CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Monday, November 20, 2017 6:30 p.m. Closed session as provided by Section 2.2-3712 of the Virginia Code Second Floor Conference Room (Discussion of the conveyance of City right-of-way adjacent to a business at the west end of the Downtown Mall) 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting - CALL TO ORDER Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL AWARDS/RECOGNITIONS Helen Cauthen – GO Program; Small Business Saturday & ANNOUNCEMENTS CITY MANAGER RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC Public comment is provided for up to 15 speakers at the beginning of the meeting (limit 3 minutes per speaker.) Pre-registration is available for up to 10 spaces, and pre-registered speakers are announced by noon the day of the meeting. The number of speakers is unlimited at the end of the meeting. 1. CONSENT AGENDA* (Items removed from consent agenda will be considered at the end of the regular agenda.) a. Minutes for November 6, 2017 b. APPROPRIATION: Local Contributions for Crisis Intervention Team – $105,910 (2nd of 2 readings) c. APPROPRIATION: Runaway Emergency Shelter Program Grant – $209,444 (2nd of 2nd reading) d. APPROPRIATION: Additional Funding for Employment not Welfare (VIEW) Program – $22,881 (1st of 2 readings) e. APPROPRIATION: Check and Connect Student Engagement Continuation Grant – $110,250 (1st of 2 readings) f. APPROPRIATION: Charlottesville City Schools’ Check and Connect Student Engagement Grant – $50,000 (1st of 2 readings) g. RESOLUTION: MCI 5th Street Land Acquisition (1st of 1 reading) h. RESOLUTION: Discontinue Drought Warning Stage Restrictions (1st of 1 reading) i. ORDINANCE: Water Street Parking Garage Parking Spaces Lease (2nd of 2 readings) j. ORDINANCE: Proposed Changes to Dog License (2nd of 2 readings) 2. PUBLIC HEARING/ Abandon Portion of Gas Easement in Dunlora Park Subdivision (1st of 2 readings) – 15 mins ORDINANCE*: 3. PUBLIC HEARING/ Vacate Sewer Easement at 600 Brandon Ave (UVA) (1st of 2 readings) – 15 mins ORDINANCE*: 4. PUBLIC HEARING/ Land Bank Corporation Plan (1st of 2 readings) – 30 mins ORDINANCE*: 5. RESOLUTION*: Implementation Plan for the Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund – $75,000 (1st of 1 reading) – 30 mins 6. REPORT*: Legislative Package Review – 30 mins RESOLUTION: Regional Legislative Package (1st of 1 reading) RESOLUTION: Local Legislative Package (1st of 1 reading) 7. REPORT*: Civilian Review Board Recommendation – 30 mins 8. ORDINANCE*: Park Street Planned Unit Development Rezoning Request (2nd of 2 readings) – 30 mins 9. REPORT*: Incarceration Diversion Opportunities for Low Risk Offenders – 20 mins OTHER BUSINESS MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC *ACTION NEEDED GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT We welcome public comment; it is an important part of our meeting. Time is reserved near the beginning and at the end of each regular City Council meeting for Matters by the Public. Please follow these guidelines for public comment: • If you are here to speak for a Public Hearing, please wait to speak on the matter until the report for that item has been presented and the Public Hearing has been opened. • Each speaker has 3 minutes to speak. Please give your name and address before beginning your remarks. • Please do not interrupt speakers, whether or not you agree with them. • Please refrain from using obscenities. • If you cannot follow these guidelines, you will be escorted from City Council Chambers and not permitted to reenter. Persons with disabilities may request reasonable accommodations by contacting ada@charlottesville.org or (434) 970-3182. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 6, 2017 Action Required: Appropriation of ongoing funding for Crisis Intervention Team Presenter: Thomas McKean, Police Department Staff Contacts: Thomas McKean, Police Department Thomas Von Hemert, Jefferson Area C.I.T. Coordinator Title: Local Contributions for Crisis Intervention Team - $105,910 Background: The Thomas Jefferson Area Crisis Intervention Team (C.I.T) Program provides regular training courses for Law Enforcement and other agencies, both local and from throughout the state. These week long training sessions for Police Officers, along with other training sessions for security guards, dispatchers, and others are provided regularly over the course of each year led by C.I.T. Coordinator, Thomas von Hemert. This training serves to keep Agencies equipped with C.I.T. trained officers in order to better service those in mental crisis. Funding for this training is provided from multiple agencies on a previously agreed upon cost. The City of Charlottesville Police Department receives funding to support the C.I.T. Program in the amount of $105,910. The funding is from several sources that include localities and agencies within the Thomas Jefferson Area C.I.T. region. Discussion: Region 10 will provide pass through funds from The Department of Behavioral Health and Disability Services (DBHDS) in the amount of $53,700, and participating surrounding localities will provide $34,710. Additional funding will be provided for ongoing training, consultation, and assistance to C.I.T. programs in the following manner per fiscal year: Albemarle County Police Department $2,500 City of Charlottesville Police Department $2,500 University of Virginia Police Department $2,500 Albemarle/Charlottesville Regional Jail $2,500 Region Ten $2,500 Central Virginia Regional Jail $2,500 CAC Foundation $2,500 Total contributions $17,500 Further additional income may be received from outside jurisdiction agencies who attend training in the Thomas Jefferson Training Area. These are reimbursed through The Department of Criminal Justice Services, at $500 per person and received on a case by case basis as the training occurs. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: Appropriation of this item aligns with Council’s visions by providing funding to aid the Thomas Jefferson Crisis Intervention Team Program and the Charlottesville Police Department in delivering optimal C.I.T. services to our City as a Smart, Citizen-Focused Government. It supports our Mission of providing services that promote exceptional quality of life for all in our community by providing important quality services to those in need of mental health assistance and safety. This appropriation also supports Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan: A Healthy and Safe City. The C.I.T. program provides education and training to members of the community who have frequent interaction with those in need of mental health assistance. These people include but are not limited to, police officers, dispatchers, corrections officers, and fire department personnel. C.I.T. encourages safer and more effective interaction between care providers and those in need, making those interactions and the community more equitable and safer for all. The Jefferson Area CIT program also embraces Objective 5.4 Foster Effective Community Engagement by involving all aspects of the mental health processes and making them more efficient and safer. C.I.T. facilitates and fosters relationships between Region 10, mental health providers, law enforcement, local hospitals, jails, and many others to ensure that those in need of mental health services can obtain them as safely and efficiently as possible. Community Engagement: N/A Budgetary Impact: There is no impact to the General Fund. The funds will be expensed and reimbursed to a Grants Fund. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of funds. Alternatives: The alternative is to not approve this project to the detriment of increasing much needed mental health programs. Attachments: Appropriation APPROPRIATION $105,910 Local Agency Contributions for Crisis Intervention Team WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville, through the Thomas Jefferson Crisis Intervention Team and the Charlottesville Police Department, receives from local agencies $105,910 per fiscal year; WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville, through the Thomas Jefferson Crisis Intervention Team and the Charlottesville Police Department, receives from other local agencies, funding to support Crisis Intervention Team programs; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the lump sum of $105,910, received from local Agencies is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenues: $105,910 $88,410 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3101003000 G/L Account: 432080 $17,500 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3101003000 G/L Account: 434410 Expenditures: $105,910 $79,825 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3101003000 G/L Account: 519999 $26,085 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3101003000 G/L Account: 599999 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of funding by the participating agencies listed above. This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 6, 2017 Action Requested: Appropriation Presenter: Rory Carpenter, Juvenile Justice Coordinator Staff Contacts: Rory Carpenter, Juvenile Justice Coordinator Kaki Dimock, Director of Human Services Title: Runaway Emergency Shelter Program Grant - $209,444 Background: The Human Services Department, in partnership with ReadyKids, applied for and received a grant from the Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families in the amount of $200,000 in federal funds and $22,222 in local matching funds. The local match will be met with a transfer of $9,444 from the Human Services Department for a total appropriation of $209,444. An in-kind match of $12,778 from ReadyKids, to provide Runaway Emergency Shelter Program (R.E.S.P.) services will be applied to the grant as well. This is the seventh grant year of the partnership. Discussion: The funds support services that provide emergency shelter, counseling and after care services for youth in crisis for the purpose of keeping them safe and off the streets, with a goal of reunification with family. Funded services will include: emergency shelter available 24 hours per day, 7days a week; individual and family counseling to help resolve conflict and develop new communication skills to facilitate reunification with the family; and additional support services that help youth build meaningful connections with their community and encourage positive youth development. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The Runaway Emergency Shelter Program grant aligns with the goals and objectives of the City of Charlottesville’s Strategic Plan - Goal 2: A Healthy and Safe City Objective 2.3: Improve community health and safety outcomes by connecting residents with effective resources. The Human Service Department’s programs, including the Runaway Emergency Shelter Program, provide residential and community based services that prevent delinquency and promote the healthy development of youth. Community Engagement: In order to increase prevention services, R.E.S.P. staff conduct extensive outreach efforts, particularly in area schools reaching out to youth through a variety of activities including presentations to health classes and tablings during lunch. Budgetary Impact: There is no impact to the General Fund. There is a local match that the Human Service’s Department and ReadyKids will provide (cash match of $9,444 – Human Services Fund and in- kind match $12,778 – ReadyKids). This grant will be appropriated into a grants fund. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of funds. Alternatives: If the funds are not appropriated, the grant would not be received and the Runaway Emergency Shelter Program services would not be provided. Attachments: N/A APPROPRIATION Runaway Emergency Shelter Program $209,444 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville has been awarded $200,000 from the Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families with cash match of $9,444 provided by the Human Services Fund and in-kind match of $12,778 provided by ReadyKids; WHEREAS, the funds will be used to operate the Runaway Emergency Shelter Program through a partnership between the Human Services Department and ReadyKids. The grant award covers the period from September 30, 2017 through September 29, 2018; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $209,444 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue – $209,444 $200,000 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900293 G/L Account: 431110 $ 9,444 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900293 G/L Account: 498010 Expenditures - $209,444 $ 69,948 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900293 G/L Account: 519999 $115,000 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900293 G/L Account: 530010 $ 24,496 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900293 G/L Account: 599999 Transfer - $9,444 $ 9,444 Fund: 213 Cost Center: 3413003000 G/L Account: 561211 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $200,000 from the Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families. This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Approve Appropriation Presenter: Diane Kuknyo, Director, Department of Social Services Staff Contacts: Kelly Logan, VIEW Supervisor, Department of Social Services Laura Morris, Chief of Administration, Department of Social Services Title: Additional Funding for VIEW Program -- $22,881 Background: The Charlottesville Department of Social Services has received $22,881 in additional funding from the Virginia Department of Social Services for the Virginia Initiative for Employment not Welfare (VIEW) program. Discussion: This funding will serve residents of the City of Charlottesville who receive Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and are enrolled in Virginia Initiative for Employment not Welfare (VIEW) through the Department of Social Services. The VIEW program serves parents in households with children up to the age of 18. All participants in the VIEW program are considered low-income with annual incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level for single parent households and below 150% of the federal poverty level for two parent households. The VIEW program provides a variety of supportive services such as job skills training, child care assistance, and transportation to assist participants with becoming self-sufficient through employment. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: Approval of this agenda item aligns with the City’s mission to provide services that promote equity and an excellent quality of life in our community. It is consistent with Strategic Plan Goal 1: An Inclusive Community of self-sufficient residents, Objective 1.2, Prepare residents for the workforce and 1.4, Enhance financial health of residents. Community Engagement: Department staff work directly with citizens to provide social services, protect vulnerable children and adults, and promote self sufficiency. Budgetary Impact: Funds have been received and will be appropriated into the Social Services Fund. There are no general funds required or being requested. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of these funds. Alternatives: Funds that are not appropriated will need to be returned to the Virginia Department of Social Services. Attachments: Appropriation APPROPRIATION Additional Funding for Department of Social Services VIEW Program $22,881 WHEREAS, the Charlottesville Department of Social Services has received an additional $22,881 in the Fiscal Year 2018 budget from the Virginia Department of Social Services to be used for clients enrolled in the Virginia Initiative for Employment not Welfare (VIEW) program, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $22,881 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue – $22,881 Fund: 212 Cost Center: 9900000000 G/L Account: 451022 $22,881 Expenditures - $22,881 Fund: 212 Cost Center: 3333002000 G/L Account: 540060 $22,881 This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Appropriation Presenter: Rory Carpenter, Community Attention Staff Contacts: Rory Carpenter, Community Attention Kaki Dimock, Director of Human Services Title: Check and Connect Student Engagement Continuation Grant - $110,250 Background: Check and Connect is an evidence-based truancy prevention program funded by a Byrne/Juvenile Assistance Grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) and administered by the Human Services Department. The grant provides a comprehensive student engagement intervention for truant youth or youth at risk of truancy who live in the City of Promise footprint and attend Burnley-Moran Elementary and Walker Upper Elementary. The grant period is from October 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. The total grant is $55,125 in federal pass through funds, and a required local match of $55,125 to be provided by the Charlottesville Department Human Services. Discussion: Truancy is a precursor to delinquent behavior that should be addressed in its early stages to avoid further penetration into the juvenile justice system. Locally, the connection between truancy and delinquency has been documented by the Juvenile Offender Report a research report issued by the Charlottesville Department of Human Services that deals with the risk and needs of 985 local juvenile offenders who were placed on probation between 1997 – 2000, 2004 – 2006, and 2011- 2012. The average rate of truancy for the juvenile offenders in the study group was 48% per year over a nine year period. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: The Check and Connect grant aligns with the City of Charlottesville’s Strategic Plan – Goal 2: A Healthy and Safe City Objective 2.3: Improve community health and safety outcomes by connecting residents with effective resources. The Human Service Department’s programs provide residential and community based services that prevent delinquency and promote the healthy development of youth. The Check and Connect Program provides comprehensive support services for elementary and upper elementary children experiencing school attendance problems to prevent early school withdrawal and ultimately delinquent behavior by promoting students' engagement with school and learning. Expected outcomes include increased attendance and decreased delinquent behavior during and after program participation. Community Engagement: The community is engaged through the City of Promise by serving students and families in the Charlottesville school system through the Check and Connect Program and by collaborating with the many different agencies that interface with the program. Budgetary Impact: This has no impact on the General Fund. The funds will be expensed and reimbursed to a Grants Fund. The terms of the award require a local match of $55,125 which will be provided by the Charlottesville Department Human Services. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of grant funds. Alternatives: If the grant funds are not appropriated, City of Promise would not be able to provide this service to local youth. Attachments: Appropriation APPROPRIATION Check and Connect Student Engagement Grant $110,250 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville has been awarded $55,125 in Federal Funds from the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice, and $55,125 in Matching Funds for a total award of $110,250 for the Check and Connect Student Engagement Program; and WHEREAS, the grant award covers the period from October 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $110,250 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue – $110,250 $ 55,125 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413008000 G/L Account: 430120 $ 55,125 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413008000 G/L Account: 498010 Expenditures - $110,250 $101,916 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413008000 G/L Account: 519999 $ 8,334 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413008000 G/L Account: 599999 Transfer - $55,125 $ 55,125 Fund: 213 Cost Center: 3413009000 G/L: 561209 Transfers BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $55,125 from VA Department of Criminal Justice Services. This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Appropriation Presenter: Rory Carpenter, Human Services Department Staff Contacts: Rory Carpenter, Human Services Department Kaki Dimock, Director of Human Services Title: Charlottesville City Schools’ Check and Connect Student Engagement Grant - $50,000 Background: Check and Connect is an evidence-based truancy prevention program funded by a Byrne/Juvenile Assistance Grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) and administered by the Human Services Department. The grant provides a comprehensive student engagement intervention for truant youth or youth at risk of truancy in the 8th – 10th grades in the Charlottesville City School system. The grant period is from October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2018. The total grant is $45,000 in federal pass through funds, and a required local match of $7,500 to be provided by the Charlottesville City Schools. Discussion: Truancy is a precursor to delinquent behavior that should be addressed in its early stages to avoid further penetration into the juvenile justice system. Locally, the connection between truancy and delinquency has been documented by the Juvenile Offender Report, a research report developed by the Charlottesville/Albemarle Commission on Children and Families that deals with the risk and needs of 985 local juvenile offenders who were placed on probation between 1997 – 2000, 2004 – 2006, and 2011-2012. The average rate of truancy for the juvenile offenders in the study group was 48% per year over a nine year period. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: The Check and Connect grant aligns with the City of Charlottesville’s Strategic Plan – Goal 2: A Healthy and Safe City Objective 2.3: Improve community health and safety outcomes by connecting residents with effective resources. The Human Service Department’s programs provide residential and community based services that prevent delinquency and promote the healthy development of youth. The Check and Connect Program provides comprehensive support services for 8th - 10th grade Charlottesville City School students experiencing school attendance problems to prevent early school withdrawal and ultimately delinquent behavior by promoting students' engagement with school and learning. Expected outcomes include increased attendance and decreased delinquent behavior during and after program participation. Community Engagement: The community is engaged through the Check and Connect program by serving students and families in the Charlottesville school system and by collaborating with the many different agencies that interface with the program. Budgetary Impact: There is no impact on the General Fund. The funds will be expensed and reimbursed to a Grants Fund. The terms of the award require a local match of $7,500 which will be provided by the Charlottesville City Schools confirmed by a Maintenance of Understanding document between the Charlottesville Human Service Department and the Charlottesville City Schools. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of grant funds. Alternatives: If the grant funds are not appropriated, the Human Services Department would not be able to provide this service to local youth. Attachments: Appropriation APPROPRIATION Charlottesville City Schools’ Check and Connect Student Engagement Grant $50,000 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville has been awarded $42,500 in Federal Funds from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, and $7,500 in Matching Funds from the Charlottesville City Schools for a total award of $50,000 for the Check and Connect Student Engagement Program; and WHEREAS, the grant award covers the period from October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2018. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $50,000 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue – $50,000 $ 42,500 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413013000 G/L Account: 430120 $ 7,500 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413013000 G/L Account: 432030 Expenditures - $50,000 $45,737 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413013000 G/L Account: 519999 $ 4,263 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413013000 G/L Account: 599999 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $45,000 from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, and $7,500 from the Charlottesville City Schools. This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Acquisition of Parkland and Granting of Easement Presenter: Brian Daly, Director, Parks and Recreation Staff Contacts: Chris Gensic, Parks and Trails Planner Parks and Recreation Title: MCI 5th Street Land Acquisition & Grant of Easement - Trails Background: This land acquisition for park and trail purposes adds a segment of trail along the north bank Moore’s Creek in the Fifth Street area of the City. It is an addition to the park system, providing protection of a significant trail connection along Moore’s Creek, consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Discussion: The property includes one parcel on the City side of Moore’s Creek. This acquisition will provide the land needed to construct the proposed Moore’s creek trail. The land includes a sewer easement area that is flat and lends itself well to a paved multi modal trail as part of the developing network in the 5th street and Biscuit Run area that is currently being planned in partnership with Albemarle County and the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission. This also secures a permanent status for the Rivanna Trail system in this area of the City. It also includes the granting of an easement to the City for stormwater management maintenance purposes. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Priority Areas: The project supports both City Council’s “Green City” and “Healthy City” visions by creating an outstanding recreational amenity for many users while preserving and enhancing a natural and forested area of the City. It contributes to Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan, to be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community, and objective 2.5, to provide natural and historic resources stewardship, 2.6, engage in robust and context sensitive urban design, as well as objective 5.3 supporting community engagement. Community Engagement: Budgetary Impact: This purchase requires $13,000 from the CIP fund for Trails and Greenway Development, and will require the Parks Department to expend funds for the nominal cost of annual for trail maintenance. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the parkland acquisition. Alternatives: Council could decline to purchase the property for park use. Attachments: Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement Deed of Easement Proposed Resolution Vicinity Map REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT This Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into as of the ______ day of _________________, 2017 (the “Effective Date”), by and between MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation (“Seller”), and the CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia (“Purchaser”). 1. Purchase and Sale. Seller agrees to sell to Purchaser, and Purchaser agrees to purchase from Seller, in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement and for the Purchase Price set forth in Section 2: (i) that certain parcel of land located in the City of Charlottesville, Virginia identified as “PARCEL “X” PORTION OF TM 21-B-47 MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION OF VIRGINIA” on the plat (the “Plat”) attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof and any and all improvements thereon (the “Real Property”); (ii) all mineral, oil and gas rights, water rights, sewer rights and other utility rights allocated to the Real Property and (iii) all appurtenances belonging to the Real Property (items (i) through (iii), collectively, the “Property”). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the sale and purchase contemplated hereby (and, accordingly, the term “Property”) shall not include: (i) computers and computer equipment, (ii) any intellectual property rights of Seller or its affiliates, proprietary marks, tradenames, trademarks, service marks, distinctive designs and logos used by or identifying Seller, its affiliates, its business or products, (iii) any of Seller’s equipment, trade fixtures and other personal property located within or upon the Property, (iv) any rights or interests relating to the Property that relate to the period prior to Closing (as defined in Section 2), including, but not limited to, any actual or potential claims or appeals relating to taxes and assessments, tax refunds and, except to the extent assignable under the casualty and condemnation provisions of this Agreement, casualty or condemnation proceeds, (v) any right, title or interest that Seller or its affiliates may have in the Property or in any public or private roads or streets, serving the Real Property relating to operation of its or their telecommunications business or by virtue of Seller or its affiliates being a utility provider, or (vi) easement rights and in any and all telephone and telecommunications equipment and related conduits and cabling relating thereto. 2. Payment of Purchase Price. The total purchase price (the “Purchase Price”) for the Property is Thirteen Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($13,000.00). There is no deposit for this sale. The Purchase Price shall be due and payable in full at the time of closing of the purchase and sale of the Property (the “Closing”) and shall be delivered by Purchaser by federal wire transfer of immediately available funds in time for receipt by Seller not later than 11 a.m. (local time at the location of the Real Property) on the Closing Date (as hereinafter defined), time being of the essence. 3. Condition of the Property. A. The Property is being sold “AS IS”, “WHERE IS”, “WITH ALL FAULTS”, ENVIRONMENTAL OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING BOTH LATENT AND PATENT DEFECTS, AND WITHOUT ANY REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF SELLER WHATSOEVER. PURCHASER HEREBY WAIVES ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR I-1490919.2 FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND PURCHASER RELEASES SELLER FROM AND AGAINST ANY ACTION, LOSS, DAMAGE OR OTHER CLAIM AGAINST SELLER REGARDING THE CONDITION AND USE OF THE PROPERTY. PURCHASER REPRESENTS AND WARRANTS TO SELLER THAT, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED FOR HEREIN, PURCHASER HAS ENTERED INTO THIS AGREEMENT WITHOUT RELYING UPON ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY BY THE SELLER AS TO THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY; AND THERE ARE NO UNDERSTANDINGS, AGREEMENTS, REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY WARRANTIES OF MARKETABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, HABITABILITY, DESIGN, WORKMANSHIP OR OTHERWISE GIVEN BY SELLER TO PURCHASER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS TRANSACTION. THE PURCHASER, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED FOR HEREIN, HAS NOT RELIED ON ANY REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTY, PROMISE OR STATEMENT, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, OF THE SELLER, OR ANYONE ACTING FOR OR ON BEHALF OF THE SELLER, OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, AND ALL MATTERS CONCERNING THE PROPERTY HAVE BEEN OR SHALL BE INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED BY THE PURCHASER AND THE PURCHASER SHALL PURCHASE THE PROPERTY ON THE PURCHASER’S OWN PRIOR INVESTIGATION AND EXAMINATION OF THE PROPERTY (OR THE PURCHASER’S ELECTION NOT TO DO SO). It is understood and agreed that the Purchase Price has been adjusted by prior negotiation to reflect that all of the Property is sold by Seller and purchased by Purchaser subject to the foregoing. B. Purchaser further acknowledges and agrees that Purchaser is relying solely on its own investigation of the Property and not on any information provided or to be provided by Seller and agrees (subject to its rights to terminate this Agreement pursuant to Section 4.E. of this Agreement) to accept the Property at the Closing and waive all objections or claims against Seller (including any right or claim of contribution) arising from or related to the Property or to any hazardous materials on the Property. 4. Inspection Period. A. Purchaser, at Purchaser’s sole risk and expense, may inspect the Property, and make such investigations, tests and studies of the Property as Purchaser deems appropriate, subject to the terms, conditions and limitations of this Agreement during the period of time from the Effective Date until 3:00 p.m. (local time at the location of the Real Property) on the date that is thirty (30) days after the Effective Date, time being of the essence (the “Inspection Period”). Purchaser shall not be entitled to conduct any soil tests or other invasive tests on the Property without the prior written consent of Seller. Purchaser shall promptly deliver to Seller copies of all written inspection results, tests and studies. Such inspections, tests and other activities on the Property (“Purchaser’s Studies”): (i) shall not interfere with Seller’s use of the Property, (ii) shall not damage the Property, (iii) shall be commercially reasonable, (iv) shall not unreasonably disturb or interfere with the use of the Property or conduct of business by Seller or any tenants (and shall be subject to the rights of tenants), and (v) shall be conducted in accordance with customary standards and industry practices and in compliance with all laws, 2 I-1490919.2 rules, regulations and other legal requirements. Following each entry by Purchaser, Purchaser, at Purchaser’s sole cost and expense, shall restore the Property to the same condition as its original condition prior to any of Purchaser’s Studies. All such restoration shall be fully completed prior to the end of the Inspection Period, time being of the essence, and such restoration obligations shall survive any termination of this Agreement. Seller shall cooperate with Purchaser in its inspection, but shall not be obligated to incur any liability or expense in connection therewith. Each entry shall be conducted upon at least 24 hours’ prior written notice to Seller, during normal business hours, in the presence of a representative of Seller designated in writing by Seller and on mutually acceptable dates and times. B. Purchaser acknowledges that Seller has made and may make available to Purchaser certain documents, files, materials, data or information relating to the Property or the transactions contemplated by this Agreement (collectively, “Property Information”), and Purchaser accepts that such Property Information may not be accurate or complete and that Seller has not made any independent investigation or verification of any such information. Seller makes no representation or warranty whatsoever as to the accuracy, validity or completeness of any Property Information delivered by or on behalf of Seller to Purchaser. Seller shall not be obligated (i) to collect, provide or compile any Property Information, (ii) to deliver or make available any Property Information or (iii) to supplement any Property Information. Purchaser shall not have access to and may not copy Property Information or other materials that pertain to Seller’s business, Seller’s employees, or Seller’s valuation of the Property, or other materials of a proprietary nature. C. Prior to entering the Property, and throughout any period that it (or any of its agents, representatives or consultants) shall enter or be present upon the Property, Purchaser shall maintain (and, as applicable, cause its agents, consultants and representatives to maintain), at its and their expense, a policy of commercial general liability insurance, with a broad form contractual liability endorsement and with a combined single limit of not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage that may result from such entry and from any and all activities undertaken by or on behalf of Purchaser (or its representatives) during the course thereof. All of such insurance policies shall name Seller (and any entity reasonably designated by Seller) as an additional insured. All such insurance shall be on an “occurrence form” and otherwise be in such form(s) and with such insurance company(ies) as are reasonably acceptable to Seller. Prior to its first entry upon the Property, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller a certificate(s) of insurance evidencing the coverage required by this Agreement. D. Purchaser shall be responsible for any and all claims, liabilities, costs or expenses arising out of such inspections of and entries onto the Property, including, but not limited to, liability for personal injury (including death) and property damage caused by Purchaser, its agents, employees and consultants and from and against any and all liens or other encumbrances filed against the Property in connection with any work performed as part of Purchaser’s Studies. Purchaser, at its expense, shall cause the satisfaction or discharge of record all such liens and encumbrances within ten (10) days after notice or other knowledge thereof. Purchaser’s obligations under this Section 4.D shall survive Closing or the earlier termination of this Agreement. 3 I-1490919.2 E. If Purchaser, in its sole discretion, determines that the Property is not suitable to Purchaser, Purchaser may by written notice to Seller delivered to Seller on or before 3:00 p.m. (local time at the location of the Real Property) of the last day of the Inspection Period, elect to terminate this Agreement. In the event of such timely termination, time being of the essence, the parties shall have no further obligations hereunder except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. F. If this Agreement is terminated or, if Purchaser does not purchase the Property on the Closing Date (as hereinafter defined), subject only to applicable postponements of the Closing that are expressly provided for herein, Purchaser shall cause all Property Information to be either returned to Seller or at Seller’s written direction to be destroyed. 5. Title and Survey. A. Seller shall convey to Purchaser and Purchaser shall accept such title to the Property as a reputable nationally recognized title insurance company licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia shall be willing to insure (at standard rates without any special or additional premium) by the Deed (as hereinafter defined). Title shall be subject to the matters set forth below (collectively, the “Permitted Exceptions”): (i) matters that are either (x) of record, as of the Effective Date or (y) expressly provided for, or permitted, by this Agreement; (ii) any state of facts (including, without limitation, those relating to physical condition or variations in location or dimension) that would be disclosed by a physical survey of the Property; (iii) all covenants, easements, reservations, restrictions, agreements and other matters that are expressly provided for or permitted by this Agreement; (iv) all grants, licenses or other rights existing on the Effective Date in favor of any public or private utility company (including, without limitation, Seller and its affiliates) or governmental entity which are of record or, if not of record, that have been disclosed in writing to Purchaser; (v) any and all present and future laws, regulations, restrictions, requirements, ordinances, resolutions and orders affecting the Property (including, without limitation, any of the foregoing relating to zoning, building, environmental protection and the use, occupancy, subdivision or improvement of the Property) (collectively, “Laws”); (vi) all notations, notes and notices of violations of law or municipal ordinances, orders or requirements affecting the Property (collectively, “Violations”); (vii) all liens for real estate taxes, school taxes, special assessments, business improvement district charges, water and sewer taxes, rents and charges, and other governmental charges and impositions not yet due and payable; (viii) any other matter that is either expressly waived by Purchaser in writing, or deemed waived by Purchaser or “discharged” pursuant to the terms of this Agreement; and (ix) the standard printed exceptions, and exclusions to coverage, set forth in the form of title policy utilized by a recognized national title insurance company. B. Purchaser shall obtain a title commitment from a recognized national title insurance company insuring title to the Property (the “Title Commitment”) prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period. If the Title Commitment reveals any matter affecting title to the Property which is not satisfactory to Purchaser, Purchaser shall have until the expiration of the Inspection Period to provide written notice (the “Title Objection Notice”) to Seller of its objection with respect thereto (each an “Objection”), together with a copy of the Title Commitment and legible copies of all instruments identified as exceptions therein. 