OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Raleigh City Council Regular Meeting – September 2, 2025

City CouncilTuesday, September 2, 2025
BodyRaleigh, North Carolina
SessionCity Council
DateTuesday, September 2, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 3:46:49

Transcript — Verbatim
11:42

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

11:46

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

11:50

And uh Counselor Patton, would you help lead us?

12:02

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

12:12

All right.

12:12

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

12:21

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

12:26

Motion to approve.

12:27

Second.

12:28

Right.

12:29

All in favor of the motion, aye.

12:31

Aye.

12:31

All opposed, nay.

12:33

Right.

12:33

And that passes.

12:35

And do we want to talk about B4E?

12:43

Just had a question on this contract services.

12:48

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

12:55

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

13:00

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.

13:13

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

13:20

So if you could just clarify that.

13:23

Absolutely.

13:24

Uh Carrie Painter Ray Convention and Performing Arts Complex.

13:28

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

13:34

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

13:37

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

13:45

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.

13:58

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.

14:09

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.

14:21

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

14:30

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.

14:38

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

14:45

Right.

14:45

No, we're made whole.

14:46

We capture it all.

14:48

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.

14:56

But almost always we're made whole.

15:00

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

15:04

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

15:07

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

15:08

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

15:11

Okay.

15:12

Thank you.

15:14

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.

15:26

All in favor of the motion, aye.

15:28

Aye, aye.

15:29

All opposed, nay.

15:30

All right, so that passes.

15:31

Thank you.

15:32

Uh right.

15:33

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

15:39

Good afternoon, Bynam Walter, Raleigh Planning and Development.

15:41

I'm joined today by Vice Chair Roberta Fox.

15:45

Okay.

15:45

Ms.

15:45

Bennett since her chairbennett since her regrets.

15:48

She's not well.

15:55

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

16:01

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

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Procedural███████████████████████████████31%
Personnel Matters██████████████████████████████30%
Pending Litigation█████████9%
Parks and Recreation████4%
Engineering And Infrastructure████4%
Economic Development████4%
Legislative Process████4%
Miscellaneous████4%
Rezoning███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Raleigh City Council Regular Meeting – September 2, 2025

The Raleigh City Council met on September 2, 2025, in afternoon (1:00 PM) and evening (7:00 PM) sessions. The meeting covered consent agenda items, planning commission reports, a Fayetteville Street streetscape plan update, public hearings, committee reports, appointments, and a closed session.

Consent Calendar

  • All consent items were approved by roll call vote, except item B.4.e (Convention Center event and security services contract) which was pulled for discussion. Councilmember Jones asked whether the city recovers the full cost; staff confirmed clients are billed and the city is made whole. The item was then approved.
  • Key consent actions included:
    • Referral of the State Capitol Holiday Inn (320 Hillsborough Street) historic landmark application to the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, with a joint public hearing set for November 4, 2025.
    • Acknowledgment of four annexation petitions (AX-10-25, AX-22-25, AX-24-25, AX-26-25) and authorization of public hearings on September 16, 2025.
    • Grant applications: $50,000 for traffic enforcement, $5,000 for BikeSafe motorcycle safety, and $553,707 for a DWI enforcement unit (no city match required).
    • Contracts: $113,400 for South Saunders Street improvements (STV, Inc.); $700,000 amendment for utility billing services (RevSpring); $7,531,380 (up to $15,863,635 with extensions) for convention center security (Staff-1 Services Group); $424,000 for ERP modernization (Gartner); $506,000 for Eagle Stream restoration (Durham County Soil and Water District); $990,000 total for property management of affordable housing (Barker Realty).
    • Street closing resolution of intent for Swinburne Street, with public hearing on October 7, 2025.
    • Three encroachment authorizations for monitoring wells, stairs, and soil nails.
    • Budget amendments: $340,000 for Bailey Drive Gateway (Walnut Creek Wetland Park), $1,799,545 for yard waste collection trucks, and $35,000 for Vallie Henderson Park improvements.
    • Condemnation resolution for Sanford Creek Interceptor easements on three parcels.
    • Bid award: $580,000 for HVAC replacement at the Northeast Remote Operations Center.
    • Neighborhood speed limit reductions on five streets (Ellwood Drive, Harvest Lane, Rail Fence Road, Taylor Oaks Drive, Tyler Bluff Lane) with near-unanimous resident support.
    • No-parking zones on Keowee Way (removing ~17 spaces) and Dowling Road (removing ~22 spaces on Dowling and ~10 on Evans Drive) to improve sight lines.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • No public comments were recorded during the afternoon session. The evening session included a public hearing for rezoning Z-52-24 (Tryon Road) which was opened in the afternoon and continued to the evening; no testimony from the public was summarized in the transcript.
  • Other evening public hearings (BuildOps incentive, street closings, annexations, rezoning, text changes) were listed on the agenda but the transcript does not detail any public testimony.

