OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Raleigh City Council Public Comment Session - May 12, 2026

City Council — Tuesday, May 12, 2026
BodyRaleigh, North Carolina
SessionCity Council
DateTuesday, May 12, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:07:02

Transcript — Verbatim
1:27

Welcome everybody to the public comments.

1:31

Councilor Patton is likely excused for the whole evening, and I believe that Councillor Fort will be here as will Counselor Branch, but we have five, so we will start.

1:44

And we have Miss Rainey first on the agenda.

1:52

Good afternoon.

1:53

I'm here voicing a big concern that I have.

2:00

Can you hear me now?

2:02

Can you hear?

2:02

Yeah, I think now we can.

2:04

Yeah.

2:04

Nanny can hear me.

2:05

Okay, okay.

2:06

Um, I have been talking to staff, and I had a meeting with the Housing and Development Director a month ago.

2:13

And I asked her about the sign on the corner of Raleigh Boulevard and Newbert Avenue, and I asked her why College Park was not added to that sign.

2:26

And I'll tell you what she told me.

2:28

She said, Well, I tell you, there's been some problems about crime and crime in the neighborhood in the past.

2:39

Not no one who's been fighting since 1972.

2:44

So she was talking to the wrong, wrong person.

2:48

And I resent that statement, and I kept it to myself for about a month, but that ain't right.

2:55

That ain't right.

2:56

And I'm not playing with her.

2:57

Second, when Larry Job was supposed to plan and director, he had a list of things that he said he was going to do for College Park.

3:05

So far, that list has not been taken care of, Michelle.

3:09

It has not.

3:58

So when they moved it to the corner of Fisher Street, I asked Larry, I said, are you gonna put our sign up there saying this was built in 1969?

4:09

He said, I tell you, yes, I am.

4:16

What is wrong with that picture?

4:18

See, something is wrong here when staff tell you to your face, make comments to you that it's insulting and to be a director of a department, housing and neighborhood service, Janet, I got some serious issues about their bond, and we need to talk.

4:31

We need to talk.

4:38

Because if I got a director who can sit in my face and tell me some stuff like that, and you talking about a housing bond, oh no, no, no, no, no.

4:45

That ain't going down.

4:46

That ain't going down.

4:48

Another thing I want to talk about.

4:52

Corey, the issue in Riley North need to be dealt with because it's headed.

4:56

It is headed to be a racial.

5:02

Y'all need to thank you.

5:24

Eugene Myrick.

5:26

He's in here.

5:27

Okay.

5:29

Keisha Monk.

5:32

Good evening, everyone.

5:33

You know, when I first started participating in public comment, I was honestly impressed.

5:38

Residents showed up with bold signs and creative visuals and powerful presentations that help both you all and the public better understand community concerns.

5:49

And it really mattered because you know, visual presentations aren't just props, right?

5:55

Residents prepare them for you all, but they can also be incredibly helpful to the community as well, both inside this chamber and online.

6:04

So a few years back, I videotaped the concerns of an elderly homebound neighbor who physically couldn't come to the chamber himself.

6:12

And because of that video, his voice was still heard.

6:15

And then the rules changed.

6:18

Because as the media became more present in this room, the city decided that sign sizes needed to be reduced.

6:26

And around that time, I remember being stopped at security for wielding a dangerous weapon.

6:31

What was that?

6:32

A sign made of regular copy paper.

6:35

Yes, I was denied entry because the edges of the paper were too sharp.

6:40

And I would show you the encounter caught on video, but I can't because video presentations are banned now.

6:48

And uh image presentations are no longer allowed in the chamber as well.

6:52

And while I understand concerns about inappropriate content, presentations were already submitted in advance for review.

6:59

The city had the ability to approve or deny content individually, which, let's be honest, were super minimal.

7:08

Instead, the decision was made to restrict everyone, and then came the tiered speaking system during public comment.

7:15

And I get it if 150 people show up, you guys would be here for hours.

7:20

But if the maximum amount of people show up, but only 15, I'm sorry, if a hundred and fifty people sign up but only 15 show up, those 15 residents are still locked into the least amount of time to speak.

7:33

Outside of this chamber, engagement continues to shrink.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Affordable Housing█████████████████17%
Rezoning█████████████13%
Transportation Safety███████████11%
Environmental Protection██████████10%
Annexation█████████9%
Community Engagement██████6%
Public Safety██████6%
Public Engagement█████5%
Personnel Matters█████5%
Summary of Proceedings

Raleigh City Council Public Comment Session - May 12, 2026

This public comment session featured over 20 speakers addressing a wide range of issues including affordable housing, public safety, transportation infrastructure, rezoning cases, public participation restrictions, and internal city department concerns. No council deliberation or votes occurred during the session.

Public Comments & Testimony

Affordable Housing & Housing Bond

  • Tim Niles (Livable Raleigh) called for a $200 million+ affordable housing bond and mandatory developer contributions, criticizing the proposed $101 million bond as insufficient. He noted that 51,000 households in Raleigh are cost-burdened and 27,000 spend half or more of their income on housing.
  • Donna Bailey (Livable Raleigh) echoed disappointment with the $101 million bond (less than the $80 million bond from six years ago when adjusted for inflation), and urged the council to assign affordable housing to a standing committee for study.
  • Mamakai Sanders (unhoused mother) opposed the affordable housing bond, arguing it concentrates poverty and proposed direct rental assistance: $2,400 per year per household could house 100 families for $2.4 million.
  • Miss Rainey (College Park resident) expressed strong opposition to the housing bond due to what she described as insulting comments from the Housing and Neighborhood Services Director regarding crime in College Park, and complained that signs and promised improvements had not been delivered.