4 I-1490919.2 C. Seller may, within five (5) business days after receipt of the Title Objection Notice, notify Purchaser in writing whether Seller elects to attempt to cure such Objections. If Seller fails to give such notice, Seller will be deemed to have elected not to attempt to cure such Objections. Purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by written notice given within five (5) business days after Seller’s election or deemed election to not cure any Objection. If Purchaser fails to timely notify Seller of Purchaser’s termination of this Agreement, Purchaser will be deemed to have waived such Objections. If Seller elects to attempt to cure such Objections and Purchaser has not otherwise terminated this Agreement under Section 4.E., Seller shall have the right to attempt to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure each Purchaser’s Objection that Seller has agreed to attempt to cure. If Seller is unable to cure such Objections prior to the Closing Date, Seller may postpone the Closing Date up to an aggregate maximum of ninety (90) days, for the purposes of discharging, or attempting to discharge, any Objections. Purchaser may, nevertheless, accept such title as Seller may be able to convey, without reduction of the Purchase Price or any credit or allowance against the Purchase Price and without any liability on the part of Seller. D. Purchaser’s sole remedy with respect to any Objection contained in a Title Objection Notice in which Seller has not expressly agreed to attempt to cure, or which Seller has elected to cure but has failed to effect such cure on or prior to Closing, shall be to terminate this Agreement or accept title to the Property subject to such Objection. E. The acceptance of the Deed by Purchaser shall be deemed to be a full performance and discharge of every agreement and obligation on the part of Seller to be performed under this Agreement, except those, if any, which are herein specifically stated to survive Closing. Unless otherwise stated, no obligation, liability, representation or warranty of Seller shall survive Closing. F. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, unless otherwise undertaken in writing by Seller, Seller shall have no obligation to bring any action or proceeding or otherwise to incur any expense whatsoever to eliminate or modify such Objections or to cure any of the same; provided, however, that at or before Closing Seller shall be obligated to discharge or cause to be discharged the following Objections (collectively, “Seller’s Discharge Obligations”): (A) any Objection that constitutes a mortgage that Seller voluntarily created encumbering the Property, (B) any Objection that constitutes a consensual lien that Seller voluntarily causes to be recorded against the Property after the Effective Date and (C) any Objection that constitutes a mechanic’s lien of record resulting from work that Seller has performed or caused to be performed at the Property, provided that Seller shall have the right to bond off and remove any such mechanic’s lien. G. Without limitation of the provisions of this Section 5, Purchaser acknowledges that Seller, by virtue of its business activities throughout the United States, (i) may be named as a defendant in lawsuits, some of which may result in judgments, and (ii) may receive notices of Violations which, in either case, Seller may be unable to vacate or otherwise satisfy or resolve prior to the Closing. All such judgments and Violations shall constitute “Permitted Exceptions” (and, accordingly, Purchaser shall accept title to the Property subject thereto), so long as Seller delivers the Certificate and Indemnity attached hereto as Exhibit B; provided, however, if any such judgment or Violation results in a judgment lien or other non- 5 I-1490919.2 consensual lien which encumbers the Property as of Closing, then such judgment lien or other non-consensual lien shall not constitute a “Permitted Exception.” 6. No Conditions to Closing; No Financing Contingency. Intentionally omitted. 7. Closing. The Closing shall occur during normal business hours on the first business day that is fifteen (15) days following expiration of the Inspection Period (the “Closing Date”). Closing shall take place at the offices of Purchaser’s title company, or at such other place as the parties shall mutually agree. Purchaser agrees to conduct closing through a pre- closing, escrow or other arrangement reasonably requested by Seller to facilitate closing mechanics and to reduce or eliminate the need for Seller and its attorneys to be physically present at the Closing. TIME SHALL BE OF THE ESSENCE with respect to Purchaser’s obligation to effectuate the Closing no later than the Closing Date. 8. Prorations, Apportionments and Adjustments at Closing. A. The following shall be apportioned with respect to the Property as of 12:01 a.m., on the Closing Date, as if Purchaser were vested with title to the Property during the entire day upon which the Closing occurs: (i) rents, if any, as and when collected (the term "rents" as used in this Agreement includes all vault rentals, if any; (ii) ad valorem, real estate, personal property and similar taxes, including stormwater taxes/fees, if applicable (collectively, “Property Taxes”) assessed against the Property. Prorations shall be based upon current year’s taxes and assessments, if available, or upon figures for the last preceding year. Any then due, but unpaid special assessments, special improvement district or taxing district levies, shall be prorated in the same manner as ad valorem taxes. If Seller is taxed for Property Taxes on a statewide basis and is not obligated to pay the foregoing taxes, then the foregoing proration shall be based on the portion of such statewide taxes that are reasonably allocable to the Property; and (iii) any other operating expenses and items of expense pertaining to the Property which are customarily prorated between a purchaser and a seller in the area in which the Property is located. B. The provisions and obligations of this Section 8 shall survive Closing. 9. Transaction Costs. Seller shall be responsible for the cost of (i) preparing the Deed, (ii) the Grantor’s tax payable in connection with recording the Deed and (iii) releasing all liens that constitute Seller’s Discharge Obligations, including recording the applicable releases. Purchaser shall pay the cost of (i) conducting its due diligence studies, (ii) any title commitments and title policies, (iii) all other transfer and recordation taxes, sales taxes and recording fees, if applicable, (iv) any escrow fees or charges, and (v) the cost of a survey of the Property, if any. Each party shall pay its own attorneys’ and consultants’ fees. All other costs shall be paid by Seller and Purchaser as is customary in the geographic area in which the Property is located. The provisions of this Section 9 shall survive closing. 6 I-1490919.2 10. Closing Documents and Deliveries. A. At the Closing, Seller shall deliver the following: (i) The executed and acknowledged Special Warranty Deed in the form attached hereto as Exhibit C (the “Deed”), subject to the Permitted Exceptions, sufficient for recording, conveying fee simple title to the Property which Purchaser shall cause to be recorded; (ii) An executed and acknowledged Deed of Easement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D, sufficient for recording, granting a storm water drainage easement across the portion of Seller’s property that is adjacent to the Property in the location shown on the Plat as “PROPOSED 10’ x 10’ STORM EASEMENT CENTERED ON PIPE” which Purchaser shall cause to be recorded. (iii) A Certificate and Indemnity, in the form attached as Exhibit B; (iv) An affidavit of Seller pursuant to Section 1445(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, stating that Seller is not a foreign person within the meaning of such Section; (v) A closing statement, executed by Seller; and (vi) Such other documentation as maybe reasonably required by Purchaser’s title company. B. At the Closing, Purchaser shall deliver the following: (i) The Purchase Price, in cash or immediately available funds; and (ii) A closing statement, executed by Purchaser. 11. Representations and Warranties. A. Seller represents and warrants to Purchaser as of the Effective Date and as of the Closing Date that (i) the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by Seller has been duly authorized by all necessary action on the part of Seller and does not require the consent of any third party, (ii) the individual executing this Agreement on behalf of Seller has the authority to bind Seller to the terms of this Agreement, and (iii) Seller is a corporation duly organized and in good standing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and has the power and authority to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement. B. Purchaser represents and warrants to Seller as of the Effective Date and as of the Closing Date that (i) the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by Purchaser have been duly authorized by all necessary action on the part of Purchaser and do not require the consent of any third party, (ii) the individual executing this Agreement on behalf of Purchaser has the authority to bind Purchaser to the terms of this Agreement, and (iii) Purchaser 7 I-1490919.2 is a municipal corporation duly organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and has the power and authority to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement. C. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that, except as expressly provided in this Agreement, Seller has not made, does not make and specifically negates and disclaims any representations, warranties, promises, covenants, agreements, or guaranties of any kind or character whatsoever, whether express or implied, oral or written, past, present, or future, of, as to, concerning or with respect to (i) the value, nature, quality, or condition of the Property, including the water, soil, and geology, (ii) the income to be derived from the Property, (iii) the suitability of the Property for any and all activities and uses that Purchaser or any tenant may conduct thereon, (iv) the compliance of or by the Property or its operation with any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, policy, order or other determination of any applicable governmental authority, (v) the habitability, merchantability, marketability, profitability, or fitness for a particular purpose of the Property, (vi) the manner or quality of the construction or materials, if any, incorporated into the Property, (vii) the manner, quality, state of repair, or lack of repair of the Property, (viii) compliance with any environmental protection, pollution, or land use laws, rules, regulations, orders, or requirements, including the existence in or on the Property of hazardous materials, or (ix) any other matter with respect to the Property. Additionally, Seller shall not be liable or bound by any statement, representation or information made or furnished by any broker or other person representing or purporting to represent Seller. 12. Environmental. Intentionally omitted. 13. Casualty and Condemnation. Intentionally omitted. 14. Failure of Conditions; Default. If Seller is in default hereunder for failure to comply with any one or more of the material terms or conditions of this Agreement and such failure continues for more than five (5) business days after Seller’s receipt of written notice from Purchaser, Purchaser at its sole option may: (i) terminate this Agreement by written notice delivered to Seller on or before the Closing, (ii) waive such defaults and proceed to Closing, or (iii) enforce specific performance of this Agreement. Purchaser hereby knowingly waives any and all right to institute any action, claim or suit for damages against Seller with respect to any default by Seller hereunder. If Purchaser defaults under this Agreement, and such default is not cured within five (5) business days after written notice thereof from Seller, then Seller, as its sole and exclusive remedy, may terminate this Agreement. Nothing contained in this Section 14 shall in any way limit any indemnification (and any related hold harmless and defense) obligation of Purchaser or Seller pursuant to this Agreement. This Section 14 shall expressly survive the termination of this Agreement. 15. Limitations on Liability. A. Purchaser forever irrevocably releases Seller, its officers, directors, employees, affiliates, representatives and agents from any and all liability and claims arising out of (i) Property Information or opinions made or furnished by or on behalf of Seller (except only for any representations of Seller that are expressly set forth in this Agreement) and (ii) failure or refusal by Seller to disclose or provide Property Information or opinions. 8 I-1490919.2 B. In no event whatsoever shall any director, officer, shareholder, parent, member, manager, affiliate or agent of Seller have any obligation or liability arising from, or in connection with, this Agreement or the transactions contemplated herein. C. Seller shall not be liable for any indirect, incidental, speculative, punitive, special, or consequential damages of any kind including, but not limited to, loss of revenue, loss of goodwill, loss of business opportunity, loss of profits, losses related to third party claims or any one or more of them arising in any manner from this Agreement or the performance or nonperformance of obligations related thereto regardless of the forseeability thereof. D. The provisions of this Section 15 shall survive the Closing or the earlier termination of this Agreement. 16. Certificate of Occupancy and Zoning. Intentionally omitted. 17. Seller’s Work. Intentionally omitted. 18. Assignment. Purchaser shall not have the right to assign its interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of Seller, which consent may be granted or withheld in Seller’s sole and unfettered discretion, and any such assignment without such consent shall be null and void and of no force and effect. Notwithstanding any such assignment of this Agreement, Purchaser shall at all times stay responsible and not be relieved of liabilities hereunder. 19. Section 1031 Applicability. Intentionally omitted. 20. Notices. All notices and other communications hereunder shall be addressed to the parties as follows: If to Seller: Verizon Global Real Estate Attn: Real Estate Administration 7701 E. Telecom Parkway Mail Code: FLTDSB1W Temple Terrace, FL 33637 With a copy to: Willcox & Savage, P.C 440 Monticello Avenue, Suite 2200 Norfolk, VA 23510 Attn: Kyle A. Martin, Esq. If to Purchaser: Charlottesville City Attorney’s Office P.O. Box 911 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Allyson Manson Davies, Deputy City Attorney Any notice, demand or other communication (each, a “notice”) that is given pursuant to this Agreement by either Seller or Purchaser to the other party, shall be (i) given in writing, (ii) addressed to the other party at its required address(es) for notices delivered to it as set forth 9 I-1490919.2 above, and (iii) delivered via either (x) hand delivery, (y) nationally recognized courier service (e.g., DHL, Federal Express, Express Mail) or (z) certified U.S. mail postage prepaid with return receipt requested. Any such notice shall be deemed given, and effective for purposes of this Agreement, as of the date actually delivered to the other party at such address(es) (whether or not the same is then received by other party due to a change of address of which no notice was given, or any rejection or refusal to accept delivery). Notices from either party (to the other) may be given by its attorneys. Each party may, from time to time, designate an additional or substitute required address(es) for notices delivered to it (provided, that such designation must be made by notice given in accordance with this Section 20). 21. Parties Bound. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Seller and Purchaser and their respective successors and permitted assigns. 22. Confidentiality. The parties shall treat all materials and information provided by the other party, regardless of whether such materials or information were provided prior to or after the Effective Date, as confidential information, and shall take reasonable efforts to distribute same only to the receiving party’s current or prospective partners, lenders, employees, agents and representatives who have a need to know and to third party consultants and professionals, all as may be required for reasonable actions hereunder. Each party shall instruct its applicable employees, agents, representatives, and third party consultants and professionals as to the confidentiality of all such information as well as the existence or terms of this Contract. The existence or terms of this Contract shall not be disclosed by either Seller or Purchaser to any unrelated third-party, except for and only to the extent reasonably necessary for those parties required by either Seller or Purchaser to facilitate the transaction contemplated herein, or for any disclosures required by law, or for any disclosures made in connection with litigation. Purchaser and Seller shall only be liable for actual damages arising out of a violation of this Section, and this Section shall not, as it relates to Purchaser, survive Closing. 23. Governing Law. The laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia shall govern the validity, construction, enforcement and interpretation of this Agreement. 24. Brokers. Seller and Purchaser represent and warrant that no brokers have been involved in this transaction. If any broker should make a claim against Purchaser for a commission based upon the actions of Seller, Seller shall indemnify, defend and hold Purchaser harmless from such claim. If any broker should make a claim against Seller for a commission based upon the actions of Purchaser, Purchaser shall indemnify, defend and hold Seller harmless from such claim. 25. Multiple Counterparts; Facsimile Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in any number of identical counterparts. If so executed, each of such counterparts shall, collectively, constitute one agreement, but in making proof of this Agreement, it shall not be necessary to produce or account for more than one such counterpart. For purposes of enforcing this Agreement, facsimile signatures shall be deemed originals. Electronic transmission of this Agreement between the parties, through e-mail or other means, shall be sufficient to constitute delivery. 10 I-1490919.2 26. Time of the Essence. The parties hereto expressly agree that time is of the essence with respect to this Agreement. 27. Entire Agreement. This Agreement embodies the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the transaction herein contemplated, superseding all prior agreements and communications whether oral or written. Any amendments hereto shall be in writing and executed by the party against whom enforcement of the modification is sought. 28. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any party or circumstances shall to any extent be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to parties or circumstances other than those as to which it is invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each provision shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 29. Captions. The captions of the various Sections in this Agreement are for convenience only and do not, and shall not be deemed to, define, limit or construe the contents of such Sections. 30. No Offer. This Agreement shall be of no force or effect unless and until a fully- executed copy, signed by all parties hereto, is delivered to both Seller and Purchaser. The submission of this Agreement to Purchaser for review does not constitute an offer or option to purchase the Property. 31. Construction. The parties acknowledge that the parties and their attorneys have reviewed and revised this Agreement and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement or any exhibits or amendments hereto. 32. Terminology. As used in this Agreement, (i) the phrase “and/or” when applied to one or more matters or things shall be construed to apply to any one or more or all thereof as the circumstances warrant at the time in question, (ii) the terms “herein” “hereof” and “hereunder”, and words of similar import, shall be construed to refer to this Agreement as a whole, and not to any particular Section, unless expressly so stated, (iii) the term “including”, whenever used herein, shall mean “including without limitation”, except in those instances where it is expressly provided otherwise, (iv) the term “person” shall mean a natural person, a corporation, a limited liability company, and/or any other form of business or legal association or entity, and (v) the term "business day" shall mean any day other than a Saturday or Sunday or Federal holiday or legal holiday in the State in which the Property is located. 33. Merger Provision. All understandings and agreements heretofore had between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement are merged into this Agreement (together with any and all documents executed and delivered contemporaneously herewith and therewith), which alone completely expresses their agreement, and this Agreement is entered into after full investigation, neither party relying upon any statement or representation made by the other not embodied in this Agreement. No person or entity other than a party to this Agreement shall be entitled to rely on this Agreement, and this Agreement is not made for the benefit of any person or entity not a party hereto. 11 I-1490919.2 34. Non-Business Days. If the date of Closing, the last day of the Inspetion Period, or the date for delivery of a notice or performance of some other obligation of a party falls on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday in the Commonwealth of Virginia, then the date for Closing, the last day of the Inspection Period, or such notice or performance shall be postponed until the next business day. 35. Patriot Act Compliance. A. Seller shall take any actions that may be required to comply with the terms of the USA Patriot Act of 2001, as amended, any regulations promulgated under the foregoing law, Executive Order No. 13224 on Terrorist Financing, any sanctions program administrated by the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control or Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or any other laws, regulations, executive orders or government programs designed to combat terrorism or money laundering, if applicable, on the transactions described in this Agreement. Seller is not an entity named on the List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons maintained by the U.S. Department of Treasury, as last updated prior to the date of this Agreement. B. Purchaser shall take any actions that may be required to comply with the terms of the USA Patriot Act of 2001, as amended, any regulations promulgated under the foregoing law, Executive Order No. 13224 on Terrorist Financing, any sanctions program administrated by the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control or Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or any other laws, regulations, executive orders or government programs designed to combat terrorism or money laundering, if applicable, on the transactions described in this Agreement. Purchaser is not an entity named on the List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons maintained by the U.S. Department of Treasury, as last updated prior to the date of this Agreement. 36. Tax Proceedings. Intentionally Omitted. 37. Non-Recordability. This Agreement shall not be recorded by Purchaser, and all recordation officers are hereby directed not to record this Agreement. Any recordation by Purchaser shall be a default by Purchaser hereunder. [Signatures Appear on the Following Pages] 12 I-1490919.2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have, by their duly authorized representatives, executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. “SELLER” MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation By: Name: Title: Date: 13 I-1490919.2 “PURCHASER” CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia By: ______________ (SEAL) Maurice Jones, City Manager ATTEST: By: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Allyson Manson Davies, Deputy City Attorney I-1490919.2 EXHIBIT A PLAT SHOWING REAL PROPERTY 15 I-1490919.2 EXHIBIT B CERTIFICATE AND INDEMNITY The undersigned, MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation, successor in merger to MCI Network Services of Virginia, Inc., a Virginia corporation, formerly known as MCI WorldCom Network Services of Virginia, Inc., formerly known as MCI Telecommunications Corporation of Virginia, a Virginia corporation (“Seller”), hereby certifies to ______________ (the “Title Company”) that: 1. Seller has not entered into any currently effective unrecorded leases or occupancy agreements affecting the real property described in Exhibit A (the “Property”). 2. Seller possesses sufficient assets to pay any of the judgments, corporate, franchise and motor vehicle use taxes against Seller that are described in the Title Commitment No. ___________ of the Title Company (the “Title Commitment”). 3. Real estate taxes with respect to the Property that are due and payable by Seller on the date hereof, if any, have been or will be paid, with any interest or penalties thereon if applicable. 4. Seller will pay for any work done at the Property by or on behalf of Seller that could give rise to a mechanic’s lien against the Property. Seller will indemnify and hold the Title Company harmless from and against all loss, cost, damage and expense, including attorney’s fees, resulting from the omission of any exceptions in the Title Commitment in reliance upon and relating to the matters set forth in this Certificate and Indemnity. This Certificate and Indemnity is made for purposes of inducing the Title Company to insure fee title to the Property pursuant to the Title Commitment. Dated: ____________, 2017 MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation By: ___________________________________ Name: ___________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ I-1490919.2 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ALL THAT CERTAIN tract or parcel of land situate in the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, containing approximately 0.2910 acres and described as Parcel “X” on that certain subdivision plat entitled “Minor Subdivision Tax Map 21B-47 Charlottesville, Virginia” prepared by Draper Aden Associates, dated June 3, 2015 and last revised June 19, 2017. 17 I-1490919.2 EXHIBIT C DEED PREPARED BY: Kyle A. Martin VSB# 85610 Willcox & Savage, P.C. 440 Monticello Avenue, Suite 2200 Norfolk, Virginia 23510 Title Insurance Company: _____________________ TAX PARCEL ID: 21B-47 (portion of) Consideration: ______________________ Assessed Value: ______________________ This deed is exempt from state recordation taxes imposed by Virginia Code Sec. 58.1-801 pursuant to Virginia Code Sec. 58.1-811(A)(3). SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED is made this ______ day of __________, 2017, by and between MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation (“Grantor”), successor in merger to MCI Network Services of Virginia, Inc., a Virginia corporation, formerly known as MCI WorldCom Network Services of Virginia, Inc., a Virginia corporation, formerly known as MCI Telecommunications Corporation of Virginia, a Virginia corporation, a grantor for indexing purposes, and the CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, a grantee for indexing purposes (“Grantee”), whose address is _______________, _______, _________, _________________. W I T N E S S E T H: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby grant, bargain, sell, assign and convey with SPECIAL WARRANTY unto the Grantee, in fee simple, the real property located in the City of 18 I-1490919.2 Charlottesville, Virginia and more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof (the “Property”). This conveyance is made expressly subject to the covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements and reservations contained in duly recorded deeds, plats and other instruments constituting constructive notice in the chain of title to the Property hereby conveyed that have not expired by time limitations contained therein or otherwise become ineffective. [SIGNATURE PAGES FOLLOW] 19 I-1490919.2 WITNESS the following signatures and seals: MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation By:________________________________(SEAL) Name: _____________________ Title: _____________________ STATE OF ______________ COUNTY/CITY OF ________________, to wit: I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this _____ day of ___________, 2017, before me, the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared __________________, who is personally known to me, or who has proven on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged that he/she is the _____________ of MCImetro Access Transmission Services of Virginia, Inc., and that he/she, as such, being authorized to do so, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained. Notary Public My Commission Expires: My Registration No.: 20 I-1490919.2 The City of Charlottesville, acting by and through its City Attorney, the City official designated by the City Manager pursuant to authority granted by resolution of the City Council of the City of Charlottesville, does hereby accept the conveyance of the Property, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.2-1803, as evidenced by the City Attorney’s signature hereto and the City’s recordation of this deed. As is further required by Sec. 15.2-1803 of the Virginia Code, the City Attorney’s signature hereto constitutes his certification that this deed is in a form approved by him. Accepted by: CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA _______________________________(SEAL) S. Craig Brown, City Attorney COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________, 20____, by S. Craig Brown, City Attorney, on behalf of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia. My commission expires: _________________________ Registration No: ______________ __________________________________________ Notary Public 21 I-1490919.2 EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL THAT CERTAIN tract or parcel of land situate in the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, containing approximately 0.2910 acres and described as Parcel “X” on that certain subdivision plat entitled “Minor Subdivision Tax Map 21B-47 Charlottesville, Virginia” prepared by Draper Aden Associates, dated June 3, 2015 and last revised June 19, 2017, recorded in the Clerk’s Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia simultaneously herewith. IT BEING a portion of the same property conveyed to MCI Telecommunications of Virginia, a Virginia corporation, by deed from Brass, Inc., a Virginia corporation, dated March 24, 1995 and recorded March 31, 1995 in Deed Book 649 at page 254. Deed of Correction recorded in Deed Book 653 at page 186 correcting Grantee name to MCI Telecommunications Corporation of Virginia. 22 I-1490919.2 EXHIBIT D DEED OF EASEMENT Prepared by S. Craig Brown (VSB #19286) Charlottesville City Attorney’s Office, P.O. Box 911, Charlottesville, VA 22902 City Tax Map Parcel: 21B-47 (portion of) This deed is exempt from state recordation taxes imposed by Virginia Code Sec. 58.1-801 pursuant to Virginia Code Sec. 58.1-811(A)(3). THIS DEED OF EASEMENT made this _____ day of _____________________, 20_____, by and between MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation, successor in merger to MCI Network Services of Virginia, Inc., a Virginia corporation, formerly known as MCI WorldCom Network Services of Virginia, Inc., a Virginia corporation, formerly known as MCI Telecommunications Corporation of Virginia, a Virginia corporation, Grantor; and the CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation, P.O. Box 911, Charlottesville, Virginia 22902, Grantee. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of ONE DOLLAR AND 00/100 ($1.00), receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor does hereby GRANT and CONVEY unto the City the following described easement (the “Easement”): Perpetual, non-exclusive easement and right-of-way, ten feet (10’) in width, to construct, replace, maintain, extend and repair storm drain line facilities (the “Facilities”), in the area of Grantor’s property shown and labeled as “PROPOSED 10’ x 10’ STORM EASEMENT CENTERED ON PIPE” (the “Easement Area”) on a plat made by Draper Aden Associates, dated June 3, 2015 and last revised June 19, 2017, which plat is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and made a part of this deed. Said Easement crosses a portion of the property conveyed to Grantor by deed dated March 24, 1995, of record in the Charlottesville Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Deed Book 649, 23 I-1490919.2 Page 254 (the “Property”). Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid deed for a more complete description of the Property over which the Easement crosses. The conveyance of the Easement includes the perpetual right of ingress and egress across the Property for the above-mentioned purposes. The City shall have the right to trim, cut, and remove all trees, limbs, undergrowth, shrubbery, landscape plantings of any kind, fences, buildings, structures, paving, or other obstructions or facilities within the Easement Area which interferes with construction, operation, and maintenance of the Facilities in or on the Easement Area. The City shall repair or replace only ground cover (pavement, gravel, or grass) located within the Easement Area or any other area of the Property accessed by the City which is disturbed, damaged, or removed as a result of the construction or repair of any of the Facilities, shall remove all trash and other debris of construction or repair from the Easement Area or other area of the Property accessed by the City, and shall restore the surface thereof to its original condition as nearly as reasonably possible, all subject, however, to this exception, to-wit: that the City shall not be so obligated when it would be inconsistent with the proper operation, maintenance or use of the Facilities. Grantor reserves the right to make use of the Property subject to the rights herein granted, which use shall not be inconsistent with the rights herein conveyed or interfere with the use of the Easement by the City for the purposes aforesaid; provided, however, that all such use shall be at Grantor's risk unless prior written approval of City is obtained. As evidenced by its acceptance and recordation of this deed, the City covenants that it will perform the installation and maintenance of the Facilities in a proper and careful manner. 24 I-1490919.2 The Easement and the City’s rights granted hereunder by Grantor shall be subject to any easement of record recorded prior hereto. [This space intentionally left blank] 25 I-1490919.2 GRANTOR: MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation By:________________________________(SEAL) Name: _____________________ Title: _____________________ STATE OF _______________________ City/County of __________________________ The foregoing was acknowledged before me on this ________ day of ______________, 20____, by ___________________________, as ______________________ of MCImetro Access Transmission Services of Virginia, Inc. My commission expires: ________________________ _______________________________________________ Notary Public Registration #: _________________ 26 I-1490919.2 The City of Charlottesville, acting by and through its City Attorney, the City official designated by the City Manager pursuant to authority granted by resolution of the City Council of the City of Charlottesville, does hereby accept the conveyance of this easement, pursuant to Virginia Code Sec. 15.2-1803, as evidenced by the City Attorney’s signature hereto and the City’s recordation of this deed. Accepted by: CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA _______________________________________ S. Craig Brown, City Attorney COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA City of Charlottesville The foregoing was acknowledged before me on this ________ day of _____________________, 20____, by S. Craig Brown, City Attorney, on behalf of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia. __________________________________________ Notary Public Registration #: ________________ 27 I-1490919.2 EXHIBIT “A” PLAT SHOWING EASEMENT AREA [To be attached] 28 I-1490919.2 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF LAND NEAR FIFTH STREET STATION PARKWAY FOR EXTENSION OF THE CITY GREENBELT TRAIL SYSTEM WHEREAS, MCImetro Access Transmission Services of Virginia, Inc. (“MCImetro”), the owner of a parcel of land identified on City Tax Map 21B as Parcel 47, has indicated a willingness to convey a portion of their land (designated as Parcel X on the attached plat made by Draper Aden Associates, dated June 3, 2015, last revised June 19, 2017) to the City of Charlottesville for greenbelt trail purposes; and WHEREAS, a Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement for the conveyance of said land has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney; and WHEREAS, as a condition of closing, MCImetro has agreed to grant an easement across their property to the City (shown on the attached plat) for the purpose of maintaining a portion of the existing private stormwater pipe on MCImetro property that serves to direct stormwater through Parcel X and into Moore’s Creek; and WHEREAS, the City’s Parks and Recreation Department seeks the endorsement of City Council to proceed with the purchase of the above-described land at a purchase price of $13,000.00, which is well below the City Assessor’s valuation of the land; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Council hereby authorizes the purchase of a parcel of land (0.2910 acre) designated as Parcel X on a plat by Draper Aden Associates, dated June 3, 2015, last revised June 19, 2017, located near Fifth Street Station Parkway, for extension of the City’s greenbelt trail system. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a purchase agreement, in form approved by the City Attorney, and the City Attorney shall take whatever actions are necessary to effect the acquisition of the above-described land and easement, pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the aforementioned purchase agreement. Proposed Property Acquisition - Verizon - 5th St 12,677 square feet for trail along Moores creek $13,000 Zoned HW Food Lion Verizon Hardees 5th Street Station Shopping Center (Wegman's, etc.) CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Requested: Authorization to Discontinue Drought Warning Stage Restrictions Presenters: Maurice Jones, City Manager Lauren Hildebrand, Director of Utilities Staff Contacts: Maurice Jones, City Manager Lauren Hildebrand, Director of Utilities Title: Discontinue Drought Warning Stage Restrictions Background: The Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) operate two water treatment plants that provide water to the City of Charlottesville. The two treatment plants are the South Rivanna Water Treatment Plant, which draws water from the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir (SFRR), and the Observatory Water Treatment Plant, which draws water from the Ragged Mountain and the Sugar Hollow Reservoirs. The RWSA is implementing a water supply plan to meet the long term needs of the community. RWSA recently completed the initial phase of the plan: The new Ragged Mountain Dam, which increased the water storage capacity of the reservoir. Additional phases for the water supply plan are being implemented and will be completed in upcoming years. These include increasing the capacity of the Observatory Water Treatment Plant, the Avon to Pantops water line and the pipeline from the SFRR to the Ragged Mountain Reservoir. The completion of these projects will give RWSA the flexibility and redundancy necessary to maximize the urban water system. Discussion: The water level of the SFRR has been 100% full and overflowing since November 1, 2017. This is due to the recent rainfall, the community embracing water conservation measures, and the Department of Environmental Quality cooperating with RWSA to implement certain operational measures. A meeting of the RWSA Board of Directors was held November 14, 2017. The RWSA Board authorized the Executive Director to notify the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, the Albemarle County Service Authority Board of Directors, and the Charlottesville City Council that water use restrictions are no longer required, in accordance with the Regional Drought Response and Contingency Plan. In order for the City to discontinue mandatory water conservation restrictions, according to Code Section 31-125, the City Council must determine that a water emergency no longer exists. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This request supports City Council’s “Green City” vision. It contributes to Goal 3 of the Strategic Plan: To be a beautiful and sustainable natural and built environment; Objective 3.2: To provide reliable and high quality infrastructure; and Objective 3.4: To be responsible stewards of natural resources. Community Engagement: RWSA issued a press release regarding discontinuing water use restrictions. In addition, Albemarle County Service Authority issued a press release that water restrictions are no longer required. The City plans on communicating through social media that mandatory water restrictions will no longer be in effect. Budgetary Impact: This has no impact on the General Fund. Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council approve the resolution declaring that a water supply emergency no longer exists and mandatory water stage restrictions imposed on October 11, 2017 are no longer in effect according to City Code Section 31-125. Attachments: Code Section 31-125- Conservation of water during emergencies Resolution RESOLUTION DECLARING THAT DROUGHT WARNING STAGE RESTRICTIONS ARE NO LONGER IN EFFECT WHEREAS, on October 11, 2017 the Charlottesville City Council imposed mandatory water restrictions as set forth in Charlottesville City Code Sec. 31-125; and WHEREAS, rainfall measurably improved the water levels in the urban reservoirs that supply water to the City; and WHEREAS, water conservation measures were embraced by the community; and, WHEREAS, the Department of Environmental Quality cooperated with the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority to implement certain operational measures; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2017 the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority announced the Authority’s Drought Warning was discontinued and requested that the Charlottesville City Council declare that mandatory water restrictions are no longer required; and, WHEREAS, City Code sec 31-125 provides that Drought Warning Stage Restrictions shall remain in effect until City Council determines that a water emergency in the City of Charlottesville no longer exists; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that a water supply emergency within the City of Charlottesville no longer exists, and the mandatory water restrictions imposed on October 11, 2017 are no longer in effect. Sec. 31-125. - Conservation of water during emergencies. (a) Drought warning stage restrictions: The following drought warning stage restrictions on the use of water drawn from the city's public water supply shall be in effect upon adoption of an implementing resolution by city council: (1) Watering of established outside shrubbery, trees, lawns, grass, plants, homegardens, or any other established vegetation, shall only be conducted manually by means of a non-leaking hand held hose with an automatic shutoff nozzle and using the minimum amount required to preserve plant life. (2) New plantings, commercial greenhouses or nursery stocks, newly seeded and sodded lawns, and athletic fields and courts shall only be watered as follows: (i) Athletic fields and courts and commercial greenhouses or nursery stocks may be watered by automatic irrigation systems, or manually by the means described in subsection (a)(1), between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 10:00 a.m., using the minimum amount of water required to preserve plant life. (ii) Newly seeded lawns and new plantings are required to be installed by a licensed contractor and shall have a forty-five-day establishment period from the date of installation. Sodded lawns are required to be installed by a licensed contractor, shall have a twenty-day establishment period, and shall use no more than ½ inch of water over the sodded area daily. Automatic irrigation or manual watering, by the means described in subsection (a)(1), of newly installed plantings and seeded and sodded lawns shall be conducted only between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 10:00 a.m. and only as necessary to preserve plant life. Prior to installation, the customer shall provide the director of public works with a written estimate of the amount of water to be used during the establishment period, a dated licensed contractor receipt, and the irrigation method to be used. Failure to provide the required information or initiating installation prior to receipt of written approval shall be deemed a violation pursuant to section (g). Testing and servicing of outside, automatic irrigation systems may be performed during the drought warning stage only if the contract to install the system is dated prior to the council's declaration of the drought warning stage, and a copy of the contract is provided to the director of public works. (3) Washing of automobiles, trucks, trailers, or any other type of mobile equipment, except in licensed commercial vehicle wash facilities, is prohibited. (4) Washing of sidewalks, streets, driveways, parking lots, service station aprons, exteriors of homes or apartments, commercial or industrial buildings or any other outdoor surface, except where mandated by federal, state or local law, is prohibited. (5) The operation of any ornamental fountain or other structure making a similar use of water is prohibited. (6) The filling or refilling of swimming or wading pools requiring more than five (5) gallons of water shall require written approval from the director of public works. Approval shall only be considered for those swimming or wading pools contracted to be installed or constructed prior to the declaration of the drought warning stage. The director of public works shall balance the need for filling the pool against the public's interest in the conservation of water to determine if approval shall be granted. As used herein, the phrase "filling or refilling" shall mean the addition of any water to the pool from the public water supply after the adoption of this amended ordinance. (7) The use of water from fire hydrants for any purpose other than fire suppression, unless otherwise approved by the director of public works, is prohibited. (8) The serving of drinking water in restaurants, except upon request, is prohibited. (9) The operation of any water-cooled comfort air conditioning that does not have water conserving equipment in operation is prohibited. Page 1 (10) All commercial lodging establishments shall adopt a policy which limits the daily changing of washable linens and towels, and communicate that policy to employees and guests. At a minimum all sheets, pillowcases, towels, washcloths and bathmats shall only be changed and washed (i) upon request by an occupant; (ii) upon a change in occupancy; or (iii) once every three (3) days if used by the same occupant. As used herein, "commercial lodging establishment" shall include any establishment offering to the public for compensation lodging or sleeping accommodations, including but not limited to hotels, motels, travel lodges, tourist homes and bed and breakfast establishments. (b) Drought emergency stage restrictions: The following drought emergency stage mandatory restrictions on the use of water drawn from the city's public water supply shall become effective at such time as the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) certifies, in writing, that a drought emergency stage exists, and shall add to or supersede, where appropriate, the restrictions already in place pursuant to subsection (a) above: (1) All water leaks must be repaired within three (3) business days after notification by the city. If a water leak is not repaired within three (3) business days after notification by the city, the director of finance shall terminate water service to the address where the leak is located until such time as the leak is repaired. (2) Watering of athletic fields is prohibited. (3) All businesses, institutions and governmental entities must develop and implement a written plan, available for inspection by the city within fourteen (14) days of notice of the drought emergency stage, which will reduce the current use of water by that business or institution by twenty (20) percent, other than what is necessary for the sanitary and drinking needs of its employees and invitees. Usage will be based on the customer's average monthly use for the twelve-month period prior to the notice of the drought emergency stage. The public utilities director shall establish a monthly usage benchmark for all businesses, institutions and governmental entities without a twelve-month billing history using criteria established by the department of public works. (4) All businesses, institutions and governmental entities must place signs at each main entrance and in each restroom and shower indicating the existence of a water supply emergency and encouraging the conservation of water. (5) All outdoor watering is prohibited. (6) The use of showers in health, fitness and athletic clubs is prohibited, except showers equipped with low flow or flow reducing equipment. (7) The filling or refilling of swimming or wading pools of any size is prohibited. As used herein, the phrase "filling or refilling" shall mean the addition of any water to the pool from the public water supply after the adoption of this amended ordinance. (8) Exemptions granted during the drought warning stage are no longer valid. Customers may reapply for an exemption during the drought emergency stage. None of the restrictions set forth herein shall be construed to authorize the violation of any health or safety regulation promulgated by the state department of health. (c) Notice and enforcement: The above restrictions shall be enforced upon their being printed in any newspaper of general circulation in the City of Charlottesville, or broadcast upon any radio or television station serving the City of Charlottesville. (d) Duration. Drought warning stage restrictions shall remain in full force and effect until city council determines that a water emergency in the City of Charlottesville no longer exists. Drought emergency stage restrictions shall remain in full force and effect until such time as the Executive Director of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority certifies in writing to the Director of Public Works of the City of Charlottesville that a drought emergency stage no longer exists. Page 2 (e) Appeals: The city manager shall establish an appeals procedure to review customer applications for exemptions from the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) on a case by case basis and, if warranted, to make equitable adjustments to such provisions. The city manager shall also be empowered to establish regulations governing the granting of temporary exemptions applicable to all or some of the uses of the water supply set forth in subsections (a) and (b). The city manager or designee shall, in deciding applications, balance economic and other hardships to the applicant resulting from the imposition of water use restrictions or allocations against the individual and cumulative impacts to the water supply resulting from the granting of exemptions. (f) Additional restrictions: Should measures taken pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this section prove insufficient to preserve sufficient supplies of water for the citizens of the city, with prior council approval, the city manager and director of public works are hereby further authorized to implement additional restrictions, including but not limited to the following: (1) Impose temporary rate increases or surcharges on the consumption of water; (2) Restrict or discontinue the supply of water to any industrial or commercial activity which uses water beyond the sanitary and drinking needs of its employees and invitees; and (3) Declare a moratorium on new water connections to buildings issued a building permit after the date of declaration of emergency and to restrict water use to basic human needs only. (g) Violation and penalties: It shall be a violation of this section for any person to use water, or allow or cause the use of water, in violation of the provisions of this section after publication of the restrictions as required by paragraph (c). Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be subject to the following penalties: (1) For the first offense, violators shall receive a written warning delivered in person or posted at the site of the violation by a representative of the City of Charlottesville Department of Public Works. (2) For the second offense, violators shall be fined five hundred dollars ($500.00), which penalty shall be added to the violator's next city water bill; (3) For the third offense, violators shall be fined one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), which penalty shall be added to the violator's next city water bill; (4) For the fourth and each subsequent offense, the violator shall be guilty of a Class I misdemeanor. (5) Each violation by a person shall be counted as a separate violation by that person, irrespective of the location at which the violation occurs. In addition, the public works director is hereby authorized to terminate the water service, for the duration of the emergency, to any person convicted of such violation. Any person assessed a penalty pursuant to paragraphs (g)(2) or (3) of this section shall have the right to challenge the assessment by invoking the appeals procedure established pursuant to paragraph (e). The imposition of the penalty may be waived if it is determined that the violation occurred due to no fault of the person assessed the penalty. (h) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the city manager and the public works director from rescinding any orders issued thereunder when the conditions creating the need for such orders have abated. (6-19-00(6); 9-16-02(2); 10-7-02(1); 10-7-02(2), § 1; 11-20-06(4); 11-3-08(2)) Page 3 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 6, 2017 (updated for November 20, 2017) Actions Required: Vote on Ordinance Craig Brown, City Attorney Staff Presenter: Craig Brown, City Attorney Staff Contacts: Chris Engel, Director of Economic Development Title: Proposed Lease of 75 Parking Spaces in the Water Street Parking Garage Background: The owner / developer of the Dewberry Hotel on the Downtown Mall has expressed an interest in leasing City-owned parking spaces in the Water Street Parking Garage (“WSPG”) for use by the hotel’s visitors and guests, once the hotel is built and opened. In 2007 the original developer of the hotel leased 70 parking spaces in the Garage from Charlottesville Parking Center, Inc. for an initial term of 20 years, with the right to renew the lease for two additional terms of 20 years each. That lease ended when the original hotel owner was unable to complete the project. Virginia law provides that property owned by cities and towns can be leased for a maximum term of 40 years, and that before granting a lease in excess of five years, “the city or town shall, after due advertisement, publicly receive bids therefore.” Since the hotel developer has expressed an interest in leasing WSPG parking spaces for more than five years, City Council adopted a Resolution on September 5, 2017 authorizing staff to advertise a 40-year lease of 75 designated parking spaces in the WSPG. That advertisement, inviting written bids for the parking space lease, was published in The Daily Progress once a week for two successive weeks, as required by law. A copy of the proposed ordinance and Parking Space Lease, which were referenced in the legal advertisement, are attached to this agenda memo. This public advertisement and bid process has previously been used to lease property for a 40 year term to the Boys and Girls Club at the Buford Middle School site, and to the YMCA at McIntire Park. Discussion: Virginia Code §15.2-2102 describes the process for receiving bids and awarding the lease: The presiding officer shall read aloud, or cause to be read aloud, a brief summary of each of the bids that have been received, for public information, and shall then inquire if any further bids are offered. If further bids are offered, they shall be received. The presiding officer shall thereafter declare the bidding closed. The presiding officer shall receive recommendations from the staff relative to any bids received in advance and staff's recommendations, if any, on any bids received at the advertised council meeting. If one or more bids have been submitted, City Council is required to hold a public hearing on the lease of the parking spaces, prior to deciding whether to proceed with the proposed ordinance. Virginia Code §15.2-2102 states that “the council shall accept the highest bid from a responsible bidder and shall adopt the ordinance as advertised . . . however, the council, by a recorded vote of a majority of the members elected to the council, may reject a higher bid and accept a lower bid from a responsible bidder, if, in its opinion, some reason affecting the interest of the city or town makes it advisable to do so, which reason shall be expressed in the body of the subsequent ordinance granting the . . . lease”. The City also has the right to reject any and all bids received. As of the date of this memo no bids for the lease of the 75 parking spaces have been received. It is not mandatory that City Council have a first reading on the ordinance at the November 6 meeting, although it may choose to do so. State law provides that City Council has the option to conduct additional investigation prior to moving the ordinance forward for a second reading. Community Engagement: There has been no formal community engagement to date, but Virginia Code §15.2-1800 requires that a public hearing be held prior to the lease of real property. That public hearing has been advertised for this City Council meeting, to be held following the submission of all bids. Budget Impact: The impact on the City budget will be determined by the amount bid for the parking spaces, if accepted by the City. Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council hold a public hearing on any bids received, and if appropriate move and second the attached ordinance on first reading. Alternatives: City Council can reject all bids submitted for the lease, either before or after conducting a public hearing. If all bids are rejected the City must re-advertise prior to any subsequent award of the lease. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Parking Space Lease AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE LEASE OF SEVENTY-FIVE (75) DESIGNATED PARKING SPACES IN THE WATER STREET PARKING GARAGE WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville seeks to lease seventy-five (75) parking spaces in the Water Street Parking Garage for a term of forty (40) years; and, WHEREAS, Virginia law requires that the City advertise and receive bids on any lease of City-owned real property that is devoted to a public use and that will have a term in excess of five years; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Virginia Code § 15.2-2100 et seq., this ordinance was duly advertised for the purpose of receiving bids; and, WHEREAS, a bid has been received in response to the advertisement, and in accordance with Virginia Code § 15.2-1800 (B) a public hearing was held on November 6, 2017 to give the public an opportunity to comment on the proposed long term lease of City-owned parking spaces in the Water Street Parking Garage; and, WHEREAS, the bid submitted by Deerfield Square Associates II, LLC has now been selected by the City Council to receive the Parking Space Lease. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a Parking Space Lease, in substantially the same form as attached hereto, with Deerfield Square Associates II, LLC as Lessee, for the leasing of seventy-five (75) Parking Spaces in the Water Street Parking Garage as described in the attached Lease. Said Parking Space Lease shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney prior to execution by the City Manager. PARKING SPACE LEASE This PARKING SPACE LEASE (“Lease”) is made this ____ day of ____________, 2017, by and between the CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, a Virginia municipal corporation, referred to herein as “City” or “Lessor”, and ______________________________, a ____________________, referred to herein as “Lessee”. The City is the owner of approximately 629 condominium units designated and used as parking spaces in the Water Street Parking Garage Condominium, located in the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, on Water Street, between Second Street S.E. and Fourth Street S.E. The purpose of this Lease is to lease, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Lease, seventy- five (75) of those City-owned parking spaces on a long term basis to Lessee, for the purpose of parking by Lessee’s _______________________________________. Therefore, the parties agree as follows: 1. Lease of Parking Spaces. The City hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee hereby leases from the City, the following seventy-five (75) Parking Spaces located on the top floor of the Water Street Parking Garage: • Parking Spaces designated P-884 through P-897; • Parking Spaces designated P-915 through P-964; and, • Parking Spaces designated P-1009 through P-1019. These Parking Spaces are depicted on Exhibit A attached hereto, entitled “Water Street Parking Garage Expansion – Roof Parking”. As an incident to the leasing of such Parking Spaces, Lessee is granted the right to use the area of the Condominium in which the Parking Spaces are located and to use such other areas of the Condominium as are reasonably necessary for ingress and egress to the Parking Spaces and otherwise in such manner as is consistent with appropriate parking of motor vehicles and the provisions of this Lease. Lessee shall also have the right to use the common elements and limited common elements specifically associated with the area in which the Parking Spaces are located, so long as such use does not inhibit or interfere with the proper use of common elements and limited common elements by other persons entitled to use thereof. 2. Term of Lease; Option to Extend. [Bidders should state the desired initial term of the lease, and the terms and conditions for an extension or renewal, if any. The entire term, including any extensions or renewals, cannot exceed forty (40) years. Bidders should also specify when the initial lease term begins, if the term of the lease will not begin when the lease is executed by both parties.] 3. Rent. [Bidders should propose the amount of rent payable to the Lessor for the 75 Parking Spaces during the term of the lease.] If the rent is a fixed amount payable in monthly installments, the rent will be due and payable on the first of the month in advance. Lessee will be billed for such rent by the City in advance of the first of the month when such rent is due. Such rent will be reduced by 5% if Lessee pays rent on all spaces for any calendar year on or before the January 1 of any calendar year at the rate of 12 times the rent billed for the monthly rent which would be due on such January 1. If any rent is not paid within 10 days after it is due, the City may impose a charge of 10% for late payment. If any check provided by Lessee for payment of rent or any other amounts due under this Lease is returned for any reason other than lack of endorsements, Lessee will be charged $50.00. Such late payment and returned check charges will be considered additional rent under this Lease. [If any bidder proposes rent in an amount other than a fixed monthly amount, the bidder should propose any necessary terms and conditions regarding calculation of the rent, billing, invoicing and payment.] 4. Access to Premises. [Bidders should state the days and hours that access to the 75 Parking Spaces is needed.] With the prior approval of the City, Lessee will be entitled to install signage and appropriate measures to limit access to the 75 Parking Spaces, and to insure that the spaces are reserved for Lessee’s exclusive use; provided, however, that Lessee shall not take any actions or install any improvements that will in any manner limit or restrict access to or use of any parking spaces in the Water Street parking Garage that are not the subject of this Lease. Nothing in this Lease shall be interpreted to preclude any person associated with the Lessee in any capacity from parking in other available parking spaces in the Water Street Parking Garage on the same terms, conditions and for the same fees as are applicable to members of the public at large. Notwithstanding Lessee’s installation of signage and measures to limit access to the Parking Spaces leased herein, Lessee shall ensure that the City and its agents, contractors and representatives continuously have access to the Parking Spaces for purposes of maintenance, upkeep, repairs and security. 5. Assistance with Problems. As appropriate and upon notice, the City or its agent will provide reasonable assistance to Lessee, without charge during any hours that the Water Street Parking Garage is otherwise open to the public, in obtaining access to the Parking Spaces in the event of any problems with access due to an access system failure. The obligation to provide assistance without charge does not apply when the loss of access is due to (a) damage caused by Lessee or any authorized user of the leased Parking Spaces, or (b) when assistance is rendered outside of normal business hours, under circumstances that would result in a charge against any other person using the Garage for parking. 6. Responsibility for Equipment, Maintenance and Repairs. Lessee will be responsible for maintaining, repairing or replacing any improvements installed pursuant to section (4), supra, except that the City will be responsible for the costs of all maintenance and repairs due to the negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its employees, agents or contractors. As a member of the Water Street Parking Garage Condominium Association the City will be responsible for its pro rata share of the cost of maintaining, repairing, and keeping clean the other equipment, systems, structural components, lighting, doors, stairwells, elevators, and signs of the Condominium in accordance with good maintenance, repair and security practices, except that Lessee will be responsible for the costs of all maintenance, repairs and replacements due to the actions or inactions of Lessee or its ____________________________. 7. Risk of Loss; Insurance; Indemnification. Lessee acknowledges that the City does not maintain insurance for damage to vehicles caused by the actions of others or for damage caused by any reason other than its own negligence, or the negligence of its employees, agents, representatives or contractors, or as is covered by general liability insurance for parking garage facilities. The City will not have any responsibility for any damage caused to any vehicles parked in the Parking Spaces or within the Condominium except for losses covered by insurance maintained by the City, or for any loss caused by the City. Therefore, as among the City and the Lessee, Lessee will be responsible for any losses or claims of any persons using the Parking Spaces when the City has no responsibility for any such loss or damages. Lessee will, therefore, be responsible for maintaining its own insurance for such purposes. Any such insurance will name the City as additional insured as its interest may appear. The City and the Lessee will request of their respective insurers that they provide for waiver of subrogation as to the other parties to this Lease. Lessee will indemnify and hold the City harmless with respect to any costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, and any damages arising from or incurred in connection with claims made by any employees, agents, invitees, and guests of Lessee, or any person using the Parking Spaces with Lessee’s consent, for which the City is not legally responsible; and the City, to the extent permitted by applicable law, will indemnity and hold the Lessee harmless with respect to any costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, and any damages arising from or incurred in connection with claims made by any employees, agents, invitees, and guests of Hotel for which the City is solely legally responsible. 8. Quiet Enjoyment. Through the entire term of this Lease and for so long as the rent is paid to the City, but in no event for a period in excess of forty (40) years, Lessee shall peaceably and quietly hold and enjoy the provisions of this Lease, the rights of ingress and egress to and from the Parking Spaces and the Condominium, and the use of the Parking Spaces, all without hindrance or interruption by the City or any other person or persons lawfully or equitably claiming by, through or under the City; subject, nevertheless, to the terms and conditions of this Lease. Lessee agrees to provide any estoppel certificate which may be requested by the City. 9. Use, Assignment and Sublease. The 75 Parking Spaces leased herein will be used by Lessee exclusively for: [Bidders should submit a description of how the Parking Spaces will be used, i.e., by employees, customers, guests, clients, etc] Lessee agrees and covenants that the Parking Spaces will not be used for any other purpose, nor leased or subleased to the public or to anyone not affiliated with Lessee or Lessee’s business. None of the rights of Lessee under this Lease may be assigned or sublet without the specific written approval of the City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, except that Lessee reserves the right to make the following assignment or sublease without the prior approval of the City: [Bidders should insert any circumstances where they wish to retain the unconditional right to assign or sublet this Lease.] No assignment or subletting will act to release Lessee from any of its obligations under this Lease without the express written consent of the City. 10. Default. With respect to Lessee, a default under this Lease will have occurred if: (a) Lessee fails to make any rent payment within 10 days after such payment is due; (b) Lessee fails to perform any other obligation under this Lease and such failure is not remedied within 30 days after being given notice by the City of such failure, or if such failure cannot be remedied in 30 days, remedial action is not commenced within such 30 days and diligently pursued to completion, except that no notice is required in the event of any use being made by Lessee of the Parking Spaces or the Condominium which might violate any applicable environmental law or might increase the cost of any fire and extended coverage insurance of the City; (c) Lessee has docketed against it any judgment in excess of $50,000 which is not released or is not bonded within 30 days after it is docketed; (d) Lessee makes any assignment for the benefit of creditors; or (e) Lessee files, or has filed against it, a petition under any insolvency or bankruptcy laws, which petition is not dismissed within 60 days after filing. If any such default occurs, the City may (i) in its sole discretion, perform such responsibility of Lessee; and/or (ii) declare the remaining amount of the rent for the term of the Lease due and payable, terminate this Lease immediately, enter upon and relet the Parking Spaces and hold Lessee liable for any deficiency in the amount of rent obtained upon such reletting. If the City terminates the Lease and declares the remaining rent due, it must make commercially reasonable efforts to rent some or all of the Parking Spaces, and the rent received or to be received from any re-letting which occurs will be credited against any amount due from Lessee with respect to such accelerated rent. Lessee will be responsible to the City for all costs incurred by the City, including attorney’s fees, if the City takes any actions with respect to any default hereunder that remains uncured upon the expiration of the applicable cure period, and all such costs will be considered additional rent under this Lease. With respect to the City, a default under this Lease will have occurred if it fails to perform any of their obligations under this Lease, and such failure continues for a period of 15 days after Lessee notifies the City in writing of such failure to perform. If any such default involves a responsibility for repair or maintenance, the City will have such additional reasonable time as may be necessary to undertake and to complete such repair or maintenance. If such a default occurs, Lessee may: (i) perform the obligation of the City under which it is in default and deduct the costs of such performance from any future rent which may be due under this Lease; or (ii), if such default unreasonably interferes with Lessee’s use of the Parking Spaces or the Condominium, terminate this Lease at a date no earlier than 30 days after giving such notice and no later than three months after giving such notice, in which case Lessee will have no further liability for rent under this Lease after such termination. The City will be responsible to Lessee for all costs incurred by Lessee, including attorney’s fees, if Lessee takes any actions with respect to any default hereunder that remains uncured upon the expiration of the applicable cure period, and all such costs may be deducted from rent due under this Lease. Waiver of or failure to take any action with respect to any default will not constitute a waiver of any subsequent or other default of the same or a different provision of this Lease. The rights of the parties to terminate this Lease and to take other actions in the event of default are in addition to any rights which such parties may otherwise have under applicable law and are subject to any provisions of applicable bankruptcy and insolvency laws. 11. Notice of Commencement of Term. [Bidders will specify the time when the term of the Lease will begin; the successful bidder will have no right under this Lease to use the Parking Spaces prior to the commencement of the Lease term.] 12. Destruction of the Condominium. In the event of the destruction of all or any part of the Condominium by fire, explosion, storm, the elements, or otherwise, through no fault of Lessee or its _______________, to such an extent that it becomes impracticable or unsafe for Lessee to use the Parking Spaces or the Condominium for their intended purposes, the term hereby created will, at the option of either party, upon notice to the other, be terminated as of the date of such damage, and the accrued rent will be paid up to the time of such damage. If the owners of the Condominium elect, in their discretion, to repair the Parking Spaces and the Condominium, and during the period of repair or rebuilding the Lessee is unable to use all or any portion of the Premises, the rent due will be reduced proportionately for such period, unless Lessee or any of its ___________________________ were responsible for the damage. 13. Condemnation. If all or any portion of the Parking Spaces or the Condominium is taken by condemnation by any entity other than the City, and if, after such taking, Lessee is unable to continue to use the Parking Spaces or the Condominium, then this Lease will terminate and Lessee will have no further obligation under this Lease. 14. Miscellaneous. This Lease contains the complete understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Lease. Any amendment to this Lease is to be in writing and signed by the parties to this Lease. This Lease will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective heirs, successors, assigns and personal representatives of each of the parties. This Lease and any amendment may be executed in counterparts, any one of which will be considered an original for purposes of proof. Any signature to be affixed to this Agreement may be provided by a facsimile or by electronic signification. Lessee shall have the right to record this Lease in the land records in and for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia. Any notices required to be given by this Lease must be in writing and may be delivered by hand, first class mail or overnight courier to the following: If to the City: Maurice Jones City Manager 605 East Main Street P. O. Box 911 Charlottesville, VA 22902 With a copy to: City Attorney 605 East Main Street P. O. Box 911 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 If to Lessee: [Bidders to provide notice information.] Any party may substitute another address for notice by giving notice to the other party in the manner provided. Any party may provide a number for transmission of notice by facsimile or an address for transmission of notice by electronic mail. Any notice given by regular mail will be deemed to be received five business days after mailing. Any notice given by mail providing for return receipt or given by facsimile, electronic mail or overnight courier will be deemed to be received when delivered. A confirmation from the facsimile machine, electronic mail processor, or the overnight courier will be deemed prima facie proof of the date of delivery. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. As appropriate to the contest, the singular will include the plural and vice versa, and any one gender will include the others. A waiver of any breach or of any condition of this Lease and the failure to enforce any provision of this Lease will not constitute a future waiver of the same provision or a waiver of any other provision of this Lease. In the event that any party initiates any action against any other regarding any breach of this Lease, the party substantially prevailing upon the merits (as determined in writing by the trier of facts) will be entitled to recover all costs incurred in connection with such action, including reasonable attorney’s fees, in addition to being awarded any other relief to which such party may be entitled, which costs, including attorney’s fees, may be recovered from time to time as incurred. WITNESS the following signatures and seals, as of the date first above written. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE By: ________________________ (SEAL) City Manager LESSOR By: ________________________ (SEAL) CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 6, 2017 Action Requested: Approve changes to dog license fees Presenter: Jason A. Vandever, Treasurer Staff Contacts: Jason A. Vandever, Treasurer Chad Everette Thorne, Chief Deputy Treasurer Title: Proposed Changes to Dog License: Implement Lifetime Dog Tag Fee Background: Virginia Code § 3.2-6528 “Amount of License Tax” stipulates that localities shall impose, by ordinance, a license tax on the ownership of dogs within their jurisdiction. Earlier this year, Virginia Code § 3.2-6528 was amended to permit localities to enact, by ordinance, a lifetime license tax on dog ownership. New language within the statute stipulates the dog license tax shall not be more than $10 per year for an annual license, and no more than $50 for a lifetime license. The Treasurer’s Office currently issues dog licenses annually to residents who own or keep dogs at least four (4) months old in the City of Charlottesville. Licenses issued are for one (1) or three (3) years based on a calendar year of January 1 – December 31; and cost: (a) For an unsexed female or male dog, $4.00 per year (b) For any dog not spayed or neutered, $10.00 per year (c) For a kennel of twenty (20) dogs, $20.00 per year (d) For a kennel of fifty (50) dogs, $35.00 per year Discussion: Many localities in Virginia are considering implementation of the relatively new lifetime dog license. At present, Hanover and Stafford Counties have already implemented the lifetime tag. It is also being considered in Orange County. Chesterfield and Accomack have expressed an interest in the possibility of a lifetime dog license. The proposed fee change would be to implement a lifetime dog license fee of $10 and eliminate the annual tag requirement, saving residents the cost and hassle on the annual tag renewal process. Fees for kennel dogs will remain the same. The replacement fees for lost or stolen licenses will be $1. The implementation of a $10 lifetime dog license tax could: • Reduce the tax burden for dog owners over the course of their dog’s lifespan • Present a convenience for dog owners by eliminating the renewal requirements of dog licenses • Limit the processing and supply costs of issuing license renewals for the Treasurer’s Office Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This supports the City’s Strategic Goal 5: A Well-Managed and Responsive Organization; Objective 5.1: Integrate effective business practices and strong fiscal policies and 5.3 Provide responsive customer service. Community Engagement: CASPCA has been contacted and sees no issue with the proposed changes. Budgetary Impact: Annual dog license revenues have been fluctuating between $11,000 – $15,000 per year recently. It is expected that the first year’s implementation will result in a slight revenue increase since many owners who would have purchased a $4 one year dog tag will now purchase a $10 lifetime dog tag. Over the next several years, revenue is expected to decrease as renewals are phased out and only new dogs will be added on an annual basis. The decline in revenue will be offset slightly by a decrease in program administration costs. Recommendation: Replace the annual license tax with a lifetime dog license costing $10. These changes will go into effect with the tag year starting on January 1, 2018. Alternatives: Continue with current dog license fee structure. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REORDAINING SECTION 4-37 OF ARTICLE III OF CHAPTER 4 (ANIMALS AND FOWL) TO ESTABLISH A LIFETIME DOG LICENSE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that Section 4-37 of Article III of Chapter 4 of the Charlottesville City Code, 1990, as amended, are hereby amended and reordained, as follows: ARTICLE III. DOGS GENERALLY Sec. 4-36. License—Required. It shall be unlawful and a Class 4 misdemeanor for any person to own or keep within the city any dog four (4) months old or older for which a current license has not been secured as provided by the laws of the state. Sec. 4-37. Same—Year and tax. (a) Dog licenses shall run from January 1 to December 31, inclusive, and The dog license tax, payable at the office of the city treasurer, shall be as follows: (1) For an unsexed female or male dog, four dollars ($4.00). For any individual dog, a lifetime license tax of ten dollars ($10.00). (2) For any dog not spayed or neutered, ten dollars ($10.00). (3) For a kennel of twenty (20) dogs, twenty dollars ($20.00) annually. (4) For a kennel of fifty (50) dogs, thirty-five dollars ($35.00) annually. (b) The lifetime license shall be valid only as long as the animal’s owner resides in the City of Charlottesville and the dog’s rabies vaccination is kept current. A fee of one dollar ($1.00) will be charged for replacement of a dog license that is lost or stolen. The license for a kennel shall run from January 1 to December 31, inclusive. A dog license may be purchased for a three year period, and the license tax, payable at the office of the city treasurer, shall be twelve dollars ($12.00) for an unsexed female or male dog, or thirty dollars ($30.00) for any dog not spayed or neutered. The three year license shall expire on December 31 of the third calendar year, or on the last day of the month in which the rabies vaccination of the licensed animal expires, whichever occurs first. (c) No license tax shall be levied on any dog that is trained and serves as a guide dog for a blind person or that is trained and serves as a hearing dog for a deaf or hearing impaired person or that is trained and serves as a service dog for a mobility-impaired person. As used in this section, "hearing dog" means a dog trained to alert its owner by touch to sounds of danger and sounds to which the owner should respond, and "service dog" means a dog trained to accompany its owner for the purpose of carrying items, retrieving objects, pulling a wheelchair or other such activities of service or support. State Law reference— Similar provisions Virginia Code §§ 3.2-6527 – 3.2-6536 This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Yes (Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance) Presenter: Lauren Hildebrand, Director, Public Utilities Department Staff Contacts: Lauren Hildebrand, Director, Public Utilities Department Title: Abandonment of Portion of Gas Easement in Dunlora Park Subdivision Background and Discussion: In July of 2017 the City was granted a permanent easement for the installation of natural gas lines on Varick Street and Marin Court in the Dunlora Park Subdivision in Albemarle County on East Rio Road (Albemarle County Deed Book 4936, Page 102). The easement crosses property owned by Dunlora Investments LLC and they have asked the City to abandon a small portion of the easement because it is being relocated within the subdivision. This portion of the easement was never used for the installation of natural gas lines. The relocated easement has been granted to the City in a separate deed of easement, which has been recorded in the Albemarle County Clerk’s Office. The Gas Division has no objection to the abandonment of the portion of the easement shown on the attached plat. Community Engagement: A public hearing is required by law to give the public an opportunity to comment on the proposed conveyance of a property interest. Notice of such public hearing was advertised in the local newspaper at least 7 days in advance of the public hearing. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Priority Areas: Not applicable. Budgetary Impact: None. Recommendation: Approve the ordinance abandoning the referenced portion of the existing gas easement. Attachments: Ordinance; Proposed Deed and Plat. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF A NATURAL GAS EASEMENT GRANTED TO THE CITY BY DUNLORA INVESTMENTS LLC WHEREAS, Dunlora Investments, LLC is the current owner of property located off East Rio Road (Dunlora Park Subdivision) in the County of Albemarle; and WHEREAS, Dunlora Investments, LLC has requested abandonment of a portion of the permanent natural gas easement granted to the City by deed dated July 6, 2017, of record in the Albemarle County Circuit Court Clerk’s Office in Deed Book 4936, page 102, which crosses the above-referenced property; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Utilities has reviewed the request and determined that the City no longer has a need for the above-described portion of the easement (shown on the attached plat); and WHEREAS, in accordance with Virginia Code Sec. 15.2-1800(B), a public hearing was held to give the public an opportunity to comment on the abandonment of this easement; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a Deed of Abandonment of Easement, in form approved by the City Attorney, to abandon the above-described portion of natural gas easement, as shown on the attached plat dated September 20, 2017, made by the Gas Division of the Public Utilities Department. Prepared by Charlottesville City Attorney’s Office November 3, 2017 Albemarle Tax Map 62F, Parcel A (Charter Oaks Drive, Dunlora Subdivision) This deed is exempt from state recordation taxes imposed by Virginia Code §58.1-802 pursuant to Virginia Code §58.1-811(C)(4). THIS DEED OF ABANDONMENT OF EASEMENT, made and entered into this _____ day of ___________________, 2017, by and between the CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation, Grantor, hereinafter “City”, and DUNLORA INVESTMENTS, LLC, “Grantee”, whose address is 170 South Pantops Drive, Charlottesville, Virginia 22911. WITNESSETH: THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the sum of ONE DOLLAR ($1.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the City hereby VACATES, ABANDONS, QUITCLAIMS and EXTINGUISHES all right, title and interest to a portion of the natural gas easement located on Varick Street (Dunlora Park Subdivision) in Albemarle County, shown as a cross-hatched area and labeled as “A 10.0’ WIDE EASEMENT FOR NATURAL GAS FACILITIES TO BE VACATED” on a plat made by the Gas Division of the Charlottesville Public Utilities Department dated September 20, 2017, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Said easement was granted to the City by deed from Dunlora Investments, LLC, dated July 6, 2017, of record in the Circuit Court Clerk’s Office of the County of Albemarle, Virginia in Deed Book 4936, page 102. WITNESS the following signature and seal. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA By: ___________________________________ A Michael Signer STATE OF VIRGINIA City of Charlottesville The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, a Notary Public in and for the aforesaid City and State, by A. Michael Signer, Mayor of the City of Charlottesville, on this _________ day of _______________________, 2017. My commission expires: _____________________________ _________________________________________ Registration #: __________________ Notary Public - This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Yes (Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance) Presenter: Lisa A. Robertson, Chief Deputy City Attorney Staff Contacts: Lauren Hildebrand, Director of Utilities Title: Abandonment of Sanitary Sewer Easement – 600 Brandon Avenue Background: The University of Virginia Foundation (“Foundation”) owns property located at 600 Brandon Avenue (the “Property”), which contains several 2-story apartment buildings. As part of a larger Master Plan to begin the site work for redevelopment of an assemblage of parcels as a model, “Green Street Project” including a mix of academic spaces, student wellness facilities and student housing. The Foundation plans to demolish all the existing buildings and structures on the Property and then convey the Property to the Rector and Board of Visitors of the University of Virginia (“UVA”).1 When UVA expands its campus, the effect on the City is similar to an annexation: real estate is removed from real estate tax rolls, development of land is no longer subject to City zoning regulations and requirements, and negotiated agreements are sometimes needed in order to work through the impacts of the provision of certain public services relative to the property. These issues will be discussed in more detail in one or more agenda item(s) that will be coming to you at a later date. For purposes of this agenda item, the negotiated joint agreement that touches upon the proposed abandonment is a 1981 Lease, Water and Sewer Agreement (“1981 Agreement”). The 1981 Agreement consolidated eight (8) earlier negotiated agreements between the City and UVA relative to the provision of water and sewer services to UVA (dating back as far as 1891), and included terms for a lease of 5 acres of UVA land to the City (the current term of the lease expires on April 17, 2021). For decades, UVA has maintained its own private “distribution system”, primarily for water; to a lesser extent, for sewer. As of 1981, the City was supplying water via pipeline to UVA, three different ways: (i) City water was to be delivered to two primary service points (one at Observatory Mountain; the other, at the intersection of Massie Road and Emmet Street) for distribution through UVA’s distribution system; (ii) City water was to be supplied through UVA’s distribution system to several “accounts” in UVA’s “Piedmont Housing Area” (the 1981 Agreement is silent as to the location(s) at which City water was to be delivered for distribution to these accounts); and (iii) water was to be delivered by the City directly to individual UVA-owned properties through the City’s distribution system. For water supplied pursuant to category (iii), UVA is required to pay the City the same retail rate that any other City water customer would pay. Special rates were negotiated between the City and 1 The Foundation is subject to real estate taxation as well as to the City’s local ordinances. Once sitework is complete and title to the land is transferred, then UVA will construct a multistory building for upper class student apartments on the Property. UVA-owned real estate (land and improvements) are exempt from City real estate taxation and from local ordinances, because UVA is a state agency. UVA for water supplied pursuant to categories (i) and (ii). Significantly: the 1981 Agreement does not discuss or set forth any agreement between the parties as to when, under what circumstances, and under what terms and conditions UVA may extend its then-existing distribution system into areas at which the City’s water distribution/ sewerage collection infrastructure is already available to serve new development. The Property located at 600 Brandon Avenue is currently served by a City-owned sewer line. In 1963 the City acquired a sanitary sewer easement (“Existing Sewer Easement”) across the Property (see attached plat with the easement highlighted in yellow). This City line collects sewerage from the existing buildings. See attached ALTA/ NSPS Land Title Survey, area marked “Sewer Line and Easement to be Abandoned.” For sewer service provided to the existing buildings, the City has received compensation at its established retail rate. The Foundation is asking City Council to abandon the existing sewer line, vacate the Existing Sewer Easement, and to allow UVA to construct a new sewer line that would be owned and maintained by UVA. The proposed UVA “lateral” would collect waste from the new student housing building and deliver it into manhole # 19-102A (just shy of the manhole to which waste is currently being delivered by the City-owned line--in effect leaving approximately 50 feet of the existing sewer line that will not be rehabilitated and upgraded to serve the new buildings). The Foundation’s proposed plan also shows additional sewer infrastructure, to facilitate a future off-site connection to the sewer line within the next phase of the UVA Green Street Project. See attached Utility Plan, p. C3.06. Water and sewer service are related. (If you are a City sewer customer, you are always a City water customer). At the Subject Property water service is currently provided by the existing City infrastructure in Brandon Avenue (according to the City’s Department of Utilities, this existing water infrastructure is adequate to serve the new student housing buildings). UVA proposes that the new student housing buildings would receive water service through UVA’s private distribution system. The Department of Utilities recommends that the City should continue to be the water and sewer service provider to this project. Discussion: The Department of Utilities has noted that, unless and until an update of the 1981 Water and Sewer Agreement is updated to set forth a specific agreement negotiated between the parties as to UVA expansions, the City should not authorize any existing City utility service to be discontinued to a specific property, or to an area of the City, in which City utilities are currently available. As to the request for abandonment of the sewer line and easement at 600 Brandon Avenue: the Department of Utilities has no objection to this Agenda Item if two conditions are required: (1) the status quo is maintained and the City continues to be the provider of both water and sewer service for the Subject Property (subject to any different arrangement reached as part of a new agreement with UVA or an amendment/ renegotiation of the 1981 Agreement), and (2) UVA would agree to modify their proposed Utility Plan to rehabilitate the remaining 50 feet of existing City sewer line, by either: constructing a new lateral the entire length of the existing City line, or by rehabilitating the remaining 50 feet of City-owned line, to bring it up to current City standards, and grant the City an easement for the new, rehabilitated line. Granting the Foundation’s request under the above-referenced Conditions would allow the development to proceed in the same manner as any other private development: (i) buildings on the Subject Property would be served by the City’s sewer system, through a private lateral connecting the buildings to a City-owned manhole, and (ii) the water service to the buildings would be provided by the City through City-owned distribution system. If City Council votes to abandon the City-owned sewer line and the related sewer easement, then the City Attorney’s Office will draft a Deed of Abandonment of Easement (substantially the same as the attached sample deed) to release the City’s rights in the original sewer easement across the Property. Community Engagement: A public hearing is required by law to give the public an opportunity to comment on the proposed disposition of a City-owned interest in real property (in this case, the City’s sewer easement). Notice of such public hearing was advertised in the local newspaper at least 7 days in advance of this public hearing. Budgetary Impact: None. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: Not applicable. Recommendation: Approve the ordinance abandoning the above-described sanitary sewer easement. Attachments: Request Letter from University of Virginia Foundation (with attachments); Drawing of New Sewer Lateral Location Proposed Ordinance; Plat of 1963 Easement; Proposed Deed CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Requested: Approve Ordinance Presenter: Brenda Kelley, Redevelopment Manager Staff Contacts: NDS: Alex Ikefuna, Stacy Pethia City Manager’s Office: Brenda Kelley, Mike Murphy Finance Department: Chris Cullinan City Treasurer: Jason Vandever City Attorney’s Office: Lisa Robertson Title: Land Bank Corporation Background: At its meeting on July 17, 2017, the City Council instructed staff to investigate the viability of the City creating a Land Bank Corporation, as recently allowed by state law, to be used as one additional tool to assist with encouraging the development of affordable housing. What Some Other States Have Done A land bank is typically created in order to sell or convey property through locally developed policies that reflect the community’s priorities. States like Michigan, Ohio and New York have specifically authorized land banks due to the extremely high number of vacant and abandoned properties in order to more directly control returning these properties back to useful occupancy and tax base without the undue burden of a repeating cycle. Other communities utilize land banks to assist with redevelopment efforts and development of affordable housing. City Council has specifically requested staff to research the viability of creating a land bank entity to assist with the future development of affordable housing. This can be identified as a priority in the creation and function of a land bank entity. Alabama – In 2009, Alabama passed the original legislation, revising this legislation in 2013- now known as the Act of Alabama 2013-249 - to broaden the powers of the Land Bank Authority. This revised legislation broadened the powers by allowing: acquiring title to property, not only by tax- delinquent properties, but also by purchase, donation or exchange the transfer of the state’s interest in tax delinquent properties that have been held by the state for at least five years; and to institute quiet title actions to clear title on property; and addresses the ways in which properties may be disposed of whose title issues have been cleared; and provides for the creation of local authorities by establishing an intergovernmental cooperation agreement to transfer property between the Alabama Land Bank Authority and a local land bank authority. Georgia – In 1990, Georgia General Assembly passed the original land bank legislation, revising this legislation with the new Georgia Land Bank Act in 2012. The revised legislation allowed for a new era of regional collaboration, focused initiatives on particular problem properties, and the conversion of vacant spaces into vibrant places. Kentucky – In 1988, Kentucky passed legislation permitting Landbank Authority. The state is currently reviewing legislation to revise the 1988 legislation to allow the land bank to issue bonds, keep proceeds of any sale of property and receive a portion of the property taxes generated, and would allow the city to stop selling property tax liens in certain neighborhoods targeted for redevelopment. In Kentucky, an interlocal cooperation agreement with the state, the Board of Education and the community is required to establish a Land Bank Authority. Michigan – In 2003, Michigan passed legislation called the Land Bank Fast Track Act which authorized land banks in the state to address needs to strengthen and revitalize the economy of the state and local units of government. New York – In 2012, New York passed legislation that permits 25 municipalities to apply for and create land bank corporations that will take control of, and redevelop, vacant, abandoned or tax- delinquent properties to productive use. Ohio – In 2004, Ohio passed the Land Reutilization Program legislation to allow public or community-owned land bank entities to acquire, manage, maintain, and repurpose vacant, abandoned, tax-delinquent and foreclosed properties. In 2016 the General Assembly adopted legislation authorizing a locality, by ordinance, to create a land bank entity as a corporation, for the purpose of assisting the locality to address vacant, abandoned and tax delinquent properties. A Land Bank can sue and be sued in its own name (including actions to clear title to property); can borrow money from private lenders as well as the locality; can enter into contracts; can manage rental property; can sell property; can design, develop, construct, demolish, reconstruct, rehabilitate, renovate, relocate, and otherwise improve real property or rights or interests in real property; can enter into collaborative relationships with municipalities, and other public and private entities for the ownership, management, development and disposition of real property; and may acquire or accept transfers of real estate from any source, including a locality. Within an ordinance creating a Land Bank, a locality may establish a ranking of priorities for the use of real property conveyed by a Land Bank to third parties, including: affordable housing; public spaces; retail, commercial, industrial activities; or preservation of historic properties. Significantly, a locality may remit to the Land Bank up to 50% of real estate taxes collected on real property acquired by a person from the Land Bank, for a period of up to 10 years after the conveyance. One of the potential benefits of a land bank entity is the ability to incentivize the transfer of tax delinquent and other properties into ownership of individuals who will rehabilitate and utilize those properties for desirable purposes. A properly funded land bank could acquire a tax delinquent property at auction. Once acquired by the land bank, that property could only be sold for certain purposes, and post-sale, a portion of the real estate taxes from that property can be earmarked as a source of ongoing funding for the Land Bank. The City of Charlottesville does not have a large inventory of tax delinquent properties. Currently there are approximately 7 properties in the multiple years tax delinquent/judicial sale process; approximately 6 properties that are judicial sale candidates; and approximately 25 properties that are delinquent multiple years but not yet eligible for judicial sale. As of July 2017 there are approximately 161 properties with delinquent taxes. Of those 161 parcels, approximately 68 parcels appear to be owner-occupied properties, 10 appear to be commercial properties and 10 appear to be unusable strips of land. Properties are not eligible to go to the judicial sale process until taxes are a minimum of two years delinquent. It must be noted however, that a Land Bank is not limited by law as to how it may acquire property. The Land Bank may purchase or accept donations of tax delinquent properties, purchase or accept donations of blighted properties, and may enter into purchase agreements with private landowners. The benefit of a Land Bank is the ability to assemble parcels of land which, once they come into the ownership of the Land Bank, may be rehabilitated, developed and sold for purposes specified in the Ordinance adopted by a locality. Discussion: Attached is an ordinance proposed by staff for your consideration. It is our recommendation that Council establish the Land Bank as a non-profit corporation, and that the board of directors be City Officials best suited for acquisition, disposition of the properties once acquired, resource allocation, planning and redevelopment. The benefits of this proposed arrangement are that the City would truly be implementing a new tool, in a new manner, as opposed to recycling arrangements similar to those which the City has had with various existing nonprofits and public entities in past decades. Also, the structure of this type of corporation, and the conflicts of interest provisions in the enabling legislation, will ensure that the board of directors of the corporation are not business entities or nonprofits who might have competing interests in the financial assets of the corporation. The initial Board of Directors would be:  City Manager, or designee  Director of Neighborhood Development Services  City Finance Director The initial Board of Directors, with cooperation and assistance from the City government, would prepare and file all of the paperwork to duly constitute the nonprofit corporation. Once that is done, and the corporation is ready to commence its activities, the initial Board members would then select two additional board members from the private sector, one (1) member to be from each of the following categories:  A banking/finance professional experienced in the financing of commercial and multifamily residential development, and  A member of the Charlottesville Albemarle Association of Realtors Thereafter, when there is a vacancy in the Private Sector board seats, then the governing board would be responsible for seeking and approving the appointment of qualified private-sector individuals to serve on the board.  The CLBC would initially be staffed by the Redevelopment Manager in the City Manager’s Office.  The priorities for disposition of properties will be as follows: o Affordable housing plans and other projects adopted or supported by the City of Charlottesville o Individuals who meet the criteria who wish to acquire property for owner-occupied affordable housing o For-profit or not-for-profit corporations that meet the criteria and that intend to rehabilitate or develop affordable housing o Individuals who meet the criteria and who own and occupy residential property for purposes of a side-lot disposition program (vacant lots that don’t meet developable zoning standards) Staff recommendation:  Create the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation (CLBC) - this would be a non-profit corporation, separate and apart from the City government, but subject to governance by both public officials and private experts, in the nature of a type of public/ private partnership Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This project supports City Council’s visions of Quality Housing Opportunities for All, and Smart, Citizen-Focused Government. It contributes to the following Goals and Objectives of the City’s Strategic Plan FY2018-2020: Goal 1: An Inclusive Community of Self-sufficient Residents 1.3: Increase affordable housing options Community Engagement: There is no community engagement as this request is to establish a non-profit entity. Budgetary Impact: No additional funds will be appropriated at this time. It is anticipated that funding will be allocated through the FY 2017 Year End Appropriation process in an approximate amount of $120,000. Filing fees, Board insurance, increased city audit costs and property acquisition funding are expenses to be covered through the allocation in December. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this Ordinance. Alternatives: The City Council may decide not to approve staff recommendation; however, this will limit the City’s access to this available tool designed to spur and encourage more creation of affordable housing. Attachments: Authorizing Ordinance Copy of state statute authorizing a Land Bank Corporation ORDINANCE CREATING THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE LAND BANK CORPORATION AS A NONPROFIT, NONSTOCK CORPORATION; ESTABLISHING A BOARD OF DIRECTORS; ESTABLISHING THE POWERS OF THE CORPORATION AND PROVIDING GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE LAND BANK Pursuant to authorizing legislation set forth within Virginia Code §§ 15.2-7500 et seq., and following a public hearing held pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2-7502, IT SHALL BE AND IS HEREBY ORDAINED AND ENACTED the City Council for the City of Charlottesville as follows: 1. Findings The Charlottesville City Council finds that the social and economic vitality of the City of Charlottesville is adversely affected by a deficit of affordable housing within the jurisdiction of the City, and by the existence of vacant, abandoned, blighted and tax delinquent properties. The purpose of this Ordinance is to serve a public necessity and the interests of the general welfare of City residents, by facilitating the return of vacant, abandoned, blighted and tax delinquent properties to productive use, and by establishing a legal entity whose sole purpose is to partner with the City government to facilitate the productive use of such properties, and the acquisition and transfer of these and other properties to individuals and entities who can create affordable housing and economic growth within the City. 2. Authority This ordinance is adopted in accordance with the provisions of Virginia’s Land Bank Entities Act, §§ 15.2-7500 et seq. of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended (“Va. Code”). 3. Authorization and Establishment (A) The Charlottesville City Council hereby authorizes the creation of a nonprofit, nonstock corporation, created under Chapter 10 (§§ 13.1-801 et seq.) of Title 13.1 of the Va. Code, to be named the “Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation” and hereby establishes the same as a separate legal entity for the purposes of acting as a Land Bank under the provisions of Virginia’s Land Bank Entities Act and implementing and administering the terms of this Ordinance. The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall exist until terminated and dissolved in accordance with the terms of this Ordinance. (B) Initially, the principal office of the corporation shall be at 605 East Main Street (P.O. Box 911), Charlottesville, Virginia, 22902. Thereafter, the governing board of the corporation may change the location of its principal office. (C) The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation is considered a public instrumentality of the City; accordingly, the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall not be required to pay any taxes upon any property acquired or used by the Land Bank under the provisions of this Ordinance. 4. Powers The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall have all of the powers enumerated and authorized within Va. Code § 15.2-7506, as amended. Page 1 of 6 5. Acquisition of Property The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation may acquire real property or interests in real property by any means and in any manner authorized by Va. Code § 15.2-7507 or other provisions of Virginia’s Land Bank Entities Act. The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall neither possess nor exercise the power of eminent domain. 6. Financing of Operations (A) The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation may receive funding, and may receive and retain payments, in accordance with the provisions of Va. Code § 15.2-7509. (B) Fifty percent (50%) of the real property taxes collected on real property conveyed from the Land Bank to a transferee shall be remitted by the City to the Land Bank. This allocation of City real estate tax revenue shall commence with the first taxable year following the date of conveyance from the Land Bank and shall continue for a period of ten (10) years thereafter. 7. Use and Disposition of Property (A) The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall hold in its own name all real property acquired by it, regardless of the identity of the transferor of such property, and shall hold, use and dispose of such property in accordance with Va. Code § 15.2-7508 or other provisions of Virginia’s Land Bank Entities Act. (B) The governing board of the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall adopt policies and procedures governing the use and disposition of real property interests. Real property or interests in real property shall be conveyed in accordance with this Ordinance and the Virginia Land Bank Entities Act, for use in accordance with the following priorities, in the order stated: (i) use for affordable housing in accordance with city programs and policies (ii) use for retail, commercial or industrial activities (iii) preservation or rehabilitation of historic properties within a major design control district (iv) use for public spaces and places (v) such other uses, and in such other priority, as the City Council may hereafter determine, from time to time. (C) The governing board of the corporation shall establish policies and procedures to regulate the disposition of property, which shall specify the general terms and conditions for consideration to be received by the Land Bank for the transfer of real property and interests in real property. (i) The board shall determine the amount and form of consideration necessary to convey, exchange, sell, transfer, lease, grant or mortgage interests in real property. Consideration may take the form of monetary payments and secured financial obligations, covenants and conditions related to the present and future use of property, contractual commitments of the transferee, and other forms of consideration as determined by the board to be in the best interest of the Land Bank. (ii) Market Value shall be determined by up-to-date data, and by using valuation method(s) that the governing board determines is most appropriate given the particular condition of a property and the surrounding real estate market. Nominal or reduced price disposition shall be an option for any property owned by the corporation; however, in calculating a reduced sales price: Page 2 of 6 (a) Any discount shall take into account the substantiality of the benefit provided by the proposed use, and the amount of support needed to make a project both initially financially feasible and continually sustainable as indicated in financial pro formas provided to the Land Bank; and (b) For housing projects serving households at a mix of income levels, the Land Bank may count the number of low and moderate income households served and provide proportionate discounting. (iii) The Land Bank shall enforce any provisions agreed upon as conditions of sale between a transferee and the Land Bank, through legally binding mechanisms, including but not limited to deed restrictions, covenants, and mortgages. (D) The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation is authorized to discharge liens and other municipal claims, charges or fines, and may seek to enter into agreements with City officials for such discharges against the properties that it acquires. For the duration of time that a property is held by the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation, the corporation may abate all real estate taxes, water and sewer charges and other municipal charges and, to the extent necessary, may seek abatement or non- taxable status from other government entities. (E) Requirements which may be applicable to the disposition of real property and interests in real property by the City of Charlottesville shall not be applicable to the disposition of real property and interests in real property by the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation. 