Discussion Items

  • Planning Commission Report (Bynum Walter, Vice Chair Roberta Fox):

    • Four rezoning cases were presented:
      • Z-13-24 (South New Hope Road): 7.74 acres from R-6/R-10 to NX-4-PL-CU. Planning Commission recommended approval (8-1). Council set public hearing for October 7, 2025, and requested additional traffic information.
      • Z-51-24 (Fairbanks Road): 2.67 acres to NX-3-CU. Planning Commission recommended approval (9-0). Council set public hearing for October 7, 2025. Councilmember Jones noted pedestrian infrastructure concerns; staff said site plan review will address.
      • Z-10-25 (Leesville Road): 2.66 acres to R-10-CU with conditions limiting density. Planning Commission recommended approval (9-0) but suggested applicant revise conditions. Council deferred setting public hearing to next meeting (September 16) with October 7 target.
      • Z-12-25 (Peace and West Street): 2.6 acres from IX-12 to DX-30-UG-CU. Planning Commission recommended approval (9-0). Council deferred setting public hearing to next meeting (September 16) with October 7 target, to allow applicant revisions.
  • City Manager Report:

    • Resolution of Support – Naming of Louisburg Road Bridge: Michael Moore presented a resolution to name the US-401 bridge over the Neuse River for Dr. William Weston Hedrick, honoring his medical service and contributions to Horseshoe Farm Nature Preserve. The resolution was adopted unanimously by voice vote.
    • Fayetteville Street Streetscape Plan Update: Ken Bowers presented a plan to reallocate street space: expand outdoor dining zones to 8 feet along building frontage, create a clear 8-foot pedestrian path, and activate the furniture zone with flexible uses. A longer-term concept includes replacing pavers, improving City Plaza, and possibly adding a water feature. Council discussed concerns about water feature maintenance, activation of adjacent plazas (Market and Exchange), and budget. Councilmember Lambert-Melton moved to send the item to the Economic Development and Innovation (EDI) Committee for expedited action. The motion passed unanimously.
  • Committee Reports:

    • Safe, Vibrant and Healthy Community Committee (Councilmember Branch): Reported on digital signage/digital billboards. The committee recommended authorizing staff to draft a text change (referred to Planning Commission) to allow digital billboards with modifications on bulk, location, separation, brightness, and removal of existing signs. Council discussion revealed divided views: Councilmember Patton opposed, citing previous community opposition and safety concerns; Councilmember Silver supported initiating the conversation; Councilmember Harrison wanted more specificity. Councilmember Jones suggested a closed session first. No final vote was taken; the council agreed to defer action to a future meeting pending a closed session to discuss legal implications.

Key Outcomes

  • Consent Agenda: Approved all items except B.4.e (which was separately approved).
  • Planning Commission Report: Public hearings set for Z-13-24 and Z-51-24 on October 7, 2025. Z-10-25 and Z-12-25 deferred to September 16 meeting for public hearing date setting.
  • Bridge Naming Resolution: Adopted unanimously.
  • Fayetteville Street Streetscape Plan: Referred to EDI Committee for further discussion and action items.
  • Digital Signage/Digital Billboards: Committee recommendation discussed but not voted on; council will revisit after a closed session on legal aspects.
  • Appointments:
    • Andrew Baker appointed to Arts Commission (regular vacancy).
    • Kate Charland appointed to Design Review Commission (alternate vacancy).
    • Veronica Bitting appointed to Environmental Advisory Board (regular vacancy).
    • Chancé Busdamonte (Arts Commission) and Sebastian Duca (Raleigh Sister Cities) nominations returned for next ballot.
    • Iain Burnett reappointed to Parks, Recreation and Greenway Advisory Board.
    • Diana Yusuf nominated to Fair Housing Advisory Board (to be confirmed).
  • Closed Session: Entered at approximately 5:00 PM to discuss legal matters (potential claims in Jones Estates LLC cases), public safety plans, and personnel matters. No action reported upon return to open session.

Meeting Transcript

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.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com