make sure too that we have uh closed session on this topic, regardless of how we move forward, so that we understand um from the attorney's perspective on this.

Um I do believe the South Saunders area is in District D.

Maybe it's right on the edge.

It depends on the edge of the street.

Yeah, it is part of it, but when you look at Tower shopping center, tower shopping center alone has more than South Saunders.

Yeah, yeah.

But I'm just saying there are some mix in I think it's B, C, and D primarily.

Well, the final just for the uh city attorney, I know this was part of there were a number of bills run in the General Assembly, right?

That were trying to take away zoning authority.

Uh there was there was some uh uh language that was removed from that bill related to signage.

So just might be helpful for us to understand what were some of the bills introduced in the General Assembly, you know, where did those go?

Um we did wait to hear this until after session.

Um, but given that they have not concluded really their business either.

Um that just might be helpful context, particularly in a closed session as Councillor Harrison was mentioning.

Uh yeah, and I would say just in inclusive also of peer cities in North Carolina who have made these changes and the you know follow-along activities that have happened with them.

What's the uptake then?

Have they uh had to expand them based on state action or leg uh litigation, et cetera.

Um I was just going to add that maybe uh one possible solution would be perhaps we could hold this till the next meeting and ask for a closed session on it to refresh everyone's memory, or do we want to advance it now?

Well, it would have to be, I think it would have to be the first meeting in um October because I don't because you would have to prepare for a closed session on the 16th.

Right.

How does that also I mean how does that inform the planning commission, right?

What how would they get information that's relevant from a closed session?

They don't it would inform us who ultimately make the decision.

Yeah.

Yeah, it it may help us provide a little bit more direction.

Um I I could use a refresher on this.

I have the closed session memo for March of 2024.

I I read it before the meeting because Councilmember Patton circulated it, but a touch point on what these bills were and what the outcome was, what were what we would hope to accomplish from this and any legal issues associated with it.

I think last time it was heavily focused on regulation of content.

Um that may help us provide a little bit more direction before we initiate a text change.

So what we do is this has been referred out.

It's now in the hands of the council.

So it'll be a special item, I guess, on a future agenda until the closed session.

Another lengthy conversation.

Uh uh just deciding.

Okay.

Um we have two pinning items.

One of them I need to talk to the city attorney about on how, because we said we weren't going to talk about the um noise ordinance part because of the other conversation, other work that we have from the previous from close from that closed session.

So I get with the city attorney on on that.

And then the other conversation was about commercial trash.

Um, due to time, we cannot go in great detail.

We let those who are present speak, and we want to pick that up at our next meeting, uh, which will be September the 23rd here in the chamber.

Okay.

That's all I have.

All right.

Thank you.

Uh transportation and transit has one item pending, pavement markings, and we will meet on Thursday, September 25th from 3 to 5 in council chambers to discuss that item.

Okay.

All right.

Next we have report of the mayor and city council.

I'll start with Councilor Harrison.

Um just want to say we will have a District D neighborhood alliance meeting on Saturday, September 20th.

That's at 9.30 a.m.

at the Crowder Center at Lake Johnson Park.

And also uh happy Labor Day.

Hope everyone had a nice long weekend.

Um September 29th.

I'm waiting for a location to be confirmed.

Um once I have that information will go out.

Other than that, I hope everyone had a good um past holiday weekend for those that work out in and labor and and serve.

Thank you for what you do.

And have a great day.

Thank you.

Um our next District E community meeting will be held on September 10th from 6 to 8 p.m.

at La Cusina Italian Restaurant.

And the decoding democracy book club will meet on September 13th, back at the Oberlin Regional Library from 9 30 to 11 30.

We'll be moving on to Article 6 and 7 of the Raleigh City Charter, and that will be under Book 3, meeting three in the Google Drive.

And then lastly, I just I don't think they will, so I'm gonna highlight it right now.

We have two birthdays coming up on council.

We've got Councillor Patton and Councillor Harrison coming up next week.

So super excited for Virgo season and happy birthday.

No report from me.

Very well attended and great conversation, and I'll be announcing the next one for either uh late September or late October.

That's it for my report.

All right.

Um highlighting as always good things we did through the consent agenda.

We um began the process of making the holiday in a historic landmark.

We accepted several grants from the Governor's Highway Safety Program for motorcycle safety, enforcement of seatbelt violations, and spotting and stopping impaired driving.

I also added some no parking areas in my district to improve lines of sight for driver and pedestrian safety and lowered some speed limits on Taylor Oaks Drive and Tyler Bluff Lane.

Um my office hours will be Wednesday, September 10th from 6 to 8 at local 919.

Um then I wanted to just offer sympathies to families who sent their kids off for the first week of school and also experienced um school-based gun violence last week.

Um policy is in my view, love out loud and the policies we make can express that or not.

And um so I just want to express my sympathies to those families and remind us that this doesn't have to keep happening.