8. Governance (A) Governing board—the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall be governed by a board of directors comprised of five (5) members, as follows: (i). The Charlottesville City Manager, or an individual designated by the City Manager to serve on the board as his or her representative (“designee”), in either case: this member’s term shall coincide with the term of employment of the City Manager; (ii). The City’s Finance Director and Director of Neighborhood Development Services; each of these two members shall serve a term that coincides with his or her term of employment; and (iii). The Charlottesville Area Association of Realtors, which shall designate an individual realtor or broker from the private for-profit sector, to serve as its representative on the governing board; this member’s term shall be for a period of four (4) years, effective on the date on which the board of the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation acts by majority vote to accept the member’s initial designee; and (iv). A lending institution which has financed residential or commercial development in the City, to be selected by the Board members listed in (i) through (iii). This lending institution shall designate one of its officers to serve as its representative on the governing board. This member’s term shall be for a period of four (4) years, effective on the date on which the board of directors acts by majority vote to accept the member’s initial designee. Page 3 of 6 Each member shall continue to serve until his or her successor has been appointed. Successors shall be selected in the same manner as set forth within 8(A)(i) through (iv), above . (B) Authorization of Initial Board actions—the Initial Board Members shall be those referenced in 8(A)(i) and (ii), above. The Initial Board Members shall have authority to take all actions as are necessary to create and activate the corporation as a nonprofit, nonstock corporation under Chapter 10 (§13.1-801 et seq.) of Title 13.1 of the Va. Code. Once the corporation has been duly organized in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Initial Board Members shall take such actions as are necessary to obtain the two additional members referenced in 8(A)(iii) and (iv), above. The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall not acquire any right, title, or interest in any real property, until such time as the corporation has been duly organized and the five-member governing board has been duly constituted and has approved written bylaws for the regulation of the corporation’s affairs and the conduct of its business. (C) Quorum—three members shall constitute a quorum, and the vote of a majority of such quorum shall be necessary for any action taken by the land bank entity. No vacancy in the membership of the board shall impair the right of a quorum to exercise all of the rights and to perform all of the duties of the land bank entity. (D) Financial interests of board members and employees prohibited— (i). No member of the board, nor any employee of the corporation, shall acquire any interest, direct or indirect, in any real property of the corporation, in any real property to be acquired by the corporation, or in any real property to be acquired from the corporation. (ii). No member of the board, nor any employee of the corporation, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or proposed contract for materials or services to be furnished to or used by the corporation. (iii). The board may, within its written bylaws, adopt supplemental rules and regulations, not in conflict with this ordinance or the Land Bank Entities Act, addressing potential conflicts of interest and ethical guidelines for members of the board and employees of the corporation. (E) Miscellaneous— (i). The governing board shall elect officers to serve as Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary. The secretary for the board need not be a member of the board. The City’s Finance Director shall serve as the Treasurer of the corporation, through December 31, 2021 (Initial Treasurer’s Term). Thereafter, the governing board shall elect a Treasurer at the same time it elects its other officers; the elected Treasurer need not be a member of the board. Except for the Initial Treasurer’s Term, officers shall serve one-year terms and may be re-elected to serve successive one-year terms. The duties of officers shall be established by the board within its bylaws. (ii). Members shall serve without compensation; however, a member may seek reimbursement for reasonable expenses incurred in performance of duties relating to the business of the Land Bank. Page 4 of 6 (iii). The corporation shall obtain insurance to defend and indemnify it, its board members, officers, and its employees with respect to claims or judgments arising out of activities performed on behalf of the Land Bank. 9. Staffing (A) The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation may employ individuals and may retain consultants, including, without limitation: an executive director, legal counsel, land planners, and technical experts. (B) The corporation may also enter into agreements with the City of Charlottesville, for the City to provide staffing or other services to the Land Bank, and/or for the Land Bank to provide staffing or other services to the City. (C) The City Manager and other city officials, as may be required by the City Manager, are hereby directed to take any and all actions necessary to effectuate the provisions of this Ordinance and the creation of the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation. 10. Participation by other Jurisdictions Other localities within the Thomas Jefferson Planning District may be added as participants in the Land Bank, by concurrent ordinances adopted by the Charlottesville City Council and the governing body(ies) of such other locality(ies), in accordance with Va. Code § 15.2-7501. 11. Dissolution The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation may be dissolved in accordance with the provisions of Va. Code § 15.2-7511. 12. Miscellaneous (A) The Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation shall not expend any public funds on political activities. Subject to the foregoing, the provisions of this paragraph are not intended to prohibit the Land Bank from engaging in activities authorized by applicable law. (B) No provision of this Ordinance is intended, nor shall it be construed, as a waiver by the City of any governmental immunity available to the City, its officials, officers or employees, or to the Charlottesville Land Bank Corporation, under any applicable law. (C) In the event any provision, section, sentence, clause, or part of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, sections, sentences, clauses or parts of this Ordinance; it being the intent of this City Council that the remainder of the Ordinance shall be and shall remain in full force and effect. (D) This Ordinance shall become effective on the date enacted, as provided by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. DULY ORDAINED AN ENACTED the ____________ day of ________________, 2017, by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, in lawful session duly assembled. Page 5 of 6 ATTEST: ______________________________ Paige Rice, Clerk of City Council Page 6 of 6 Code of Virginia Title 15.2. Counties, Cities and Towns Chapter 75. Land Bank Entities Act § 15.2-7500. Definitions. As used in this chapter, unless the context requires a different meaning: "Act" means this chapter, the Land Bank Entities Act (§ 15.2-7500 et seq.). "Authority" means any political subdivision, a body politic and corporate, created, organized, and operated pursuant to the provisions of the Act. "Board of directors" or "board" means the board of directors of an authority or a corporation. "Corporation" means any nonprofit, nonstock corporation created under Chapter 10 (§ 13.1-801 et seq.) of Title 13.1 and operated pursuant to the provisions of the Act. "Existing nonprofit entity" means any nonprofit organization that is exempt from taxation under § 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and eligible to receive donations from a locality pursuant to § 15.2-953. "Land bank entity" means any authority, corporation, or existing nonprofit entity established or designated by a locality to carry out the purposes of the Act. "Real property" means lands, structures, and any and all easements and every estate and right therein, legal and equitable, including terms for years and liens by way of judgment, mortgage, or otherwise, and any and all fixtures and improvements located thereon. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7501. Creation of land bank entities by localities. A. Subject to a public hearing held pursuant to § 15.2-7502, a locality may by ordinance, or two or more localities may by concurrent ordinances, create a land bank entity as either an authority or a corporation, under an appropriate name and title, for the purpose of assisting the locality to address vacant, abandoned, and tax delinquent properties. Other localities may join the authority or corporation as provided in the ordinance. An authority created pursuant to the Act shall be created as a public body corporate and as a political subdivision of the Commonwealth. A corporation created pursuant to the Act shall be a nonprofit, nonstock corporation created under Chapter 10 (§ 13.1-801 et seq.) of Title 13.1. B. Each ordinance shall include the following: 1. The name of the authority or corporation and the address of its principal office; 2. The name of each locality creating the authority or corporation; 3. The purpose for which the authority or corporation is created; and 4. The names, addresses, and terms of office of the initial members of the board of directors of 1 11/6/2017 the authority or corporation. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7502. Public hearing required prior to creation or designation of a land bank entity. The governing body of a locality shall not adopt an ordinance creating a land bank entity pursuant to § 15.2-7501 or designating an existing nonprofit entity pursuant to § 15.2-7512 until notice of intention to do so has been published once a week for two successive weeks in some newspaper published or having general circulation in the locality. The notice shall specify the time and place of a hearing at which affected or interested persons may appear and present their views, not less than five days nor more than 21 days after the second advertisement appears in such newspaper. After the public hearing has been conducted pursuant to this section, the governing body shall be empowered to create a land bank entity or designate an existing nonprofit entity. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7503. Board of directors; qualifications; terms; vacancies; compensation and expenses. A. Each land bank entity created pursuant to the Act shall be governed by a board of not less than five members appointed by the governing body of the participating locality. When a land bank entity is created by two or more localities, the governing body of each locality shall appoint at least two members, one of whom may be a member of the governing body. After initial staggered terms, the term of all board members shall be four years. When one or more additional localities join an existing land bank entity, each of such participating localities shall be represented by not less than two members on the board. The first members shall be appointed immediately upon the admission of the locality into the land bank entity in the same manner as were the initial members of the land bank entity. B. The board shall elect one of its members to serve as chairman and one of its members to serve as vice-chairman and shall elect a secretary and a treasurer who need not be members of the board. The offices of secretary and treasurer may be combined. A majority of the members of the board shall constitute a quorum, and the vote of a majority of such quorum shall be necessary for any action taken by the land bank entity. No vacancy in the membership of the board shall impair the right of a quorum to exercise all the rights and perform all the duties of the land bank entity. C. The localities that created or thereafter join the land bank entity, by ordinance or concurrent ordinances, may provide for the payment of compensation to the members of the board and for the reimbursement to each member of the land bank entity the amount of his actual expenses necessarily incurred in the performance of that member's duties. 2016, cc. 159, 383. 2 11/6/2017 The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7504. Executive director; staff. The board may appoint an executive director, who shall be authorized to employ such staff as necessary to enable the land bank entity to perform its duties as set forth in the Act. The board is authorized to determine the duties of such staff and to fix salaries and compensation from such funds as may be received or appropriated. The land bank entity may enter into contracts and agreements with a locality for staffing services to be provided to the land bank entity. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7505. Financial interests of board members and employees prohibited. A. No member of the board or employee of the land bank entity shall acquire any interest, direct or indirect, in real property of the land bank entity, in any real property to be acquired by the land bank entity, or in any real property to be acquired from the land bank entity. B. No member of the board or employee of a land bank entity shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or proposed contract for materials or services to be furnished to or used by a land bank entity. C. The board may adopt supplemental rules and regulations addressing potential conflicts of interest and ethical guidelines for members of the board and employees of the land bank entity. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7506. Powers of land bank entity. A. The land bank entity shall have the power to: 1. Adopt, amend, and repeal bylaws for the regulation of its affairs and the conduct of its business; 2. Sue and be sued in its own name and plead and be interpleaded in all civil actions, including actions to clear title to property of the land bank entity; 3. Adopt a seal and alter the same at its pleasure; 4. Borrow money from private lenders, localities, or the state or from federal government funds, as may be necessary, for the operation and work of the land bank entity; 5. Procure insurance or guarantees from the Commonwealth or federal government of the 3 11/6/2017 payments of any debts or parts thereof incurred by the land bank entity and pay premiums in connection therewith; 6. Enter into contracts and other instruments necessary, incidental, or convenient to the performance of its duties and the exercise of its powers; 7. Enter into contracts and other instruments necessary, incidental, or convenient to the performance of functions by the land bank entity on behalf of localities or agencies or departments of localities or to the performance by localities or agencies or departments of localities of functions on behalf of the land bank entity; 8. Make and execute contracts and other instruments necessary or convenient to the exercise of the powers of the land bank entity; 9. Procure insurance against losses in connection with the real property, assets, or activities of the land bank entity; 10. Invest funds of the land bank entity, at the discretion of the board, in instruments, obligations, securities, or real property determined proper by the board and name and use depositories for its funds; 11. Enter into contracts for the management of, the collection of rent from, or the sale of real property of the land bank entity; 12. Design, develop, construct, demolish, reconstruct, rehabilitate, renovate, relocate, and otherwise improve real property or rights or interests in real property; 13. Fix, charge, and collect rents, fees, and charges for the use of real property of the land bank entity and for services provided by the land bank entity; 14. Grant or acquire a license, easement, lease, or option with respect to real property of the land bank entity; 15. Enter into partnerships, joint ventures, and other collaborative relationships with municipalities and other public and private entities for the ownership, management, development, and disposition of real property; 16. Accept grants and donations from any source, as may be necessary, for the operations of the land bank entity; 17. Accept real estate from any source, subject to the limitations and restrictions set out in § 15.2-7507; 18. Make loans or provide grants to carry out activities consistent with the purposes of the land bank entity; and 19. Do all other things necessary or convenient to achieve the objectives and purposes of the land bank entity or other laws that relate to the purposes and responsibility of the land bank entity. B. The land bank entity shall neither possess nor exercise the power of eminent domain. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section 4 11/6/2017 may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7507. Acquisition of property. A. The land bank entity may acquire real property or interests in real property by gift, devise, transfer, exchange, purchase, or otherwise on terms and conditions and in a manner the land bank entity considers proper. B. In addition to the powers granted is subsection A, the land bank entity may acquire real property by purchase contracts, lease purchase agreements, installment sales contracts, land contracts, and pursuant to the sale or other conveyance of real property under Article 4 (§ 58.1- 3965 et seq.) of Chapter 39 of Title 58.1. C. The land bank entity may accept transfers or conveyances from a locality upon such terms and conditions as agreed to by the land bank entity and the locality. Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, any locality may transfer or convey to the authority real property and interests in real property of the locality on such terms and conditions and according to such procedures as determined by the locality. D. The land bank entity shall maintain all of its real property in accordance with the laws and ordinances of the jurisdiction in which the real property is located. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7508. Disposition of property. A. The land bank entity shall hold in its own name all real property acquired by the land bank entity regardless of the identity of the transferor of such property. B. The land bank entity shall maintain and make available for public review and inspection an inventory of all real property held by the land bank entity. C. The land bank entity shall determine and set forth in policies and procedures of its board the general terms and conditions for consideration to be received by the land bank entity for the transfer of real property and interests in real property, which consideration may take the form of monetary payments and secured financial obligations, covenants, and conditions related to the present and future use of the property; contractual commitments of the transferee; and such other forms of consideration as determined by the land bank entity to be in the best interest of the land bank entity. D. The land bank entity may convey, exchange, sell, transfer, lease as lessee, grant, and release any and all interests in, upon, or to real property of the land bank entity. E. A locality may, in its ordinance creating a land bank entity: 1. Establish a ranking of priorities for the use of real property conveyed by a land bank entity, including (i) use for purely public spaces and places; (ii) use for affordable housing; (iii) use for retail, commercial, or industrial activities; (iv) preservation or rehabilitation of historic 5 11/6/2017 properties within historic areas as defined in § 15.2-2201;and (v) such other uses and in such priority as determined by the participating locality; 2. Require that any particular form of disposition of real property, or any disposition of real property located within specified jurisdictions, be subject to specified voting and approval requirements of the board. Except and unless restricted or constrained in this manner, the board may delegate to officers and employees of the land bank entity the authority to enter into and execute agreements, instruments of conveyance, and all other related documents pertaining to the conveyance of real property by the land bank entity; and 3. Require that the acquisition, management, and disposition of any historic property as designated by the locality in accordance with § 15.2-2306 or within a historic area as defined in § 15.2-2201 be considered subject to the requirements of § 15.2-2306. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7509. Financing of operations. A. A land bank entity may receive funding through grants and loans from the locality or localities that created or are currently participating in the land bank entity, the Commonwealth, the federal government, and other public and private sources. B. A land bank entity may receive and retain payments for (i) services rendered, (ii) rents and lease payments received, (iii) consideration for disposition of real and personal property, (iv) proceeds of insurance coverage for losses incurred, (v) income from investments, and (vi) any other asset and activity lawfully permitted to a land bank entity under the Act. C. Up to 50 percent of the real property taxes collected on real property conveyed by a land bank entity may be remitted to the land bank entity. Such allocation of property tax revenues shall commence with the first taxable year following the date of conveyance and continue for a period of up to 10 years. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7510. Exemption from taxes or assessments. The land bank entity is hereby declared to be performing a public function on behalf of the locality with respect to which the land bank entity is created and to be a public instrumentality of such locality. Accordingly, the land bank entity shall not be required to pay any taxes upon any property acquired or used by the land bank entity under the provisions of the Act. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose 6 11/6/2017 provisions have expired. § 15.2-7511. Dissolution of land bank entity. A. A land bank entity may be dissolved 60 calendar days after an affirmative resolution is approved by two-thirds of the membership of the board. Sixty calendar days' advance written notice of consideration of a resolution of dissolution shall be (i) given to all governing bodies that created or are currently participating in the land bank entity, (ii) published in a local newspaper of general circulation, and (iii) sent by certified mail to the trustee of any outstanding bonds of the land bank entity. Upon dissolution of the land bank entity, all real property, personal property, and other assets of the land bank entity shall become the assets of the locality or localities that created the land bank entity. In the event that two or more localities create or are participating in a land bank entity, the withdrawal of one or more participating localities shall not result in the dissolution of the land bank entity unless the intergovernmental agreement so provides and no participating locality desires to continue the existence of the land bank entity. B. No land bank entity shall be dissolved unless all obligations and debts of such land bank entity have been lawfully satisfied or otherwise provided for. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. § 15.2-7512. Designation of existing nonprofit entities to carry out the functions of a land bank entity. A. Subject to a public hearing held pursuant to § 15.2-7502, a locality may by ordinance designate an existing nonprofit entity and its governing board to carry out the functions of a land bank entity. The ordinance shall include a finding by the locality that the governance structure, articles of incorporation, charters, bylaws, and other corporate documents are sufficient to authorize the designated existing nonprofit entity to carry out the provisions of the Act. B. An existing nonprofit entity designated pursuant to this section shall not be required to comply with the provisions of § 15.2-7503. 2016, cc. 159, 383. The chapters of the acts of assembly referenced in the historical citation at the end of this section may not constitute a comprehensive list of such chapters and may exclude chapters whose provisions have expired. 7 11/6/2017 This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Resolution Staff Contacts: Stacy Pethia, Housing Program Coordinator Presenter: Stacy Pethia, Housing Program Coordinator Title: Implementation Plan for the Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund -- $75,000 Background: On June 19, 2017, City Council approved the Housing Advisory Committee’s recommendation for the creation of a landlord risk reduction fund for the City of Charlottesville. At that time, Council members instructed City staff to develop an implementation strategy for the fund; that strategy is presented below. Discussion: Landlord risk reduction funds provide financial assurances to landlords concerned about additional risks often (unfairly) associated with low-income family tenancies (e.g., excessive damage to property, lost rent, or eviction costs)1. Cities across the across the country are employing such programs as tools to increase housing options for low-income households experiencing high barriers to housing. A study conducted by a University of Minnesota graduate student for Housing Minnesota Finance Agency2, found that since 2009, the nine programs reviewed have provided assistance to approximately 550 landlords (78 per year), with landlord claims ranging from an average low of $525 to an average high of $3,638. Each organization interviewed for the study identified the risk mitigation fund as a useful tool for recruiting landlords to affordable housing programs. One attractive quality of the reviewed programs is that the fund enhanced landlord recruitment despite low utilization of each fund. A sample of landlord risk reductions programs managed by other cities is provided in the following table: 1 (2017) “Cities Have a New Target for Ending Homelessness: Landlords”. http://www.governing.com/topics/health-human-services/gov-boston-dc-landlord-assistance-risk-housing- homeless.html 2 Hiler, Hattie (2016). Landlord Risk Mitigation Funds: A Literature and Design Review. Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. St. Paul, MN. Sampling of Landlord Risk Reduction Programs Program Locality Years in Operation Fund Capacity $50,000 grant Allegheny County from Allegheny County, Landlord Risk Mitigation 2017 (in development) Pennsylvania PA Fund Housing Finance Agency Housing Austin Fund Austin, TX 2016 – present Not Available $65,000 in local Landlords Opening municipality Denver, CO 2014 – present Doors funding and private donations Landlord Risk Mitigation Lancaster, PA 2013 – present Not Available Fund $30,000 from Its All About the Kids Minneapolis, MN 2001 – 2012 Lutheran Social Services Housing Broker Services Norfolk, VA 2007 – 2010 $12,500 2012 – present community foundation grant $25,000 grant from National Alliance to End Homelessness Housing Choice Voucher State of Oregon 2014 – present Initial $475,000 Landlord Guarantee budget allocation Program in 2014. Additional $300,000 allocation in 2015-2017 budget Landlord Liaison Project Seattle, WA 2009 – present $1 million from King County budget Locally, the Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLRRF) would be used to encourage private market landlords to provide affordable rental units to households participating in one of several rental assistance programs. Landlords would be able to access the fund to help cover the cost of unit repair, in exchange for agreeing to re-let the unit to another rent assisted household. The goals of the CLRRF, as outlined below, are: to reduce private market landlord concerns regarding rental income loss due to property damage, preserve the number of rental units available in the City to low-income households, and increase the number of City landlords willing to lease affordable rental units to low-income families. While the full program structure is provided as an attachment to this memo, key features of the program include: 1. Assistance will be targeted towards households receiving rental assistance through the following programs:  The Housing Choice Voucher program as administered by the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority;  The HUD-VASH voucher program;  Rapid Rehousing;  Supportive Services for Veteran Families;  Permanently Supportive Housing programs;  Shelter for Help in Emergency; AND  The International Rescue Committee. 2. Assistance will be provided for rental units located within the City of Charlottesville only. 3. A variety of rental unit types (e.g., apartments, condominium, single family detached homes) qualify for assistance; however, assistance cannot be applied to shared housing situations, in which unit tenants rent private bedrooms but share common areas such as kitchens, living and dining areas, bathrooms and outdoor spaces (decks, patios, porches, etc.). This caveat is due to the difficulty of determining responsibility for damages among unrelated persons. 4. Assistance can be used to cover costs of unit repair, as well as any associated court costs. 5. To ensure the assisted unit is re-rented to another rental assistance household, the funds will be provided as a reimbursement for costs associated with unit repair work. Landlords will be required to provide a copy of the executed lease for the new rental assistance household. Staff is recommending the program be administered by a local non-profit agency (selected through a competitive RFP process) that has knowledge of, or experience managing, affordable rental properties. Additionally, staff recommends $75,000 be allocated to the program from the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF), with $25,000 of that amount set-aside for fund administration and the remaining $50,000 capitalizing the program fund. This will enable the CLRRF to serve a minimum of 16 funding requests (at $3,000 each) and a maximum of 50 requests for funding (at $1,000 each). As there is no data available to indicate how effective (i.e., how many landlords the CLRRF may encourage to provide affordable housing) landlord risk reduction programs are, staff has structured the fund to operate as a three year pilot program. The three year period provides time for the fund administrator (once chosen) to set up the program, market the program to local landlords, and to collect relevant program data. The data will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the CLRRF at the end of year three; the results of the evaluation will help determine if the CLRRF program should continue, and if the level of program funding is sufficient. Community Engagement:  Landlord Outreach Working Group – July 11, 2017  Housing Advisory Committee – March 15, 2017  HAC Policy Subcommittee – March 2, 2017 Alignment with City Council Vision and Strategic Plan: This program aligns directly with Strategic Plan Goal 1.3: Increase affordable housing options. Budgetary Impact: The program would use funding previously appropriated to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF). If approved at the recommended funding level, funds available in the CAHF would be decreased by $75,000, leaving a remaining balance of $577,287.84 in the CAHF. Recommendation Staff recommends City Council approve the Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLRRF) at the requested level of program funding. Alternatives: City Council could choose to approve the CLRRF at a different level of program funding. Or, Council could choose to not fund the program at all, which may impact the City’s ability to increase the number of supported affordable housing units within the City of Charlottesville. Attachments: Resolution Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLRRF) Pilot Program Structure and Implementation Strategy Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLRRF) Application Article: “Cities Have a New Target for Ending Homelessness: Landlords” Report: Landlord Risk Mitigation Funds Literature and Design Review RESOLUTION Allocation of Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF) for the Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLRRF) -- $75,000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the sum of $75,000 be allocated from previously appropriated funds in the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF) to the Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLRRF). Fund: 426 Project: CP-084 G/L Account: 530670 Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLRRF) $75,000 Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLRRF) Pilot Program Outline & Implementation Strategy Program Overview The City of Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund (CLLRF) is designed to provide financial assistance to landlords to mitigate damages caused by tenants as a result of their occupancy under any of the following rental assistance programs:  CRHA’s Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program  HUD-VASH;  Rapid Rehousing;  Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF);  Permanently Support Housing;  Shelter for Help in Emergency; OR  International Rescue Committee. The goals of the program are to: (1) increase the number of private market landlords offering affordable rental housing to low-income households by reducing private market landlord concerns regarding rental income loss due to tenant caused property damage, as well as (2) preserve the current number of affordable rental units available to low-income households in the City of Charlottesville. Eligibility To be eligible for assistance under the CLRRF, landlords must have leased to a Requirements tenant through one of the above listed programs, and must be requesting assistance for a unit located within the City of Charlottesville. Damages to the rental property must exceed normal wear and tear, and must have occurred after XX/XX/XX. (This will be the program start date) To qualify for CLRRF assistance, a landlord must: 1. Be requesting assistance for a rental unit located within the City of Charlottesville. 2. Have suffered significant rental property damage due to a tenancy. 3. Obtain a judgment against the responsible tenant. 4. Wait until the time frame for appeal of the judgment expires without appeal, or the judgment is not subject to further judicial review, before submitting an application for assistance. 5. Have a fully executed leasing contract with a new low-income household for the unit for which assistance is being requested. Eligible Properties Assistance can be provided for repairs associated with the following types of rental properties:  Apartments  Condominiums  Townhouses  Duplexes  Single Family Detached The CLRRF funding cannot be used for the following types of rental properties:  Shared housing, in which unit tenants rent private bedrooms but share common areas such as kitchens, living and dining areas, bathrooms and outdoor spaces (decks, patios, porches, etc.) Program Assistance 1. Program assistance is limited to reimbursement for those amounts covered in a final judgment. Property damage claims must include the following: 1. Property damage incurred after XX/XX/XXXX (This will be the program start date) 2. Property damage was caused as a result of a tenant’s occupancy, pursuant to a rental agreement under one of the aforementioned programs. 3. Damage to property exceeds normal wear and tear. 2. Amount of assistance: 1. Minimum $1,000 2. Maximum $3,000 3. A 3% administrative fee will be added to the total approved CLRRF amount. 4. Security deposits and any amounts tenants have paid toward the damage claim will be subtracted from the total requested CLRRF amount. 3. Qualifying damages: 1. Cost of materials and labor necessary for unit repairs. 2. Court costs. 4. No funds will be released until after the unit has been re-let to a new low- income household through one of the above referenced programs. Program Delivery In order to qualify for assistance under the CLRRF program, landlords must: 1. Complete the CLRRF application. The application must include: a. A copy of the judgment awarding damages to the landlord for tenant property damages. Please note: the judgment must have been filed with the Charlottesville District Court. b. An itemized list of unit repairs. c. An itemized list of materials and labor costs. d. Copies of receipts for materials and labor purchased. 2. Submit the completed application and supporting documentation to organization providing rental assistance to tenant. 3. Have executed a new lease for the unit with another household receiving rental assistance through one of the programs identified above. Once the housing organization receives the application: 1. The organization will review the application within 10 days and make a recommendation for assistance. a. Verify tenant information and program enrollment. b. Verify tenant paid security deposit. c. Verify judgment and amount. d. Verify security deposit has been deducted from total cost of repair work. e. Verify funds requested are for qualifying expenses. f. Verify itemized list of repairs, materials and labor costs included with application. g. Verify copies of receipts have been received. h. Verify unit has been leased to another household receiving rental assistance. Acceptable documents for verification include: i. Copy of a signed Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) contract. ii. A letter from a rental assistance program verifying new tenant is receiving rental assistance from their program. 2. Applications, with recommendations for funding, will be submitted to the City of Charlottesville Housing Program Coordinator for final approval. a. Housing Program Coordinator will review the application(s) and provide final approval to fund administrator within 7 days of receipt of application(s). 3. CLRRF awards will be issued within 7 days of a new affordable housing contract execution. Please note: no CLRRF funds will be issued to landlord if the unit is not re-leased to a rental assistance program household. After receiving assistance, landlords must: 1. File a satisfaction/payment towards judgment within 30 days in the amount of CLRRF assistance received. 2. Submit a copy of the filing to XXX within 40 days of the landlord’s receipt of CLRRF program assistance. Landlords may receive CLRRF assistance for no more than two (2) units per year. Program Funding Amount: $75,000 -- $50,000 for fund capitalization, $25,000 for Implementation: fund administration.  Able to serve a minimum of 16 funding requests (at $3,000 each) to a maximum of 50 requests for funding (at $1,000 each). Administration: Search for a fund administrator through an RFP process.  