Public Participation Restrictions

  • Keisha Monk criticized the city's restrictions on visual presentations, video submissions, sign sizes, and the tiered speaking system during public comment. She questioned whether engagement is genuine or merely tolerated, and called for restoring reasonable presentation tools and strengthening Community Advisory Councils (CACs).

Public Safety & Police Funding

  • John Sequera (Citizens for Safe and Secure Raleigh) thanked the council for supporting police compensation in the 2026 budget and urged continued investment. He cited 85% public support for increased police funding, 80 officer vacancies out of 798 positions, and noted that take-home vehicle policies at other departments were a factor in resignations (nearly half of 70 resignations). He also requested funding for the Wake County District Attorney's Office.

Transportation & Bicycle Lane Changes

  • Robert Scherer (Fairclaw Street resident) opposed proposed bicycle lane improvements on Fairclaw Street, citing safety concerns from reduced pedestrian buffers, lack of neighborhood notification, and design finalized without community input. He requested the project be reopened for further review.

Transit Overlay & Missing Middle

  • Yolanda Smith (706 Tyler Road, Capitol Heights) described a seven-unit project on a 0.2-acre lot with no on-site parking as a dangerous experiment from broken transit overlay rules. She asked for case-by-case evaluation, requiring operational high-frequency transit, legally bound affordable housing, and safety audits.
  • Helen Tart supported Smith and criticized the missing middle policy and changes to the comprehensive plan, warning that future code updates could lose protections.

Rezoning Case Z 4325 (6309 Lichford Road)

Multiple speakers (TJ Lansbury, Larissa Green, Eva Verlinden, Elizabeth Polizzo, Jason Compareto, Robin Munsey, Nellie Taylor, Vicky Reich, Leon Reich) opposed this rezoning request, which would allow 54 townhomes on a property currently zoned R4 (allowing 32 units). Key concerns included:

  • Traffic safety on narrow roads (Johnsdale Road measured 16.5 feet wide, with 398 cars documented speeding up to 50 mph)
  • Lack of sidewalks, crosswalks, and bike lanes
  • Flooding and stormwater management issues
  • Water well contamination risks from land disturbance
  • Loss of mature tree canopy and historical farm structure (built 1904)
  • Infrastructure costs to taxpayers for road widening, sewers, and utilities
  • The Planning Commission's 8-1 vote against the rezoning Speakers asked the council to deny the application on June 2nd, or to limit development to R4 levels.

Tree Canopy & Environmental Stewardship

  • The Lorax (poetic speaker) advocated for planting 24,000 trees by 2032.
  • Lewis Wilkerson (real estate broker) emphasized the value of Raleigh's tree canopy for attracting newcomers and urged intentional stewardship, referencing the City's Leaf Out program.

City Department Concerns

  • An unnamed Solid Waste Services worker alleged corruption, mismanagement, retaliation, and nepotism within the department, calling for an investigation and warning that the issues will be publicly exposed if not addressed.

Key Outcomes

  • No votes, decisions, or formal council responses occurred during the public comment session. Multiple speakers requested specific council actions: deny rezoning Z 4325, increase the affordable housing bond, assign affordable housing to a committee, expand public participation tools, improve police retention, and investigate Solid Waste Services. The next relevant council meeting (for the rezoning vote) was noted as June 2nd.

Meeting Transcript

Welcome everybody to the public comments. Councilor Patton is likely excused for the whole evening, and I believe that Councillor Fort will be here as will Counselor Branch, but we have five, so we will start. And we have Miss Rainey first on the agenda. Good afternoon. I'm here voicing a big concern that I have. Can you hear me now? Can you hear? Yeah, I think now we can. Yeah. Nanny can hear me. Okay, okay. Um, I have been talking to staff, and I had a meeting with the Housing and Development Director a month ago. And I asked her about the sign on the corner of Raleigh Boulevard and Newbert Avenue, and I asked her why College Park was not added to that sign. And I'll tell you what she told me. She said, Well, I tell you, there's been some problems about crime and crime in the neighborhood in the past. Not no one who's been fighting since 1972. So she was talking to the wrong, wrong person. And I resent that statement, and I kept it to myself for about a month, but that ain't right. That ain't right. And I'm not playing with her. Second, when Larry Job was supposed to plan and director, he had a list of things that he said he was going to do for College Park. So far, that list has not been taken care of, Michelle. It has not. So when they moved it to the corner of Fisher Street, I asked Larry, I said, are you gonna put our sign up there saying this was built in 1969? He said, I tell you, yes, I am. What is wrong with that picture? See, something is wrong here when staff tell you to your face, make comments to you that it's insulting and to be a director of a department, housing and neighborhood service, Janet, I got some serious issues about their bond, and we need to talk. We need to talk. Because if I got a director who can sit in my face and tell me some stuff like that, and you talking about a housing bond, oh no, no, no, no, no. That ain't going down. That ain't going down. Another thing I want to talk about. Corey, the issue in Riley North need to be dealt with because it's headed. It is headed to be a racial. Y'all need to thank you. Eugene Myrick. He's in here. Okay. Keisha Monk. Good evening, everyone. You know, when I first started participating in public comment, I was honestly impressed. Residents showed up with bold signs and creative visuals and powerful presentations that help both you all and the public better understand community concerns. And it really mattered because you know, visual presentations aren't just props, right? Residents prepare them for you all, but they can also be incredibly helpful to the community as well, both inside this chamber and online. So a few years back, I videotaped the concerns of an elderly homebound neighbor who physically couldn't come to the chamber himself. And because of that video, his voice was still heard. And then the rules changed. Because as the media became more present in this room, the city decided that sign sizes needed to be reduced. And around that time, I remember being stopped at security for wielding a dangerous weapon. What was that?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com