Um no report.

City attorney was distracting me.

Um we had a a number of great um uh festivals and celebrations over the last couple weeks.

So I want to congratulate, I don't see her in here, but Octavia Rainey on the fourth ward celebration.

It was uh uh over a couple of days over a weekend was great.

So I went to the Saturday celebration and also the gospel celebration on that Sunday.

Um I have to give some acknowledgement to those folks at NC State.

They had a successful pack of Palooza uh event, which was very well attended.

And then over the last two days um or Saturday and Sunday this weekend, the folks at the African American Cultural Festival had a successful event as well.

So uh organizers of these events are uh highlighting you know small businesses in the area and a lot of other things that contribute to our economic development.

So congratulations to the organizers of all those events.

Next um appointments.

Good afternoon.

First is uh uh arts commission, two regular vacancies.

Andrew Baker received eight votes, so it would be appointed.

And then for that remaining vacancy, council members Harrison and Jones nominated Chance Bus Damonte.

So that will return on the next ballot.

Can I just check?

I believe his address might be in nightdale, so that could be an issue.

Um I will check.

Haven't done nominations as of today, but I can look at that and if that's the case, we can reach out to him.

He confirmed that.

We'll look at that.

Okay, thank you.

Um next is design review commission, one alternate vacancy.

Kate Char Kate Charlin received eight votes, so it would be appointed.

Environmental advisory board, one regular vacancy.

Veronica bidding receive eight votes, so is appointed.

Raleigh sister cities, one regular vacancy.

Councilmember Jones nominated Sebastian Duca, so that will be coming back on your next ballot.

Jumping down to nominations, fair housing hearing board, one regular vacancy term of Octavia Rainey's expiring.

She does not wish to be considered for reappointment.

Again, per city code, she will continue to serve until replaced.

So that will be coming back on your next ballot.

I'd like to nominate Damian Goo.

All right.

That'll be coming back on your next ballot.

Sorry, I keep waiting for someone to uh Parks Recreation and Greenway Advisory Board, one regular vacancy term of Ian Burnett is expiring.

He would like to be considered for reappointment.

I move that we reappoint Ian Barnett.

Second.

Uh all in favor of that motion.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, nay.

All right.

Um and lastly, just again, listed on this agenda are various various vacancies for boards awaiting council direction as discussions are ongoing regarding potential reorganizations.

And that's it.

Can I um I just want to ask for for the group?

Is it was it the will of the council to hold all of these uh vacancies?

Uh is there any interest in while we do the work with the special committee to still allow the transition into new with new members, um, or is this something that we want to wait until it's complete before we restart nomination?

I'll jump in and say because it was on the committee.

I think the the goal would be to hold, because if we do reorganization and restructuring, you don't want to bring people on, get them on boarded, and then next thing you know you're kind of removing folks.

And so I think if we pause it until we kind of figure out what the structure will be going forward, um, that would be a better plan so you don't have people coming and go and kind of ping ponging through the process.

Okay.

I want to I want to nominate Diane Yusuf to the Fair Housing Board.

Diane Yusuf.

And can I because I'm the advisor for the board, so I'm gonna say something pretty directly to folks.

One of the challenges with that board is that we really need to look at diversity from a range of perspectives, racial diversity, gender diversity, and some other things.

So that's something I just want council members to take into consideration.

Um, because the the makeup of the board seems to be um pretty um homogenous, I guess is a word that I would use.

Thank you for that.

Okay.

Any other conversation?

Okay.

Okay.

And the city clerk.

Second.

All in favor of the motion.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, nay.

Right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

So next, uh, we have a motion to enter into closed session.

Uh, it is pursuant to general statute one forty-three three eighteen eleven A three to consult the city attorney in order to preserve attorney client privilege and to consider and give instructions regarding the handling and or settlement of the potential claims in the following matters.

City of Raleigh versus Jones Estates LLC, City of Raleigh versus Jones Estates Raleigh, LLC.

General Statute 143, 318, 11A9 to discuss and take action regarding plans to protect public safety as it relates to existing or potential terrorist activity and to receive briefings by staff members, legal counsel or law enforcement concerning actions taken or to be taken to respond to such activity.

And general statute one forty-three, three eighteen, eleven A six to consider the qualifications, competence, performance, character, fitness, conditions of appoint uh of appointment, or conditions of employment for an individual public officer or employee or prospective public officer or employee, or to hear investigate a complaint, charge, or grievance by or against an individual public officer or employee.

So moved.

Second.

All in favor of the motion, aye.

Aye.

All opposed, nay.

Thank you.

We are now in closed session.

Okay.

Okay.

So the game was getting the packets.

Oh, those wrong.

So don't look at it.

I don't think that's the thing.

Oh god, I have it.

Okay.

I think it's a good thing.

Closed session.

The council met in closed session to consider the qualifications, competence, performance, and conditions of employment of an individual employee.