Qualifications for fund administrator: o Must be an IRS 501(c)(3) designated nonprofit organization. o Must have knowledge of, or experience with, rental assistance programs. o Knowledge of property management practices preferred. o Knowledge of residential property rehabilitation a plus. Pilot Period: Three (3) years from date fund administrator is secured. Allows time for:  Program set up  Advertising and outreach  Data collection including: o Household demographic data o Household income data o Most common uses of funds (i.e., types of property damage) o Frequency of requests o Major requestors of fund  Program evaluation by end of year three (3) Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund Application This form is for landlords seeking reimbursement for damages incurred by tenants receiving rental assistance from one of the following rental assistance programs:  Charlottesville Redevelopment and  Supportive Services for Veteran Housing Authority Housing Choice Families (SSVF) Voucher Program  Permanently Supportive Housing  HUD-VASH  International Rescue Committee  Rapid-Rehousing  Shelter for Help in Emergency Only complete applications, with supporting documentation will be considered for funding. Completed application must be submitted to: Housing Provider Address Please note: Applications are for reimbursement. Claims are limited to amounts of $1,000 to $3,000. A court judgment is required for all claimed amounts and must be attached. Landlord/Payee: Name listed on court judgment: Mailing or Contact Address: City/State/Zip: Phone: Email: Court Judgment Information: Entered Date County: Case Number: Amount: Has the debt been assigned to a collection Yes No agency? Reimbursement Request: Amount: Property Damages $ Court Costs $ Minus security deposit received $ Minus other payments to landlord after judgment $ Total reimbursement request (not to exceed $3,000) $ Tenant Information: Tenant Name: Last Known Address: City/State/Zip: Address where damages occurred: Date of move-out: Tenant Phone: Tenant Email: Alternate Tenant Contact: Agency Information (Who provides the tenant’s rental assistance?): Agency Name: Address: City/State/Zip: Contact Name: Phone: Email: Required Attachments: Court certified copy of the judgment and money award. This court document identifies the “Plaintiff” (Landlord) presenting the claim, the “Defendant” (Tenant), and the total amount awarded by the judgment. It is signed by the judge. Final security accounting containing an itemization of damages, minus the amount of security deposit received from the tenant and, if applicable, minus the amount of any payments received by the landlord after the judgment was awarded. Letter of certification from one of the participating agencies that the unit has been leased to another tenant receiving rental assistance from one of the participating rental assistance programs identified above. Completed W-9 form showing the individual/company payee Legal Certification: The landlord (or property manager) attests by signing this document that all entries including all attachment entries are true and correct. Landlord will report within 10 days any payment on the judgment received after submission of this application for reimbursement and/or after reimbursement is received. The landlord also attests that no appeal of judgment has been filed or received related to this application for payment. Landlord agrees to file a full or partial (as the case may be) satisfaction of judgment in the amount of the reimbursement with the court which issued the judgment within 30 days of payment from the Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund program or any source. Landlord also agrees to send a copy of the filed satisfaction of judgment, within 10 days of filing, to the Charlottesville Landlord Risk Reduction Fund at the address found at the top of this form. ______________________________ _______________________________________ _____________ Signature Printed Name Date Cities Have a New Target for Ending Homelessness: Landlords BY: J.B. Wogan | October 24, 2017 Families wait years to get off the government's waiting list for a rental voucher, sometimes while living in a homeless shelter. When they finally get that housing aid, they often struggle to find landlords willing to rent to them. Most landlords screen out people who have a criminal background, poor credit or a history of evictions, making it difficult for voucher holders to find somewhere to live, even when they can afford rent. In fact, it's common for people to lose their vouchers -- which have expiration dates -- after months of unsuccessful searching for a home. To ease landlords' worries and house more of the homeless, a growing number of cities are offering to reimburse landlords for certain losses -- unpaid back rent or repairs for tenant-caused damages -- that result from accepting applicants who have rental vouchers. “Many, many communities are doing this, and it’s out of necessity,” says Elisha Harig-Blaine, who works on affordable housing issues at the National League of Cities. “They simply can’t get people placed into housing with these subsidies.” This month, Boston and the District of Columbia announced their own “housing guarantee” or “risk mitigation” programs. In Boston, the city will reimburse landlords for up to $10,000 in unpaid back rent or property damages that go beyond normal wear and tear. In D.C., a nonprofit is raising $500,000 in private funds to cover up to $5,000 in landlord costs per tenant. In both places, program staff will be available to address landlord complaints and provide case management for the tenants. The question is, will that be enough to convince landlords to accept tenants who pay with rental vouchers? In many of the cities that have these programs, affordable housing is hard to find, but renters with clean criminal and financial backgrounds are not. “At the end of the day, real estate is a business. These landlords want to do the right thing, but we’re talking about their livelihood," says Harig-Blaine, who has attended landlord recruitment events in nine communities across the country. Landlords, he says, don’t want to deal with missed payments or other trouble that might come with renting to someone who was recently homeless. Nevertheless, local officials in D.C. -- which is getting 800 new residents every month and has some of the country's highest rents -- are optimistic. “Rather than [renting] to the millennial who is just moving in from some other part of the country," Neil Albert, president and executive director of the DowntownDC Business Improvement District, the nonprofit raising the money, told Governing. Albert thinks the risk funds will spur landlords to "weigh our needs and give equal consideration" to voucher holders. There is no official number of landlord assistance programs, according to the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, but they exist in Denver, Fargo, N.D.; Marin County, Calif.; Orlando, Fla.; Portland, Ore.; and Seattle-King County, Wash, which started one of the first almost a decade ago. Some states, such as Minnesota and Oregon, offer them as well. Before launching its program, Boston researched them in other cities and found that participating landlords rarely had to use the risk funds, according to Boston's Department of Neighborhood Development. Last year, in Seattle and King County, for example, participating landlords filed mitigation claims for only 15 percent of the renters covered by the program. Data on how many landlords participate in each city and how many people are housed through such programs, however, is not readily available. D.C. officials, though, expect demand for the risk funds to be higher in their city. "We think it will be a little different here in D.C. We think people will actually use this fund,” says Albert, adding that if it results in more units being rented to voucher-holders, then “that’s a great problem to have.” One difference between the Boston and D.C. landlord programs is the funding and management structure. In Boston, the city is putting up the risk funds and managing its landlord relations on a two-year pilot basis. In D.C., a nonprofit business improvement district is raising funds -- mostly from developers -- and a local housing nonprofit is administering the program. That's because landlords and property managers in D.C. pushed for a privately managed fund that could provide reimbursements faster than a government agency, says Albert. More than 5 million Americans receive some kind of rental voucher from the state or federal government, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. To qualify, a person or household must be below the federal poverty line or make less than 30 percent of the area median income. Because the program is not an entitlement, less than a quarter of all eligible families receive housing assistance, and many households wait years before a voucher becomes available. Landlord assistance programs are trying to address a chicken-and-egg problem, says Laura Zeilinger, D.C.’s director of human services. Landlords want renters who have jobs and earn a steady income. But stable housing is usually the first step to helping people get and keep a job. She’s hoping that landlords in D.C. will waive income requirements in their applications. “Housing is an important foundation for people to be able to work and to achieve their potential,” she says. “It’s a really difficult thing for people to do while living in a shelter environment.” This article was printed from: http://www.governing.com/topics/health-human-services/gov-boston-dc-landlord-assistance-risk- housing-homeless.html Discussion Paper Landlord Risk Mitigation Funds: A Literature and Design Review August, 2016 Hattie Hiler Graduate Student University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs This discussion paper was written by a graduate student working as a summer research intern with Minnesota Housing. While the paper was written under the supervision of Minnesota Housing staff, it is an independent research project and does not necessarily reflect the views and policies of Minnesota Housing. 2 Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Section 1: Background .................................................................................................................................. 7 Section 2: Review of Landlord Risk Mitigation Funds ................................................................................... 8 Table 1: Summary of Landlord Risk Mitigation Funds .............................................................................. 9 Landlord Liaison Project, Seattle (WA) ............................................................................................... 10 Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program, Portland (OR)........................................................... 11 Housing Broker Services, Norfolk (VA) ................................................................................................ 12 Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund, Fargo‐Moorhead Community (ND/MN) ........................................... 13 “It’s All About the Kids”, Minneapolis (MN) ....................................................................................... 15 Rent Well, Portland (OR) ..................................................................................................................... 15 Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee, Oregon .................................................................................... 16 Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program, Orlando (FL) ............................................................ 17 Landlords Opening Doors, Denver (CO) ............................................................................................. 18 Section 3: Design Recommendations for Risk Mitigation Funds ................................................................ 19 Tenant Participation................................................................................................................................ 19 Landlord Engagement ............................................................................................................................. 21 Housing Specialist Teams .................................................................................................................... 21 Standalone Risk Mitigation Funds....................................................................................................... 22 Claim Guidelines ..................................................................................................................................... 22 Program Evaluation ................................................................................................................................. 24 Household Data................................................................................................................................... 24 Landlord Data ...................................................................................................................................... 25 Claim Data ........................................................................................................................................... 25 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 25 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 26 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 A Note on Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 27 References .................................................................................................................................................. 28 3 Executive Summary Minnesota is experiencing an extremely tight rental market. Current vacancy rates in much of Minnesota remains at or below three percent1 with the vacancy rate for the Twin‐Cities metro region just above three percent.2 Tight rental markets pose additional challenges for Minnesotans with housing barriers beyond affordability. Individuals and families with criminal records, poor credit, or poor rental history struggle to compete for housing opportunities with applicants who have a “clean record.” In response, communities have developed innovative tools such as landlord risk mitigation funds to partner with landlords and address these housing needs. Landlord risk mitigation funds, sometimes called risk mitigation pools or landlord guarantee funds, provide financial assurances for landlords concerned about additional risks related to damaged property, non‐payment of rent, or evictions costs.3 Landlords renting to tenants enrolled in these programs can access reimbursement from these funds when damages and expenses exceed a tenant’s security deposit. Often, landlords have not needed to access these safeguards and the assurance of these programs creates opportunities for individuals and families to be successful tenants. This report reviews existing landlord risk mitigation funds and outlines best practices used by programs utilizing this tool. Strong programs outline strategies for tenant participation, landlord engagement, and the claims process. Although no program outlined official evaluation metrics, these practices ensure that funds successfully assist households with barriers beyond affordability access and maintain safe and stable housing. As communities consider developing or expanding this tool, programs should consider the following crucial elements to a successful landlord risk mitigation fund: Tenant Participation  Successful programs outline coverage eligibility and the household application process.  Successful programs link households with services to support tenancy. Housing conflicts and concerns can and will arise. These services ensure that these conflicts do not escalate to damages, evictions, and claims to the funds.  Most funds partner with existing programs and agencies to provide referrals and supportive services, such as case management and tenant education.  Landlord risk mitigation funds are successful tools to expand housing opportunities for voucher holders. However, restricting coverage to voucher holders may screen out households with the highest barriers. Landlord Engagement  Successful programs establish a point of contact for participating landlords to address landlord needs and concerns.  Most programs shared that providing ongoing support for landlords in the program is crucial to the success of the fund. Efforts to address landlord concerns ensure landlords’ ongoing participation in the program even when difficulties arise. 4  Programs utilize two general approaches to landlord engagement: employing specific staff to act as a housing specialist and landlord team or utilizing partnering case managers as a landlord’s primary contact. Housing specialist teams have a greater capacity to develop a systemized approach to landlord recruitment and household matching. However, communities that do not have the capacity to develop specific teams can successfully utilize case managers for landlord engagement. Claims Process  Successful programs outline dollar limits, time constraints, claim coverage, and a claim validation process.  Programs should communicate limits clearly with landlords at enrollment. Outlining these limitations in writing and in person ensures that landlords do not later feel mislead about the capacity of the fund.  Programs should consider requiring participating landlords maintain insurance for duration of coverage. This requirement ensures that landlords have coverage for damages beyond the fund’s limit. Program Evaluation  Programs should utilize program evaluation as a way to demonstrate the program’s ability to create housing opportunities for individuals and families with housing barriers.  Programs could consider collecting information about the number households served, number of households who have been able to maintain housing, and the housing barriers of households served.  Programs could consider keeping track of the number of landlords willing to rent to households as a result of the fund. Programs could periodically survey participating landlords for continual feedback about the program.  Program should use caution when utilizing claim rates as a measure of program success. Claim rates may vary year to year, especially between the early and later years of the fund. Additionally, claim rates may vary depending on the needs of households covered by the funds. Landlord risk mitigation funds are a powerful tool for communities exploring strategies to expand housing opportunities for households with barriers beyond affordability. However, these funds do not operate successfully without additional supports for participating landlords and households. This report serves as a guide to develop these components to a successful fund. Although this report developed as a tool for Minnesota Housing and communities within Minnesota considering landlord risk mitigation funds, the programs and practices outlined in this report can be helpful for any community or organization developing a fund. 5 Introduction Risk mitigation funds are an innovative tool to expand housing options for individuals facing the greatest housing barriers. These funds, sometimes called risk mitigation pools or landlord guarantee funds, provide financial assurances for landlords concerned about additional risks related to damaged property, non‐payment of rent, or evictions costs.4 Landlords renting to tenants enrolled in these programs can access reimbursement from these funds when damages and expenses exceed a tenant’s security deposit. Often, landlords have not needed to access these safeguards and the assurance of these programs creates opportunities for individuals and families to be successful tenants. Communities across the country utilize these partnerships to provide housing for tenants with criminal records, evictions, poor credit, and those experiencing chronic homelessness. In May 2016, the Minnesota Legislature appropriated $250,000 for the creation or expansion of landlord risk mitigation programs in Minnesota.5 This report serves as a design review of current landlord risk mitigation funds to inform the development of successful pilot programs in Minnesota. The first section highlights how tight rental markets limit housing opportunities for individuals and families with housing barriers and the use of landlord risk mitigation funds as a potential solution to these barriers. The second section details programs utilizing landlord risk mitigation funds nationally and within Minnesota. The third section provides design recommendations regarding landlord engagement, tenant support, claims processes, and program evaluation for landlord risk mitigation funds in Minnesota. For those very familiar with landlord risk mitigation funds, the third section will provide the most useful information on successful elements of a landlord risk mitigation fund. However, for those with little familiarity with these funds or for readers who would like to get a more complete sense of how the various components work together in a successful fund, the case studies in section two provide helpful context to better understand the design practices outlined in the third section. This report highlights the diversity and flexibility of programs utilizing landlord risk mitigation funds. These programs adapt to the needs and resources of their communities to expand housing opportunities for individuals and families with the greatest housing barriers. The most successful programs outline strategies to engage landlords and support households to thrive as tenants. These programs also provide a variety of strategies to address claim limits and coverage. Ultimately, this report serves as a handbook for communities interested in developing or expanding programs utilizing landlord risk mitigation funds. 6 Section 1: Background Communities across the country and within Minnesota are experiencing extremely tight housing markets. Nationally, rental vacancies have reached their lowest point since 1985.6 Current vacancy rates in much of Minnesota remains at or below three percent7 with the vacancy rate for the Twin‐Cities metro region just above three percent.8 The housing market has become especially challenging for low‐ income renters seeking affordable housing. In the past decade, the increase in the number of low‐ income individuals seeking low‐cost rental units has outpaced the increase in those units four to one.9 Within Minnesota, nearly 600,000 households spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing with those earning less than $50,000 more likely to cost burdened.10 These tight rental markets create greater competition for individuals and families seeking a limited number of affordable units. Households with additional barriers beyond affordability enter these tight rental markets at a competitive disadvantage. Individuals and families with criminal records and poor financial or rental history bring low “rental capital” to prospective rental situations.11 Often these barriers interconnect with experiences of homelessness, joblessness, substance abuse, and mental illness. 12 Initial findings of the 2015 Wilder study of homelessness in Minnesota indicate that eviction, unemployment, and lack of affordable housing remain the most common precipitators of homelessness in Minnesota.13 Research completed by a previous Minnesota Housing intern details the hard‐to‐house in Minnesota, identifying the lack of affordable opportunities and tight rental markets as key housing barriers for Minnesotans with poor financial history and criminal backgrounds.14 Applicants with poor rental, financial, or criminal histories may appear riskier to landlords considering leasing to these households. Landlords identify potential concerns related to non‐payment of rent, property damage, court‐related eviction costs, and problematic behavior that may jeopardize the safety of other residents.15 Landlords can more easily avoid these perceived risks in tight rental markets.16 Strategies that offset these perceived risks, such as landlord risk mitigation funds, provide financial guarantees for landlords who rent to individuals with additional housing barriers. Several communities utilizing landlord risk mitigation funds developed this financial guarantee in response to the limited housing opportunities for the hardest to house in tight rental markets.17 Landlords renting to tenants covered by these programs can access funds in the case of additional damages, lost rent, or eviction‐related costs. Communities utilizing landlord risk mitigation funds combine these pools with strategies to foster relationships and trust between tenants and landlords and link households covered by the fund with additional services to support successful tenancy.18 These strategies establish avenues to address potential tension and conflict that may arise during tenancy before escalating to more extreme circumstances that result in severe property damage or eviction. Often, landlords have not needed to access these safeguards, and the assurance of these programs creates opportunities for individuals and families with housing barriers to be successful tenants. 7 Section 2: Review of Landlord Risk Mitigation Funds Although programs vary depending on the specific needs and resources of the community all funds share similar properties. 1. Risk funds are lease‐up guarantees for landlords. Communities utilize risk funds as a form of insurance for landlords considering applicants with additional housing barriers. Generally, households apply for coverage from a fund and search for housing after obtaining coverage. While some communities provide extensive matching and housing specialist services for potential tenants and landlords in the program, others simply provide coverage through the fund without additional housing search assistance. Landlords willing to rent to these households can then access reimbursement from the fund in the case of damages or expenses that exceed a tenant’s security deposit. 2. Claim coverage is limited in scope. Funds generally only cover tenants for the first year or two of tenancy. Claims do not cover more than a few thousand dollars in damages beyond a tenant’s initial security deposit. Funds do not cover usual wear and tear but can cover additional damages, lost rent, eviction related costs, and in some cases holding fees. 3. Claims are subject to review before pay out. At the very least, landlords must submit receipts of damage‐related costs to receive reimbursement from the fund. Several programs require a third‐party verification of expenses. Review committees comprised of community stakeholders, such as attorneys, property managers, and representatives from community agencies, provide additional assurances to the validation process. 4. Risk funds work in collaboration with other supportive services. Risk funds rarely operate without additional efforts to engage landlords and support households maintain successful tenancy. Most funds require that households have access to case management for the duration of coverage. Often programs partner with existing programs and agencies to provide these services. Several programs employ staff members to specifically recruit and retain landlords in the program. However, programs stress the importance of strong relationships and good communication between all parties involved to ensure that household‐tenant conflicts can be resolved before escalating to an eviction or claim to the fund. The following section outlines various landlord risk mitigation funds and how they operate within existing programs and agencies in each community. Table 1 summarizes programs outlined in this section. The author contacted all programs described below and interviewed staff and advocates involved in the development and administration of the majority of programs.19 Additionally, three communities20 in Minnesota considering landlord risk mitigation funds were interviewed, although not highlighted in this section of the report. This section is by no means an exhaustive list of all landlord risk 8 mitigation funds in operation across the country. Instead, it offers an in‐depth look at how several communities have developed landlord risk mitigation funds to meet the needs of their community. Table 1: Summary of Landlord Risk Mitigation Funds Years of Fund Target Claims Program Community Operation Capacity Households Covered1 Claim Limits $2,000 for single units, Households Damages, $3,000 for Landlord referred by unpaid rent, Seattle, WA 2009‐present $I million multi‐ Liaison Project partnering and legal bedroom agencies fees units for two years Damages, Landlord Veterans unpaid rent, $3,000 for Recruitment (SSFV or Portland, OR 2015‐present $100,000 eviction first year of and Retention VASH related court tenancy Program participants) costs Families with 2007‐2010 $12,500 housing Damages No limit Housing Broker barriers Norfolk, VA Services Families with 2012‐ $25,000 housing Damages $750 present barriers Damages, Individuals $3000 for Fargo‐ unpaid rent, Landlord Risk and families first two Moorhead, 2014‐present $20,000 and a limited Mitigation Fund with housing years of ND/MN number of barriers tenancy late fees Homeless families with $1,000 "It's All About Minneapolis, children in initially; $500 2001‐2012 $30,000 Damages the Kids" MN Kindergarten as funds through 8th dwindled grade Damages, Graduates of unpaid rent, $2,000 for 80 Rent Well's Rent Well Portland, OR 2009‐present eviction first year of households education related court tenancy program costs 1 All programs covered claims after the use of a tenant's security deposit. 9 Table 1: Summary of Landlord Risk Mitigation Funds (continued) Years of Fund Target Claims Claim Limits Program Community Operation Capacity Households Covered1 An initial Housing Housing Choice $475,000 Damages, Choice Voucher with an court fees, Voucher and $5,000 per Landlord Oregon 2014‐present additional lost rent, and VASH unit Guarantee $300,000 in lease‐break voucher Program 2015‐2017 fees holders budget Chronically homeless $2,000 for Central households Damages and single units, Florida’s with unpaid rent $3,000 for Supportive Orlando, FL 2014‐present n/a vouchers (including multi‐ Housing (excluding holding fees) bedroom Program HUD‐VASH units vouchers) Chronically Landlords Damages and Denver, CO 2014‐present $65,000 homeless $1,000 Opening Doors holding fees and veterans 1 All programs covered claims after the use of a tenant's security deposit. Landlord Liaison Project, Seattle (WA)21 The risk reduction fund, and its parent Landlord Liaison Project, developed from King County’s ten‐year plan to end homelessness. In 2009 King County contracted with the YWCA of King County to run the Landlord Liaison Project (LLP), setting aside one million dollars for the risk reduction fund, half targeted specifically for veterans and the remaining half for all homeless households. The YWCA provides staffing for the program while money for the fund remains with King County. The fund works within a package of services and incentives offered by the Landlord Liaison Project to private landlords in the community. The larger project developed in response to confusion created by hundreds of programs reaching out and interacting with landlords in the county. The project serves as a primary point of contact for landlords leasing to tenants with housing barriers and supportive services from a variety of programs across the community. The project offers a 24‐hour hotline for landlords, flexible funding for move‐in, eviction prevention, and limited rental assistance, landlord and tenant education, as well as access to the risk reduction fund. Participating landlords sign partnership agreements and work with LLP staff to alter tenant screening criteria in accordance with fair housing laws. The project partners with 70 community agencies providing case management to clients with housing barriers. Partnering agencies must complete an agency agreement form and attend an agency orientation to refer clients to LLP for housing search assistance. Referred clients must be homeless with at least one housing barrier to receive assistance from the program. Once housed, LLP staff participates in the move‐in inspection process with tenants. Originally, the LLP required partnering agencies provide two years of ongoing case management for participants in the program. However, this requirement created barriers for many partnering agencies without capacity to provide long‐term case management. 10 Now, the program only requires that partnering agencies provide case management for the first year, unless the agency is equipped to provide intensive case management to its clients. The risk reduction fund covers households for the first two years of tenancy. Landlords experiencing challenges with tenants in the program can contact the 24/7 hotline for assistance and mediation from LLP staff. If necessary, landlords can submit claims and damage receipts to the fund after the tenant vacates the unit. Staff participates in the move‐out inspection process and utilizes a pay schedule based on the local housing authority’s pay out standards for damages. LLP caps claims at $2,000 for studios and one bedrooms and $3,000 for apartments with two or more bedrooms. Landlords can submit a hardship waiver for claims beyond the cap limits in extraordinary circumstances. Staff shared that it is possible to pay multiple claims on the same household if they rotate through the program more than once. Since 2009 the fund has covered approximately 2,000 households and paid out on 369 claims averaging $1,560 per claim. The fund alone does not entice landlords to participate in the LLP. Staff share that they use the risk fund as one of the last selling points to recruit new landlords to the program. Landlords can easily fill vacant units in Seattle’s tight rental market without the financial incentives offered by the program. Instead, the program provides unique support for landlords, especially during times of conflicts and challenges with tenants. The support and responsiveness of staff fosters landlord’s ongoing participation in the program, ensuring participating landlords continue to rent to households in the program. Landlords do value the financial incentives of the program, with many identifying these incentives as the most important to their participation in an early evaluation of the program. Taken together, the entire package of supportive services and financial incentives are integral to the success of the program. Additional information on the Landlord Liaison Project can be found at http://www.landlordliaisonproject.org/. Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program, Portland (OR)22 The veteran risk mitigation pool developed as part of the Home for Every Veteran initiative, an effort by the City of Portland, Home Forward, Multnomah County, and the City of Gresham to end veteran homelessness. The City of Portland, Multnomah County, and the City of Gresham contributed funding for the $100,000 risk mitigation pool. The risk mitigation pool works within the larger Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program to incentivize and engage landlords renting to veterans with housing barriers. JOIN, a local nonprofit, manages and administers the fund as well as the larger Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program. The Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program (LRRP) assists veterans with housing barriers access housing offered by landlords participating in the program. Community agencies refer veterans with Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) or Housing Choice Voucher for Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) vouchers to LLRP for housing search assistance. Staff screens veterans for housing barriers, matching households with units from landlords participating in the program. This process ensures that the unit is an appropriate fit for both the landlord and household. 11 Staff at LRRP actively reaches out to landlords in the community to participate in the program. Participating landlords sign a partnership agreement with LRRP, outlining the benefits and expectations of the program. As part of the program, staff and landlords negotiate screening criteria and the affordability of the landlord’s available units. Staff provide ongoing retention efforts for landlords in the program, offering a 24/7 hotline for landlords. Although partnering agencies provide case management for veterans in the program, LLRP staff provides weekly check‐ins with households in the program. The risk pool, one incentive for landlords in the program, covers households for the first year of tenancy. The risk pool covers households for up to $3,000 in expenses beyond a household’s security deposit including damages, unpaid rent, and eviction related court costs. Landlords contact LRRP staff within 14 days of a tenant’s move‐out and provide staff with a claim waiver form and copies of the lease agreement, move‐in inspection, and move‐out addendum. Staff physically inspects the unit, often taking videos or photos to confirm claimed damages. The fund only reimburses repairs completed by qualified personnel, such as maintenance teams utilized by larger property managers. Smaller landlords without specified maintenance teams must utilize third party contractors to receive reimbursement on claims. Waiver claim forms require the landlord release both JOIN and the tenant from future claims on reimbursed damages from the fund. Since its inception in 2015, the fund has covered approximately 90 households and paid out on three claims. Two claims included damages affecting other units within the building generating repairs well beyond the $3,000 limit. In these instances, the claim paid out $2,500 to cover the landlord’s insurance deductible. Staff stressed that the program only works with landlords who have landlord insurance and can accept W‐9 forms for reimbursed claims. Staff identified relationships and trust with landlords as key to the success of the program. Landlords in the program trust that staff will match appropriate tenants to their units. Staff proactively engage both tenants and landlords in the program as a way to prevent conflicts that result in evictions and claims to the fund. When conflicts arise, LRRP staff work as neutral mediators treating all parties, landlords, clients, and case managers, as customers. The composition of the team, which includes individuals with backgrounds as a social worker, landlord, and property manager, ensures that the team shares a perspective with all parties involved. Additional information on the Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program can be found at http://ahomeforeveryone.net/landlord/ Housing Broker Services, Norfolk (VA)23 The Planning Council developed the landlord contingency fund in 2007 as an incentive for landlords to participate in the agency’s larger Housing Broker Services program. The program utilized an initial $12,500 from a community foundation to reimburse claims from landlords in the program until exhausting the funds in 2010. In 2012, the program received an additional $25,000 National Alliance to End Homelessness’ Community Change Grant and continues to utilize money from this second investment to provide assurances to landlords participating in the program. The Planning Council manages and administers funding for this program. The landlord contingency fund functions as one incentive within the Housing Broker Services Program to recruit landlords into the program. Housing specialists in the program provide tenant education, mediation for landlords and tenants in the program experiencing housing conflicts, as well as 12 access to the fund in cases of damages beyond a tenant’s security deposit. Community agencies provide case management to families with housing barriers (such as those with histories of evictions, domestic violence, and incarceration) and provide referrals to the HART (Homeless Action Response Team), through Norfolk’s Department of Human Services, to receive housing assistance. Approved families complete an intake form outlining housing barriers and work with a housing specialist in the Housing Broker Services program to access housing with participating landlords. Housing specialists also work with landlords to negotiate lower security deposits and waive late fees, in certain circumstances. The initial fund paid out 12 claims before exhausting the reserve in 2010. The Housing Broker program continued to recruit landlords, assist high barrier households to obtain housing, and provide mediation services to landlords and tenants in the program without the fund between 2010 and 2012. With the additional $25,000 Community Change Grant in 2012, the fund has paid out an additional six claims. Landlords requesting a claim from the fund must contact a housing specialist and provide a move‐in and move‐out inspection and receipts of repairs from a third party vendor. Landlords must submit itemized claims within 60 days of a tenant departing the unit. The fund covers damages above and beyond a client’s initial security deposit but will not provide coverage for properties with security deposits greater than one month’s rent nor does it cover damages accumulated due to normal wear and tear. The program does not set a time limit for how long tenants can be covered by the fund. Initially, the program did not set a limit for pay‐outs from the claim, but it currently caps pay‐outs at $750 dollars due to grant restrictions. Staff suggests that setting a limit for the initial fund may have stretched the initial $12,500 further but believes that current $750 cap may be too restrictive. Staff identifies the trust and relationships housing specialists develop with landlords as integral to the success of the program. In particular, the responsiveness of housing specialists to landlords concerns and the ability for housing specialists to intervene when problems arise are one of the biggest incentives for landlords participating in the program. However, the current incarnation of the fund does not draw as much excitement from landlords as the original implementation of the fund. In part, the fund may not have the same draw for landlords as the economy recovered from the Great Recession. Additionally, landlords returned to the use of double deposit requirements for tenants with housing barriers during the fund’s hiatus. The fund may provide less of a draw for landlords revamping this practice. Additional information about the Planning Council’s landlord contingency fund and Housing Broker Service Program can be found at http://www.theplanningcouncil.org/. Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund, Fargo‐Moorhead Community (ND/MN)24 The Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund of the Fargo‐Moorhead community is a collaborative effort of housing providers, service providers, and funders from both Fargo, ND and Moorhead, MN. The fund utilizes funding from both Fargo and Moorhead to provide coverage for households in the community regardless of their state of residence. An initial $10,000 from both the City of Fargo and Minnesota Housing’s Family Homeless Prevention and Assistance Program cover households residing in the North Dakota and Minnesota sides of the community, respectively. The Fargo Moorhead Homeless Coalition administers the fund, and an advisory council, comprised of seven committee members including an attorney, service and housing providers, review and approve household applications and landlord claims to the fund. 13 The fund works as insurance for landlords leasing to approved households. The fund covers households for the first two years of tenancy and caps claims at $3,000 per household for expenses beyond a household’s initial security deposit including damages, unpaid rent, or a limited number of late payment fees. Households with supportive services in the community can apply for coverage through the fund. Households complete an application outlining housing barriers, and their case manager submits a referral letter discussing the household’s barriers and severity of need. Currently, the advisory committee processes applications as they are received but will utilize the Vulnerability Index‐Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI‐SPDAT) to prioritize applications if the number of applications outpaces the fund’s capacity. Case managers must be capable of: 1. Assisting households obtain housing and with the move‐in inspection process. 2. Providing monthly home visits to the household for the duration of coverage. 3. Coordinating between the household and landlord to resolve potential conflicts or concerns. Landlords must provide a copy of a lease agreement and move‐in inspection to tenants; case managers are responsible for providing this documentation to the Fargo‐Moorhead Homeless Coalition. The fund currently covers 25 leased households with an additional 13 households approved for coverage but currently looking for housing. Since its inception in 2014, the fund has approved four claims totaling $6,100. Landlords experiencing concerns with households covered by the fund should first contact the tenant directly before reaching out to the household’s case manager if the issue persists. Ideally, these proactive steps resolve concerns and prevent potential claims to the fund. If landlords need to make a claim to the fund, they must submit forms detailing the lost rent or damages to the unit and receipts documenting the cost to repair these damages. Staff at Fargo‐Moorhead Coalition review receipts and costs related to the claim, utilizing third‐party contractor verification in cases of unusually high payment requests. The advisory council completes a final review before approving or denying claims to the fund. Fargo‐Moorhead Coalition staff is moving towards requiring third‐party contractor verification for all claims and ultimately wants to document photos of units at move‐in and when damage claims are made to the fund. Relationship building between landlords, tenants, and case managers is integral to its success and low claim rate. Clear communication outlining how and when landlords should reach out to service providers fosters trust among all parties. Strong case management for households in the program provides avenues to address the early signs of housing concerns. Staff identified that providing in‐ person site visits rather than check‐ins over the phone are successful strategies to identifying concerns early. As one staff member identified, without the support services that providers offer to tenants and landlords, “people [will] cycle in and out of housing with the fund paying out.”25 The program is most successful when these strategies foster relationships among all parties that maintain tenancy and prevent evictions which can create additional barriers for households. One claim covered damages during a client’s tenancy, enabling the tenant to maintain their current housing. Ultimately, all parties involved benefit from strategies that maintain a household’s successful tenancy. Additional information on Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund can be found at http://www.fmhomeless.org/programs‐and‐resources/ways‐we‐help/landlord‐risk‐mitigation‐fund. 14 “It’s All About the Kids”, Minneapolis (MN)26 Lutheran Social Service (LSS) of Minnesota utilized the special damage claim fund as an incentive for landlords participating in the “It’s All About the Kids” program. The program assisted homeless families obtain stable housing as a vehicle to foster children’s success in school. The special damage claim fund operated from 2001‐2012 before exhausting the $30,000 set aside for the fund. Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota operated the special damage claim fund and the “It’s All About the Kids” Program. “It’s All About the Kids” assisted homeless families with children in grades Kindergarten through 8th to obtain housing in the neighborhoods their children attended school. Elementary schools referred these families to the program for housing search assistance. LSS also provided ongoing case management for families in the program, although participation in case management was voluntary. As part of the housing search process, LSS discussed the availability of the fund to landlords considering families with significant housing barriers. The fund covered damages to a unit beyond a tenant’s security deposit. Initially, the fund did not set claim limits and claims to the fund were large. LSS established an initial claim limit of $1,000 and reduced it to $500 as the fund dwindled. Landlords participating with the special damage claim fund submitted a copy of the household’s move‐in checklist within the household’s first month of tenancy. Landlords could only file for claims after the household had vacated the unit and were required to submit a damage claim assessment form invoicing damages to LSS within five business days of reclaiming the unit. All repairs had to be completed by a third party contractor. LSS also required that landlords submit a copy of the damage notification to households in an attempt to collect payment. LSS paid claims 20 days after receipt of the damage claim form if the tenant had not made arrangements to pay for additional damages. From 2005 to 2006, the fund covered 20 households with an average claim pay out of $542.27 Staff shared that if money were available, the fund would still be a successful strategy to engage landlords. Rent Well, Portland (OR)28 The Rent Well program provides a landlord guarantee for a limited number of graduates of Rent Well’s tenant education classes. The Rent Well program operates in four counties in Oregon and one in Washington.29 In Multnomah County, the City of Portland, Portland Housing Bureau (PHB) authorized up to 80 reservations at $2,000 each through June 30, 2016. Funding and claim limits vary by county and some counties provide the Rent Well education classes without a landlord guarantee. Home Forward, the City of Portland’s housing authority, administers the fund in Multnomah County and provides trainings for community agencies offering Rent Well’s education classes.30 Individual agencies are responsible for funding their education classes. The Rent Well program, in its current form since 2009, offers an intensive six week, 15‐hour tenant education class focusing on individuals and families with housing barriers. The curriculum teaches students how to communicate and build trust with landlords, create a realistic household budget, understand lease agreements, and gain skills to ensure successful tenancy. Graduates complete the class with a renter’s portfolio including a cover letter, referral letter, sample application, and 15 certificate of completion. The Rent Well program does not assist graduates with the housing search process. Graduates provide the certificate to prospective landlords as proof of completion of the class within 18 months of graduating from the program to qualify for the guarantee fund. Landlords interested in accessing the guarantee fund must contact Home Forward within 30 days of move‐in to confirm the tenant’s completion of the program and the availability of the guarantee funds. If funds are available, landlords complete a guarantee application and submit a copy of the tenant’s application, lease agreement, and move‐in report. The landlord guarantee fund covers graduates of the program for the first year of tenancy. Qualifying claims include expenses beyond a tenant’s security deposit such as damages, unpaid rent, and eviction related court costs. Landlords can only file a claim after a tenant vacates a unit and must make a claim within 60 days of the guarantee’s expiration and/or repossession of the unit. Landlords must submit a claim form, move‐out condition report if the claim includes damages, and invoice or receipts for repairs. Home Forward staff reviews the application, inspects the unit if necessary, and utilizes Home Forward’s existing damage review process to determine pay out. Since 2009, 4,758 participants graduated from the program with 299 graduates covered by the guarantee. The fund has paid 33 claims averaging $1,148 per claim. Initially, the fund limited the number of covered households to ensure the fund could cover the maximum pay out for every household. Pay out rates were higher during the fund’s early years and have decreased in the past three years. The fund now sets the number of covered households based on projected pay out rates. Staff attributes low pay out rates to a combination of low graduation rates from the education class and low take‐up of the guarantee fund by graduates of the program. Fewer than 50% of individuals attending the first class graduate from the program. The curriculum requires strict attendance and active engagement by participants both inside and outside of the classroom.31 Staff identified that the program’s commitment level creates barriers for participant completion of the class. The intensity and length of the program may self‐select graduates with the fewest barriers entering the program. For those participants that graduate from the program, only six percent access coverage to the guarantee. Additional information about Multnomah County’s Rent Well Program can be found at http://211info.org/rentwell Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee, Oregon32 The Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee program developed as part of legislation passed by the Oregon Legislative Assembly, which also included Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) as a source of income protected against discrimination. The initial legislation set aside $475,000 to reimburse landlords for qualifying damages while leasing to a tenant utilizing either a Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) or Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) voucher. While the fund started on July 1, 2014, Oregon’s biennial 2015‐2017 budget includes an additional $300,000 contribution to the fund. The fund is managed and administered by Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS). The Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee program works as a standalone landlord guarantee fund, without additional services or engagement strategies with participating landlords or tenants. Any HCV or VASH voucher holder automatically qualifies for coverage. Currently 34,726 households are 16 approved for vouchers in Oregon. Landlords can apply for up to $5,000 in reimbursement from the fund for expenses beyond a tenant’s initial security deposit including damages, court related costs, and fees related to lease violations or termination. The fund does not set a time limit on tenant coverage, and it is possible for more than one landlord to apply for reimbursement from the fund regarding separate tenancies for the same voucher holder.33 Since September 2014, the fund has paid out 104 claims averaging $3,638 per claim. Landlords must receive a final court judgment against a tenant with a HCV or VASH voucher to qualify for reimbursement from the fund. Landlords submit the court judgement with an application detailing the reimbursement request within one year of obtaining the judgement. Landlords have filed claims while a tenant remains in the unit, although the fund was developed to address claims regarding completed or terminated tenancy. Reimbursement claims must amount to greater than $500 dollars, although the fund can pay for partial reimbursement of a remaining balance owed for less than $500 if the original judgment amounted to greater than $500.34 OHCS reviews applications for completeness within ten days and completes applications and payments to landlords within 45 days. Tenants are required to repay the claims paid out by the fund, although tenants can apply for a hardship waiver or repayment plan through OHCS. OHCS may send unpaid debt to the Department of Revenue for collection. Landlords considering potential tenants with vouchers can contact OHCS for information about tenant compliance with repayment to the fund for past judgements. The fund was modeled, in part, on the Rent Well program run through local housing authorities in four Oregon counties. The small portion of state funding for the Rent Well programs was diverted to the initial $475,000 for the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee fund. Rather than expanding the existing Rent Well program, the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee program developed as a separate entity with a centralized rather than county‐based administration. Unlike the Rent Well program, the Landlord Guarantee utilizes court orders to determine the validity of claims. However, this process of claim validation can create additional housing barriers for these clients as court orders can negatively impact a client’s credit or financial history. Additionally, legal advocates identified that judges often default in favor of landlords. Finally, the Landlord Guarantee program does not include an educational component for tenants as provided by the Rent Well program. The Landlord Guarantee advisory committee is currently considering changes to the program that addresses these concerns, possibly re‐shaping the program to include an education component as utilized in the Rent Well program. Additional information on Oregon’s Landlord Guarantee Program can be found at http://www.oregon.gov/ohcs/Pages/housing‐choice‐landlord‐guarantee‐assistance.aspx. Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program, Orlando (FL) 35 The shared risk fund developed in 2014 as an additional tool for landlord recruitment into Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program (CFSHP). CFSHP serves as a landlord‐liaison program connecting landlords with participants who have access to case management and housing vouchers.36 CFSHP utilizes a specific housing locator team, links tenants with appropriate supportive services in the community, and provides regular visits with households covered by the fund. The Homeless Service Network (HSN), the lead continuum of care agency for the region, runs CFSHP and administers the shared risk fund while the City of Orlando manages the fund. 17 The fund covers property damages and unpaid rent reimbursement for households identified as chronically homeless through CFSHP’s coordinated entry system. The fund covers 75 percent of expenses to a landlord’s unit after a tenant’s security deposit and landlord’s insurance pay out towards the damages. The fund caps claims at $2,000 for single units and $3,000 for multi‐bedroom units. Landlords submit claims to HSN, who reviews claims and bills the city. Claims may be subject to inspection by HSN staff. At this time, no claims have been made to the fund. Additional information can be found at http://www.hsncfl.org/programs/housing‐locator/. Landlords Opening Doors, Denver (CO) 37 The Landlord Opening Doors campaign works to identify and recruit landlords to provide housing for veterans and chronically homeless in the Denver metro region. The fund, developed in 2014, works as one incentive to encourage landlords to participate in the program. A coalition of local municipalities in the Denver region and several property management firms donated money to the fund, totaling $65,000. Metro Denver Homeless Initiative (MDHI), the lead continuum of care agency, leads the campaign in partnership with Brothers Redevelopment Inc., a local housing non‐profit. The Landlord Opening Doors campaign utilizes the region’s coordinated entry system to cover households receiving case management from participating agencies. A group of the region’s providers utilize an online platform listing available units from participating landlords with households in the system. Tenants accessing housing through the campaign receive coaching on good tenancy practices. Participating landlords access the campaign through Colorado Housing Connects, run by Brother’s Redevelopment Inc. Participating landlords can receive up to $300 dollars for minor damages beyond a tenant’s security deposit. Claims up to $1,000 require unit inspection and are reviewed on a case‐by‐case basis. Landlords can also access funding to hold the unit prior to lease up for up to half of the monthly rent or $600, whichever is less. Landlords submit claims to Landlord Recruitment Specialists at Colorado Housing Connects for review. Specialists forward approved claims to MDHI for pay out. To date, only one claim has been made against the fund. Additional information can be found at www.coloradolandlords.org. 18 Section 3: Design Recommendations for Risk Mitigation Funds Communities across the country developed landlord risk mitigation funds to expand housing opportunities for individuals and families experiencing housing barriers. However, the specifics of these funds vary as communities must develop these programs to fit local needs, funding, and existing services. Successful programs, regardless of the fund’s size or program reach, have policies outlining claim guidelines, household participation, landlord engagement, and program evaluation. This section specifically does not provide a “right way” to address these issues, but instead suggests options for how communities might address the various components necessary to create a successful fund. Tenant Participation Frequently Used Terms Landlord risk mitigation funds developed as a Several terms used throughout this section tool to expand housing options for those with the may require additional clarification. greatest housing barriers. Programs target a variety of homeless or at‐risk populations depending on the needs Case Management: Social service agencies of the community and funding requirements of the often link clients with one staff member for program. Guidelines for eligibility and coverage ensure assistance navigating a variety of social that the program’s limited funding covers targeted service programs and resources. Although households. Strong programs link households with case management can have very different services that support a household’s successful tenancy meanings depending on the agency and and prevent claims to the fund. Often, funds rely on program, for the purpose of this paper, case partnering agencies to asses eligible households and management refers to the point of contact offer these additional services. Programs should use the provided by agencies to assist households following guidelines to outline tenant referral and navigate resources and programs within a participation. community. Who is eligible for coverage? All programs target Housing Specialist Teams: Several programs families and individuals with housing barriers. Several utilize staff that specifically assists programs target specific populations including the participants to obtain housing. Often these chronically homeless, families, and veterans.38 A few teams recruit landlords and serve as a point communities in Minnesota are considering utilizing funds of contact for landlord concerns. Programs to assist households with criminal records.39 also refer to these staff as landlord liaison teams, housing brokers, or housing Several programs40 require households access navigators. housing vouchers as qualification for coverage. Housing vouchers provide another level of financial assurances to landlords as they guarantee payment on a portion of household’s rent every month. Funds without this requirement identified the lack of rental assistance as a key limit to the program’s capacity to access housing opportunities for households without vouchers.41 Additionally, housing vouchers themselves may create barriers for families due to perceived risks associated with misconceptions about voucher holders.42 Oregon’s Landlord Guarantee fund developed to specifically address these concerns.43 Staff in Dakota County MN, a community considering developing a landlord risk mitigation fund, identified that the lack of housing opportunities for voucher holders “squeez[es] the entire system” of homeless services in their community. 44 Often 19 households with vouchers remain in emergency shelters as they struggle to find housing. As a result, this bottleneck in the system creates waiting lists for households accessing emergency services in their community.45 Funds covering voucher holders may relieve pressure on the entire system of housing services for homeless and at‐risk households. However, waiting lists for vouchers can be quite long. Restricting coverage to voucher holders may screen‐out households with acute needs who cannot access a housing voucher. This restriction would also screen out households whose housing barriers disqualify them from accessing the vouchers themselves. Program that use funds to target voucher holders could consider reserving a set number of slots for households with housing barriers who cannot access a voucher. How do households gain coverage? Most funds utilize agency referrals to asses qualified households. The Landlord Liaison Project enters into formal agreements with community agencies providing household referrals.46 Several agencies47 require that a household’s case manager or service worker provide the referral or assist households with application submission. The Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund in Fargo‐Moorhead requires case managers provide a referral letter outlining exhausted attempts to secure housing. This requirement ensures that the fund covers households who could not access housing without the assistance of the fund. 48 Two communities, Denver and Orlando, utilize coordinated entry for homeless programs to link households with the fund.49 The Rent Well program requires that households complete a 15 hour education class in order to qualify for coverage.50 What additional services support successful tenancy? Services that assist households to maintain successful tenancy are essential to the long‐term viability of funds. Supportive services, such as case management and tenant education, assist households to maintain successful tenancy and prevent claims to the fund. Landlords in several communities51 identified case management as a top priority for participation in the program. Staff in the Fargo‐Moorhead community stressed the importance of case managers who actively engage with participants. The program requires that case managers connect with households monthly, either on the phone or in person. However, case managers providing in‐person visits better identified the early warning signs of tenancy challenges and landlord concerns. 52 Two programs53 provide or require formal education classes for tenants covered by the fund, although case managers also informally assist households learn skills for successful tenancy. Several funds54 requiring case management ask partnering agencies to offer these services for the duration of fund coverage. However, staff with the Landlord Liaison Project shared that it was challenging for partnering agencies to provide case management for the full two years of coverage.55 As a result, the program now requires partnering agencies provide case management for the first year of tenancy.56 Landlord risk funds rely extensively on partnering agencies to asses, refer, and support households covered by the fund. Supportive services, such as case management and tenant education, and the agencies that provide them play a key role in the success and viability of funds. As suggested by staff in Fargo‐Moorhead, without services to support households and address tenancy challenges, “people [will] cycle in and out of housing with the fund paying out.”57 20 Landlord Engagement Successful risk mitigation funds rely on strong landlord engagement. Most communities58 identified relationship building with landlords as pivotal to the success of their programs. While risk mitigation funds make landlord participation financially feasible, the work by staff and case managers to foster communication, develop trust, and address conflicts ensures landlords’ ongoing participation in these programs. The extent of services and supports for landlords varies depending on the capacity and staff of programs utilizing landlord risk mitigation funds. Some programs, such as the Landlord Liaison Project in Seattle and Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program in Portland, developed as landlord liaison teams. These programs employ dedicated staff that recruit landlords to the program and serve as a third party mediator between landlords, case managers, and tenants. Others, such as the Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund in Fargo‐Moorhead, simply operate as a standalone risk fund. These programs rely on case managers to address conflict and landlord concerns. Both approaches emphasize the importance of developing strong relationships with landlords and outline strategies to engage and support landlords. Housing Specialist Teams Funds that operate within a larger landlord‐engagement project work as one tool to incentivize and support landlords participating in the program. These programs59 employ staff who specifically reach out to and recruit landlords to the program. As part of the recruitment process in these programs,60 staff negotiate screening criteria, application fees, deposits, and rent with landlords. As a result, these programs61 can create a listing of landlords and their available units. Staff can then match households with landlords based on the specific needs and barriers of the household.62 Program staff serves as the primary point of contact for landlords in the program. Several programs63 specifically staff a 24‐hour hotline to address landlord concerns. When conflict arises, staff can coordinate between landlords, tenants, and case managers. These services may be the primary attraction in bigger communities where a large number of service organizations reach out to and interact with landlords on behalf of their clients.64 Programs utilizing a housing specialist team emphasized the importance of staff’s role as a neutral‐third party.65 Often the background of the staff as service or housing providers ensures that the team can relate to all parties involved. 66 Programs emphasized the importance of understanding and respecting landlord’s perspective of their units and tenants as a business. 67 Staff with Housing Broker Services program in Virginia also emphasized the need to separate the roles of case managers and housing specialists. Instances when housing specialists provided case management services or vice versa have ended disastrously for the program.68 Programs utilizing specific landlord liaison or housing specialist teams can more easily negotiate tenant screening practices with participating landlords. Programs without these teams rely on individual case managers or service providers to reach out to potential landlords. Landlords in these programs may interact with multiple case managers assisting households in the program. Each case manager may approach a landlord about a particular client with housing barriers but does not have the capacity to negotiate a landlord’s larger screening criteria. Housing specialist teams, however, provide one point of contact for landlords participating in the program. As a result, these staff can negotiate screening criteria for a variety of units, rather than on a case‐by‐case basis. A systematic approach to negotiating 21 tenant screening procedures can create additional housing opportunities for a variety of households with screening barriers, such as evictions, criminal backgrounds, or poor credit. Standalone Risk Mitigation Funds Programs with standalone risk mitigation funds do not provide specific staff to reach out to and engage with landlords. Instead, case managers or households apply for housing with landlords in the community, utilizing fund coverage as an application incentive. Successful programs utilize case managers from partnering agencies to serve as landlords’ point of contact. The Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund in the Fargo Moorhead community outlines steps to address potential conflicts. Landlords can contact case managers with concerns and access mediation services if necessary. 69 The program relies on quality case managers to foster communication and trust with participating landlords. When challenges arise, case managers address conflicts or concerns before escalating to evictions or claims to the fund. These strategies ensure continued landlord participation in the program. The extent of landlord engagement depends on a community’s funding and service capacity. Standalone funds with clear guidelines to address landlord concerns may be the most viable option for communities without the capacity to develop a housing specialist or landlord liaison team. Regardless of the extent of landlord engagement, programs should outline a point of contact to address landlord concerns. Additionally, almost all of the communities70 interviewed utilized landlord surveys, focus groups, or advisory councils to develop their programs. These strategies ensure that the programs developed meet the needs and concerns of landlords who may be participating in the community. Furthermore, several communities71 discussed that these meetings revealed misconceptions and negative perceptions landlords in the community had about the target households in the community. These meetings can play a pivotal role in addressing these misconceptions and setting expectations for landlords in the program. Claim Guidelines Risk mitigation funds are limited in scope. Programs operate with limited budgets and must balance honoring landlord claims with preserving resources allocated to the fund. All funds establish guidelines for claim coverage, review, and pay out to address this need. Without detailed claim limits, landlords have made claims amounting to nearly half of a fund’s capacity.72Clearly outlining limitations in writing and in person to potential landlords ensures that landlords do not later feel mislead about the capacity of the fund.73 Strong programs outline the following guidelines for the fund. What does the fund cover? At minimum, all programs cover damages to a unit beyond a tenant’s initial security deposit. Several communities also cover additional expenses after a tenant’s security deposit has been exhausted. These additional expenses include unpaid rent, eviction related court costs, lease‐ break fees, and holding fees. Most funds only reimburse claims after tenants have vacated units. However, communities can utilize risk mitigation programs as a form of homeless and eviction prevention. Fargo‐Moorhead used their fund to reimburse a damage claim enabling a tenant to remain in the unit.74 King County’s Landlord Liaison Project utilizes separate funding earmarked specifically to provide temporary rental assistance for participating households.75 Several staff in Minnesota communities expressed interest in a fund’s capacity to provide temporary rental assistance to help 22 tenants remain housed.76 Programs that build in fund flexibility or link participants with funding sources that provide temporary assistance can leverage risk mitigation funds as a tool to prevent future housing barriers. What are the fund’s maximum claims? Claim limits range from $750 to $5,000, all covering costs after landlords exhaust a tenant’s security deposit. However, both communities with limits at each extreme shared that their limits are too low or high, respectively.77 The majority of communities have caps between $1,000 and $3,000 dollars. Two programs, the Landlord Liaison Project in King County and Central Florida’s Supportive Housing (CFSH) program, adjust claim limits to accommodate for larger units. Additionally, the CFSH program specifically outlines a shared risk model. The fund reimburses 75 percent of the damages while the landlord must cover the remaining 25 percent.78 Communities concerned about landlords abusing the safeguard of a risk mitigation fund could utilize a similar shared risk model. Most funds only cover one claim per household. However, both the Landlord Liaison Project and the Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund in Fargo‐Moorhead cover multiple claims to the same household as long as those claims together total to less than the cap limit.79 Oregon’s Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee ties claim limits with a household’s tenancy at a particular unit.80 As a result, the fund could pay out multiple maximum claims on the same household, as long as those claims regarded tenancies at separate units. If programs allow for multiple claims to a household, the fund should tie claim limits to the total dollar amount ever paid out on a household, as to maximize the capacity of the fund. How long are households covered? Most funds guarantee coverage for households for one to two years. Often, time limits reflect the amount of time for households to establish a successful track record as tenants.81 Funds should at least cover households for the duration of the initial year’s lease but should not cover households indefinitely. Risk mitigation funds are designed to address landlord’s initial risk but should not bear that risk forever. 82 Several programs83 also limit the length of time landlords can file a claim after repossessing a unit. Time limits range from five business days after repossession of the unit to one year after receiving a court judgement against a household. Such limits ensure that programs are not liable for charges to the fund long after households have moved out of a unit. In Minnesota, landlords must return a tenants security deposit or provide written explanation of withheld deposit within 21 days of termination of tenancy.84 Programs in Minnesota could link claim timelines with this statutory timeline. How are claims validated? All funds review claims prior to pay out. This process ensures that claims legitimately reflect the cost to repair damages caused by the tenant to the unit. The majority of programs utilize staff time to review claims, several requiring that staff physically inspect the unit when landlord’s file a claim.85 Many programs86 utilize third‐party validation of claims, either requiring landlords use third‐party vendors to repair claims or have a third‐party vendor validate claims as part of the review process. Two programs87 developed pay out guidelines for damages based those used by local housing authorities. Fargo‐Moorhead validates claims through a review committee comprised of an attorney, service and housing providers.88 Oregon’s Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee utilizes a court 23 judgement as validation of claims to the fund. However, this form of claim validation can create future housing barriers for tenants as these court orders negatively impact a client’s credit or rental history. Often programs face the challenge of developing a transparent review process that limits the administrative burden shouldered by agency staff. What documents are necessary to make a claim? Programs require a variety of documents to validate claims on households covered by the fund. Most programs89 require that landlords submit a form detailing damages to the unit. Several 90require that landlords include repair receipts as part of claim submission. Programs91 often require copies of a landlord’s move‐in and move‐out inspection and one program, the Landlord Liaison Project, participates in both of the move‐in and move‐out process with tenants. A few programs require copies of a household lease agreement, although the majority of programs92 requiring the lease ask for this document at lease‐up rather than at claim submission. The “It’s All About the Kid’s” fund required submission of a copy of the notice of damages to tenants. The Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program requires that landlords sign a waiver releasing the program and household from future claims on reimbursed damages.93 The specifics of claim guidelines reflect the needs and capacity of communities. Most programs94 developed claim guidelines in collaboration with landlord participation and input. Specific claim coverage and limits reflect the local rental market, funding limitations, the target number of households covered by the fund, and feedback from landlords in the community. Ultimately, claim guidelines must strike the balance of providing enough financial incentive for landlords to participate in the program with the capacity to cover as many qualified households as possible. Program Evaluation Very few programs developed formalized program evaluation of their landlord risk mitigation fund. King County performed the only formal evaluation of any program interviewed. However, this evaluation of the Landlord Liaison Project evaluated the entire project, rather than the impact of the risk reduction fund itself. Additionally, this evaluation took place in 2010, ten months after the program’s implementation.95 The program has changed several pieces of the program in its eight years of operation, including partnering agency case management requirements.96 Additionally, staff shared that while the program paid out few claims initially, they now utilize the fund frequently.97 Several programs shared that even though no formal evaluation process exists for the fund, these organizations monitor program spending and data for grant requirements.98 However, most staff provided suggestions for possible evaluation metrics for household, landlord, and claims data outlined below. Household Data While most programs track the number of households and individual families served, several99 also track the barriers and characteristics of those households as well. Both the Landlord Liaison Project (LLP) and the Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project track this data in each’s community Homeless Management and Information System (HMIS).100 Staff at LLP shared that it is easy to track the length of time to house families and individuals in HMIS but challenging to track how long households remain housed. 101 Capturing the length of time to assist households with obtaining and maintaining housing demonstrates a fund’s ability to assist households secure stable housing. 24 Landlord Data Several programs102 track the number of landlords participating in the program and staff at Landlord Recruitment and Retention also track the number of units made available through the program. Staff discussed the importance of reaching a variety of landlords, rather than simply accessing many units through a handful of landlords with a large portfolio of properties.103 Larger metro areas may want to consider tracking the geographic location of units to ensure households are not primarily placed in areas with a high concentration of poverty, poor schools, poor access to transit, and other barriers to opportunity.104 Several staff suggested landlord feedback as a possible evaluation tool for risk mitigation funds.105 Many communities106 surveyed landlords as part of the development of programs. Surveys could ask participating landlords if they would have rented to individuals without the availability of the funds. Claim Data Most programs track the number of households served, claims paid out by the fund, and dollar amount of those claims. Rent Well also details the programs’ claim rate to the fund.107 Programs should take caution when utilizing this metric because claim rates can be calculated several ways and are hard to compare with other programs. The easiest way to calculate claim rates utilizes the total number of households covered and total paid claims over the lifetime of the fund. However, claim rates may vary year to year, especially between the early and later years of the fund. Calculating yearly claim rates may be challenging as households’ coverage may overlap several calculation periods. Additionally, claim rates may vary depending on client’s housing needs. Individuals and families with many housing barriers may have higher claim rates than those with fewer housing barriers and funds may prioritize serving households with the most barriers. 108 Communities invest thousands, and sometimes millions, of dollars into landlord risk mitigation funds. Evaluations are a powerful tool to demonstrate the effectiveness of these programs. The Housing Broker Services program even tracks dollars saved by the fund in the form of negotiated deposits and waived fees to demonstrate the value of the program.109 This tracking may be more challenging for programs strictly providing a risk mitigation fund; however, evaluations could include information comparing the pay out of the fund and the number of successful tenancies with the comparable cost to house someone in a homeless shelter or in prison.110 Ultimately, programs should establish metrics that demonstrate a fund’s ability to assist families and individuals with housing barriers obtain safe and secure housing. Conclusion Communities develop landlord risk mitigation funds within a variety of existing homeless prevention and assistance strategies. As a result, landlord risk mitigation funds take shape very differently across, and sometimes even within, the same community. Regardless of the size or scope of these programs, all successful risk mitigation funds develop ways to address tenant participation, landlord engagement, and the claims process. Although no program outlines formal program evaluation, programs should develop strategies to demonstrate the effectiveness and success of its fund. 25 Conclusion Individuals and families with criminal records, poor rental and credit history, and other housing barriers face limited housing opportunities in tight rental markets across the country. Communities have developed innovated partnerships with landlords to increase housing opportunities for these members of their community. Landlord risk mitigation funds represent one tool to engage landlords in the effort to create stable and affordable housing opportunities for the chronically homeless, veterans, families, and households with criminal records. Communities across the country develop programs utilizing landlord risk mitigation funds to fit the needs and resources of their community. Programs with a range of funding capacity develop landlord engagement and tenant participation strategies to ensure that households obtain and maintain stable housing. These strategies, in combination with clear claim guidelines and validation, ensure that these programs maximize fund coverage and preserve the limited funding available for these programs. Minnesota Housing plays an integral role in the development of successful landlord risk mitigation programs in the state. The agency can ensure that programs develop strong landlord engagement strategies, provide sufficient support for households, and establish clear claim limits. Landlord risk mitigation funds can create housing opportunities for individuals and families with housing barriers across the state. Successful pilot landlord risk mitigation programs can lay the groundwork for a state‐wide risk mitigation fund available for all of Minnesota’s communities. 26 Appendix A Note on Methodology Very little reliable data exists evaluating programs utilizing landlord risk mitigation funds. King County performed the only formal evaluation of any program interviewed. As a result, this report cannot identify “best practices” for fund development and implementation. Instead, this report utilizes a literature review and interviews with agency staff and community stakeholders to highlight reoccurring success, challenges, and practices of programs utilizing these funds. The author completed interviews with the following individuals and agencies:  Mona Tschurwald, YWCA of King County  Katy Miller, United States Interagency Council on Homelessness  Toeney Flowers, JOIN PDX  Julie Nixon, The Planning Council  Amy Nash, Fargo Homeless Coalition  Emma Schmidt, Lakes and Prairies Community Action Partnership  Hannah Schmaltz, Home Forward  Beth Landry, Home Forward  Dawn Hogan, Lutheran Social Service  Sybil Hebb, Oregon Law Center  Julie Grothe, Guild Incorporated  Madeline Kestler, Dakota County  Matt Traynor, CHUM  Courtney Cochran, CHUM  Zoe Thiel, City of Minneapolis References 1 Minnesota Housing analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 American Community Survey. 2 Marquette Advisors (2016). Apartment Trends: Twin Cities Metro Area 1st Quarter 2015. 3 Sarver, M. (2014). Promoting Landlord Partnerships to Overcome Housing Attainment Barriers. HomeBase. 4 Sarver, M. (2014). Promoting Landlord Partnerships to Overcome Housing Attainment Barriers. HomeBase. 5 2016 Minnesota Session Laws, Chapter 189, Article 12, Section 2, Subd. 3 6 Joint Center for Housing Studies (2015). America’s Rental Housing: Expanding Options for Diverse and Growing Demand. Retrieved from: http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/research/publications/americas‐rental‐housing‐ expanding‐options‐diverse‐and‐growing‐demand 7 Minnesota Housing analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 American Community Survey. 8 Marquette Advisors (2016). Apartment Trends: Twin Cities Metro Area 1st Quarter 2015. 9 Joint Center for Housing Studies (2015). America’s Rental Housing: Expanding Options for Diverse and Growing Demand. Retrieved from: http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/research/publications/americas‐rental‐housing‐ expanding‐options‐diverse‐and‐growing‐demand 10 Minnesota Housing analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey. Minnesota Housing Finance Agency classify annual household incomes below $50,000 as lower income. 11 Macy‐Hurley, R., Hooper, J. and Mann, A. (2010). Rapid Re‐Housing for Homeless Populations: Program and Community Strategies for Recruiting Private‐Market Landlords & Overcoming Housing Barriers. Los Angeles and Boston: Beyond Shelter, HomeStart. 12 Pittman, B. et al. (2016). Initial Findings: Characteristics and Trends: People Experiencing Homelessness in Minnesota. Wilder Foundation; Aubry et al. (2015). Perceptions of Private Market Landlords Who Rent to Tenants of a Housing First Program. American Journal of Community Psychology, 55; Wilder Foundation (2013). Homelessness in Minnesota: Findings from the Statewide Homeless Study. Retrieved from http://www.wilder.org/Wilder‐ Research/Publications/Studies/Forms/Study/docsethomepage.aspx?ID=1023&RootFolder=%2FWilder‐ Research%2FPublications%2FStudies%2FHomelessness%20in%20Minnesota%202012%20Study;Shah, M.F., Black, C., and Felver, B. (2013). Achieving Successful Community Re‐Entry upon Release from Prison. Washington State Department of Commerce, Community Service, and Housing Division; Macy‐Hurley, R., Hooper, J. and Mann, A. (2010). Rapid Re‐Housing for Homeless Populations: Program and Community Strategies for Recruiting Private‐ Market Landlords & Overcoming Housing Barriers. Los Angeles and Boston: Beyond Shelter, HomeStart; Roman, C. G. and Travis, J. (2004). Taking Stock: Housing, Homelessness and Prisoner Reentry. The Urban Institute. 13 Pittman, B. et al. (2016). Initial Findings: Characteristics and Trends: People Experiencing Homelessness in Minnesota. Wilder Foundation. 14 Jaramillo, A. (2015). Hard‐to‐House: Addressing Barriers to Housing that go Beyond Affordability. Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. 15 Greenlee, A. J. (2014). More Than Meets the Market? Landlord Agency in the Illinois Housing Choice Voucher Program. Housing Policy Debate, 24 (3); Macy‐Hurley, R., Hooper, J. and Mann, A. (2010). Rapid Re‐Housing for Homeless Populations: Program and Community Strategies for Recruiting Private‐Market Landlords & Overcoming Housing Barriers. Los Angeles and Boston: Beyond Shelter, HomeStart; Roman, C. G. and Travis, J. (2004). Taking Stock: Housing, Homelessness and Prisoner Reentry. The Urban Institute; Kloos et al. (2002). Landlords as Partners for Promoting Success in Supportive Housing: “It Takes More than a Lease and a Key”. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25(3). 16 Clark, L. M. (2007). Landlord Attitudes Towards Renting to Released Offenders. Federal Probation, 71(1); Roman, C. G. and Travis, J. (2004). Taking Stock: Housing, Homelessness and Prisoner Reentry. The Urban Institute. 17 Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016; Amy Nash, personal communication, June 22, 2016; United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016).Engaging and Supporting Landlords through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Risk_mitigation_funds_community_profiles.pdf. 18 Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016; Amy Nash, personal communication, June 22, 2016; Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016; Toeney Flowers, personal communication, June 23, 2016; Mona Tschurwald, personal communication, July 1, 2016. 19 Two programs, Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program in Orlando and The Landlords Opening Doors Campaign in Denver, were contacted but unable provide interviews for this paper. 20 Staff in St. Louis County, Dakota County, and the City of Minneapolis. 21 Katy Miller, personal communication, June 28, 2016; Mona Tschurwald, personal communication, July 1, 2016; Scott Mingus, personal communication, July 11, 2016; United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016). Webinar: Engaging and Supporting Landlords Through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/tools‐for‐action/webinar‐engaging‐and‐supporting‐landlords‐through‐risk‐mitigation‐ funds; YWCA of King County (2016). Landlord Liaison Project Agency Participation Application. Retrieved from: http://www.landlordliaisonproject.org/agencies/;United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016).Engaging and Supporting Landlords through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Risk_mitigation_funds_community_profiles.pdf; King County (2010) Landlord Liaison Project, 2010 Performance and Evaluation Report. Retrieved from: http://www.kingcounty.gov/~/media/socialServices/housing/documents/HFP_HHP/HHP/Landlord_Liaison_Project _Final_2010.ashx?la=en 22 Toeney Flowers, personal communication, June 23, 2016; United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016).Engaging and Supporting Landlords through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Risk_mitigation_funds_community_profiles.pdf. 23 Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 24 Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016; Amy Nash, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 25 Amy Nash, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 26 Dawn Horgan, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 27 Staff indicated that the fund covered additional households throughout the program’s operation. However, only information on the 2005 to 2006 year was available. 28 Hannah Schmaltz, personal communication, June 17, 2016; Beth Landry, personal communication, June 20, 2016; Home Forward (2016). Learn How to Rent. Retrieved from: http://www.homeforward.org/find‐a‐ home/learn‐how‐to‐rent; Home Forward (2016). Landlord Guarantee Fund Application. Retrieve from: http://homeforward.org/sites/default/files/Rent‐Well‐LGF‐Application_0.pdf 29 Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties in Oregon and Clark County in Washington operate Rent‐Well programs. 30 The administration of the fund and instructor training transferred from Home Forward to a local non‐profit as of July 1, 2016. 31 For instance, the program requires that participants obtain a reference letter outside of normal classroom hours. 32 Sybil Hebb, personal communication, July 6, 2016; Oregon Housing and Community Services (2016). Housing Stabilization Program: Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program. Retrieved from: http://www.oregon.gov/ohcs/Pages/housing‐choice‐landlord‐guarantee‐assistance.aspx; ORS 659A.139 Section 3 33 For example, a landlord could file a $5,000 judgment claim against a tenant for damages to her unit even if a previous landlord had received a $5,000 reimbursement from the fund for that tenant’s occupancy at a different unit. 34 For example, if a landlord received $300 from a tenant for a judgement of $700, the landlord could apply for reimbursement for the remaining balance of $400. 35 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016).Engaging and Supporting Landlords through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Risk_mitigation_funds_community_profiles.pdf; United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016). Webinar: Engaging and Supporting Landlords Through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/tools‐for‐action/webinar‐engaging‐and‐supporting‐ landlords‐through‐risk‐mitigation‐funds. 36 The fund does not cover veterans with HUD‐VASH vouchers at this time. 29 37 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016).Engaging and Supporting Landlords through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Risk_mitigation_funds_community_profiles.pdf. 38 Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program targets the chronically homeless; the Landlord Liaison Project and Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project target veterans; the Housing Broker Services program targets families. 39 St. Louis County and Dakota County 40 The Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program, and Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee. 41 King County (2010) Landlord Liaison Project, 2010 Performance and Evaluation Report. Retrieved from: http://www.kingcounty.gov/~/media/socialServices/housing/documents/HFP_HHP/HHP/Landlord_Liaison_Project _Final_2010.ashx?la=en 42 Greenlee, A. J. (2014). More Than Meets the Market? Landlord Agency in the Illinois Housing Choice Voucher Program. Housing Policy Debate, 24 (3). 43 Sybil Hebb, personal communication, July 6, 2016. 44 Madeline Kestler, personal communication, June 27, 2016. 45 Ibid. 46 YWCA of King County (2016). Landlord Liaison Project Agency Participation Application. Retrieved from: http://www.landlordliaisonproject.org/agencies/ 47 Landlord Liaison Project, Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, and Housing Broker Services Program 48 Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016. 49 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016).Engaging and Supporting Landlords through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Risk_mitigation_funds_community_profiles.pdf. 50 Hannah Schmaltz, personal communication, June 17, 2016; Beth Landry, personal communication, June 20, 2016. 51 Seattle(WA), St. Louis County (MN), Dakota County (MN). 52 Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016. 53 The Landlord Liaison Project offers participants education classes; Rent Well requires completion of 15‐hour education class as qualification for coverage. 54 Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project and Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund 55 Katy Miller, personal communication, June 28, 2016. 56 Partnering agencies that provide intensive case management services, such as mental health agencies, still provide two years of case management for households covered by the fund. 57 Amy Nash, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 58 Landlord Liaison Project, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund, Housing Broker Services Program, and Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program. 59 Landlord Liaison Project, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, and Housing Broker Services Program. 60 Ibid. 61 Landlord Liaison Project, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, and Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program. 62 Toeney Flowers, personal communication, June 23, 2016. 63 Landlord Liaison Project and the Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project 64 Katy Miller, personal communication, June 28, 2016. 65 Toeney Flowers, personal communication, June 23, 2016; Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 66 Ibid. 67 Toeney Flowers, personal communication, June 23, 2016; Dawn Horgan, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 68 Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 69 Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016. 70 Fargo‐Moorhead (MN/ND), Portland (OR), Seattle (WA), Orlando (FL) 30 71 Oregon, Portland (OR), Orlando (FL), St. Louis County (MN) 72 Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 73 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016). Webinar: Engaging and Supporting Landlords Through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/tools‐for‐action/webinar‐engaging‐and‐ supporting‐landlords‐through‐risk‐mitigation‐funds. 74 Amy Nash, personal communication, June 22, 2016; Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016. 75 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016).Engaging and Supporting Landlords through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Risk_mitigation_funds_community_profiles.pdf. 76 Zoe Thiel, personal communication, July 1, 2016; Dawn Horgan, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 77 Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016; Sybil Hebb, personal communication, June 29, 2016. 78 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016). Webinar: Engaging and Supporting Landlords Through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/tools‐for‐action/webinar‐engaging‐and‐ supporting‐landlords‐through‐risk‐mitigation‐funds. 79 Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016; United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016). Webinar: Engaging and Supporting Landlords Through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/tools‐for‐action/webinar‐engaging‐and‐supporting‐landlords‐through‐risk‐mitigation‐ funds. 80 Sybil Hebb, personal communication, June 29, 2016. 81 Emma Schmidt, personal communication, June 17, 2016. 82 Zoe Thiel, personal communication, July 1, 2016. 83 Rent Well requires submission within 60 days of repossession, “It’s All About the Kids” required submission within 5 days of repossession, the Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program requires submission within 14 days of repossession, the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program requires submission within one year of the final court judgement, and the Housing Broker Services Program requires submission within 60 days. 84 Minnesota Statutes 2015, section 504B.178, subdivision 3 85 Housing Broker Services Program, Landlord Liaison Project, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, Rent Well, and “It’s All About the Kid’s” Program. The Landlords Opening Doors Campaign and Central Florida’s Supportive Housing Program allow for pay outs up to $300 without an in‐person inspection. 86 Housing Broker Services Program, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, and “It’s All About the Kid’s Program. Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund uses a third party contractor on a case‐by‐case basis but is considering requiring this for all claims. 87 Rent Well and Landlord Liaison Project. 88 Amy Nash, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 89 Rent Well, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund, Housing Broker Services Program, “It’s All About the Kid’s” Program, and the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee. 90 Landlord Liaison Project, Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund, Housing Broker Services Program, and Rent Well. 91 Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund, Rent Well, and “It’s All About the Kid’s” Program require move‐in inspection. The Housing Broker Services Program and Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project require both the move‐in and move‐out inspection. 92 Rent Well and Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund require at lease‐up; Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project requires at claim submission. 93 Toeney Flowers, personal communication, June 23, 2016. 94 Landlord Liaison Project, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund, Rent Well, and the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee 95 King County (2010) Landlord Liaison Project, 2010 Performance and Evaluation Report. Retrieved from: http://www.kingcounty.gov/~/media/socialServices/housing/documents/HFP_HHP/HHP/Landlord_Liaison_Project _Final_2010.ashx?la=en 96 Katy Miller, personal communication, June 28, 2016; United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016). Webinar: Engaging and Supporting Landlords Through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: 31 https://www.usich.gov/tools‐for‐action/webinar‐engaging‐and‐supporting‐landlords‐through‐risk‐mitigation‐ funds. 97 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016). Webinar: Engaging and Supporting Landlords Through Risk Mitigation Funds. Retrieved from: https://www.usich.gov/tools‐for‐action/webinar‐engaging‐and‐ supporting‐landlords‐through‐risk‐mitigation‐funds. 98 Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016; Mona Tschurwald, personal communication, July 1, 2016. 99 Landlord Recruitment and Retention Program , Rent Well, and Retention Project, and Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation ask participants to self‐identify barriers as part of the programs intake or application process. 100 Toeney Flowers, personal communication, June 23, 2016; Mona Tschurwald, personal communication, July 1, 2016. 101 Mona Tschurwald, personal communication, July 1, 2016. 102 Landlord Liaison Project, Landlord Recruitment and Retention Project, and Fargo‐Moorhead’s Landlord Risk Mitigation Fund 103 Toeney Flowers, personal communication, June 23, 2016; Amy Nash, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 104 Zoe Thiel, personal communication, July 1, 2016. 105 Zoe Thiel, personal communication, July 1, 2016; Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016; Mona Tschurwald, personal communication, July 1, 2016. 106 Seattle (WA), Portland(OR), Dakota County (MN), and St. Louis County (MN) 107 Beth Landry, personal communication, June 20, 2016. 108 Zoe Thiel, personal communication, July 1, 2016. 109 Julie Nixon, personal communication, June 22, 2016. 110 Matt Traynor, personal communication, June 20, 2016. 32 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Approval of Council’s Legislative Positions for 2018 Presenter: Lisa Robertson, Chief Deputy City Attorney Staff Contacts: Lisa Robertson, Chief Deputy City Attorney Title: Thomas Jefferson Planning District Legislative Program, AND 2018 City Council Legislative Position Statements Background: Each year, the localities in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District region adopt legislative statements and positions on issues of importance and concern to local governments. These positions form the basis for local advocacy efforts during the General Assembly session each winter. The City Attorney’s Office works in conjunction with TJPD’s legislative liaison during the session to provide advocacy on behalf of the City’s interests. Additionally each year, City Council establishes a statement of legislative positions, as a means of communicating to legislators (i) issues of concern and interest to Council, and (ii) requests, if any, for legislative action items. Discussion: TJPDC Program—The TJPDC legislative program has been drafted based on discussions with and input from the six localities in the region. The recommendations, requests and positions in the program cover a range of issues and topics that are anticipated to become the subject of proposed legislation or the state budget during the upcoming session, and that may be of concern to the region or to individual localities in the region. City Position Statement—The City position statement has been drafted to reflect ongoing issues of concern and interest specifically to Council. We try not to repeat positions that are repetitive of those advocated within the TJPDC Program, but where City Council has a slightly different position than TJPDC as a whole, it’s appropriate to include it within Council’s position statements. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: The position statements in this draft align with the City Council Vision areas of Quality Housing Opportunities for All, Economic Sustainability, and A Connected Community, as well as Goal 1 (Inclusive, Self-Sufficient Community), Goal 3 (Beautiful Environment) and Goal 4 (Strong Diversified Economy) of the Strategic Plan. Community Engagement: Generally, the preparation of these draft position statements is done collaboratively between City Council’s Legislative Committee and the City Attorney’s Office. Budgetary Impact: None Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached position statements, with any edits that Council may desire. Alternatives: None proposed Attachments: 2018 TJPD Legislative Program Proposed City Council Legislative Position Statements November 13, 2017 TO: Members, Charlottesville City Council Charlottesville City Manager FROM: David C. Blount, Legislative Liaison RE: 2018 TJPD Legislative Program Approval Attached is the draft 2018 TJPD Legislative Program for your review and consideration. As I discussed when I spoke at your meeting earlier this month, I will be presenting the program and seeking approval of it at your November 20 meeting. This year, the draft program lists three top legislative priorities and three additional priority positions. They are contained in the draft program as follows: 1) State Budget and Funding Obligations 2) Public Education Funding 3) Local Revenue Authority 4) Broadband 5) Children’s Services Act 6) Land Use and Growth Management The “Legislative Positions” section contains recommendations, requests and positions in other areas of interest and concern to the region’s localities. A summary of the six priority positions will be produced and distributed later for you to use in communicating with your legislators. I look forward to presenting and discussing the draft program when we meet November 20. Thank you. Recommended Action: Approve the draft TJPD Legislative Program. Thomas Jefferson Planning District 2018 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM DRAFT Albemarle County | City of Charlottesville Fluvanna County | Greene County Louisa County | Nelson County November 2017 Genevieve Keller, Chair Chip Boyles, Executive Director David Blount, Legislative Liaison TOP LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES State Budget and Funding Obligations PRIORITY: The Planning District localities urge the governor and legislature to enhance state aid to localities, and to not impose mandates on or shift costs for state programs to localities. While state general fund revenues are expected to continue their upward crawl in the current fiscal year. Development of the next state biennial budget will be challenged by several factors, including the following: 1) the re-benchmarking of public education costs (likely to be over one-half billion dollars); 2) increases in Medicaid costs, which have jumped by over 6% per year since 2010; 3) more pressure on Children’s Services Act funding; and 4) replacement of some one-time “fixes” in the current budget plan. We encourage the State to develop revenue and spending priorities that support K-12 education, economic development, public safety, and other public goals. Localities continue to be the state’s go-to service provider, despite local budgets being subject to slowly-recovering local and state dollars. State investment in local service delivery must be enhanced, as many mandated programs have been level funded since 2009. Funding levels for others, such as the Children’s Services Act and HB 599, are less than the 2009 amounts. We take the following positions: →We oppose unfunded state and federal mandates and the cost shifting that occurs when the state or federal government fails to fund requirements or reduces or eliminates funding for programs. Doing so strains local ability to craft effective and efficient budgets to deliver services mandated by the State or federal government or demanded by residents. →We urge the State to resist placing additional administrative burdens on local governments without sufficient resources or flexibility; otherwise, the quality of services delivered at the local level is jeopardized. →We urge policymakers to preserve existing funding formulas rather than altering them in order to save the State money and/or to shift costs to localities. →The State should not confiscate or redirect local general fund dollars to the state treasury. Public Education Funding PRIORITY: The Planning District localities urge the State to fully fund its share of the realistic costs of the Standards of Quality (SOQ) without making policy changes that reduce funding or shift funding responsibility to localities. The State will spend just over $6 billion on direct aid to public education in FY18. While we appreciate additional state teacher salary dollars this past year, we believe that the State should significantly increase its commitment to K-12 education. In the past decade, overall state funding has increased just seven percent, and while the state-funded per pupil amount has jumped back above the FY09 level, state dollars do not reflect the true costs of K-12 education. Local governments consistently go “above and beyond” to close the funding gap by appropriating twice as much K-12 funding as required by the state. We believe localities need an adequately defined SOQ that closes the gap between what school divisions are actually providing and what the state currently funds in the SOQ. This could include recognizing additional instructional positions and, as recommended by the Board of Education, increasing state-funded staffing ratios for various, non-instructional positions. This would be a welcome change of course, as state policies that have been revised since the Great Recession have reduced the state’s funding obligations to public education. Local Revenue Authority PRIORITY: The Planning District localities urge the governor and legislature to diversify the revenue options available to localities, to include equalizing the revenue-raising authority of counties with that of cities, and to not restrict local revenue-raising authority. We support the legislature making additional revenue options available to diversify the local revenue stream, which could reduce dependency on real property taxes, rather than removing or restricting local revenue authorities. One way to do this is to eliminate the differences between city and county taxing authority, which exist due to now less-prevalent distinctions in the services provided. This would mean removing the restrictions that currently apply to county authority to levy the meals, lodging, cigarette and amusement taxes. Equalizing revenue authority for counties with that of cities also should be included as part of a needed modernization of the state’s tax system to comport with the realities of a global, information-driven economy, which will rely less on governmental spending and more on new, private sector business models. We also believe any tax reform efforts should examine the financing and delivering of state services at the local level. We take the following positions: →The State should refrain from establishing local tax policy at the state level and allow local governments determine the equity of local taxation policy. →The State should not expect local governments to pay for new funding requirements or the expansion of existing ones on locally-delivered services, without a commensurate increase in state financial assistance or new local taxing authority (see above). →The State should not alter or eliminate the BPOL and Machinery and Tools taxes. →The State should support the appropriate collection of transient occupancy taxes from online transactions. →The State should revamp the Communications Sales and Use Tax (CSUT). Revenues from the CSUT coming back to localities are 20% less than 10 years ago, primarily because the tax does not reflect modern technology patterns of consumption. Accordingly, we support 1) leveling the current 5% CSUT with the state sales tax rate of 5.3%; 2) broadening the coverage of the tax to include audio and video streaming and prepaid calling services; and 3) targeting the additional revenues generated to support rural area broadband expansion. OTHER PRIORITY ITEMS Broadband PRIORITY: The Planning District localities encourage and support state and federal efforts and financial incentives that assist localities and their communities in deploying universal, affordable access to broadband technology, particularly in unserved and underserved areas. Access to broadband, or high-speed internet, is a critical necessity in the 21st century. It has become basic, not optional, infrastructure, just like roads and electricity, that is essential for economic growth, equity in access to public education, community growth, and consumer communications and information. Many communities, particularly those in unserved rural areas, need thoughtful, longer-term strategies to bridge the broadband gap. This may be an approach that utilizes both fiber and wireless technologies, private/public partnerships and regulated markets that provide a choice of service providers and competitive prices. Accordingly, we believe state and federal support should include the following: →Development of a statewide comprehensive plan for broadband and state support for local governments that are developing or implementing local or regional broadband plans; →Provisions that provide for sharing utility and road right-of-way easements for expanding broadband; →Support for linking broadband efforts for education and public safety to private sector efforts to serve businesses and residences; →Maintaining local land use, permitting, fee and other local authorities; →Amending the current 5% Communications Sales and Use Tax to apply to previously uncovered technologies and to mirror the state sales tax rate of 5.3%, and targeting the additional revenues generated to rural area broadband expansion; and →Consideration of proposals that would subject broadband to stricter and more developed regulation as a public utility. Children’s Services Act PRIORITY: The Planning District localities urge the State to be partners in containing costs of the Children’s Services Act (CSA) and to better balance CSA responsibilities between the State and local government. The State should resist attempts to shift costs of serving children through CSA to localities and schools. Since the inception of CSA in the early 1990’s, there has been pressure to hold down costs, to cap state costs for serving mandated children, to increase local match levels and to make the program more uniform by attempting to control how localities run their programs. This past session, the General Assembly appropriated an additional $85.7 million to address increasing caseloads and costs in CSA, an increase largely attributable to private special education day placement costs. The budget also included language directing a review of options for these placements and how their cost and quality could be better managed. Localities are concerned about proposals that would move CSA “lump sum” funding to the Department of Education, with any resulting funding shortfalls becoming the responsibility of localities (rather than the current process where localities request supplemental state funding). Such a scenario could limit services and funding that are necessary for students who may need more intensive services at any time. Accordingly, we support 1) the ability to use state funds to pay for mandated services provided directly by the locality, specifically for private day placements, where the same services could be offered in schools; and 2) maintaining cost shares on a sum sufficient basis by both the State and local governments. Changing the funding mechanism to a per-pupil basis of state funding would shift the sum sufficient portion fully to localities, which we would oppose. We also support the following: →Enhanced state funding for local CSA administrative costs; →A cap on local expenditures (with the State making up any gaps) in order to combat higher costs for serving mandated children; and →The State being proactive in making residential facilities and service providers available, especially in rural areas. Land Use and Growth Management PRIORITY: The Planning District localities encourage the State to resist preempting or circumventing existing land use authorities, and to provide additional tools to plan and manage growth. Over the years, the General Assembly has enacted both mandated and optional land use provisions. Some have been helpful, while others have prescribed one-size-fits-all rules that hamper different local approaches to land use planning. Accordingly, we support local authority to plan and regulate land use. We oppose legislation that weakens these key local responsibilities; this would include recent efforts to 1) restrict local oversight of the placement of various telecommunications infrastructure, and 2) single out specific land uses for special treatment without regard to the impact of such uses in particular locations. We also believe the General Assembly should provide localities with necessary tools to meet important infrastructure needs, as current land use authority often is inadequate to allow local governments to provide for balanced growth in ways that protect and improve quality of life. This would include more workable impact fee authority for facilities other than roads, and changes to the currently- enacted proffer system. Proffer legislation approved in 2016 limits the scope of impacts that may be addressed by proffers, and establishes specific criteria for when a proffer is deemed to be unreasonable. We support changes to the law to provide more balanced and practical standards for determining whether a proffer is reasonable and to restore a climate where localities and applicants can openly discuss rezoning applications. Further, we support ongoing state and local efforts to coordinate land use and transportation planning, and urge state and local officials to be mindful of various local and regional plans when conducting corridor or transportation planning within a locality or region. Finally, concerning land preservation, we request state funding and incentives for localities, at their option, to acquire, preserve and maintain open space. LEGISLATIVE POSITIONS Economic and Workforce Development The Planning District’s member localities recognize economic development and workforce training as essential to the continued viability of the Commonwealth. We support policies and additional state funding that closely link the goals of economic and workforce development and the state’s efforts to streamline and integrate workforce activities and revenue sources. We encourage enhanced coordination with K-12 education to equip the workforce with in-demand skill sets so as to align workforce supply with anticipated employer demands. We also support continuing emphasis on regional cooperation in economic, workforce and tourism development. Economic Development: • We support continuation of the GO Virginia initiative to grow and diversify the private sector in each region, with ongoing state financial incentives, technical support and other incentives to support collaboration by business, governments, educational institutions and communities that spur economic development, job creation and career readiness. • We support legislation that dedicates income and sales tax revenues generated by corporations and limited liability companies within an economic development project to such locality in cases where the locality has expended local funds for such project and state grant funds or incentives were not involved. Planning District Commissions: • We support increased state funding for regional planning district commissions. • We encourage opportunities for planning districts to collaborate with state officials and state agencies on regional programs and projects. Agricultural Products and Enterprises: We encourage state and local governments to work together and with other entities to identify, to provide incentives for, and to promote local, regional and state agricultural products and rural enterprises, and to encourage opportunities for such products and enterprises through a balanced approach. Education The Planning District’s member localities believe that the state should be a reliable funding partner with localities by recognizing the operational, personnel, and capital resources necessary for a high-quality public education system (see priority position on Public Education Funding). School Division Finances: • We believe that unfunded liability associated with the teacher retirement plan should be a shared responsibility of state and local government, with the Virginia Department of Education paying its share of retirement costs directly to VRS in order to facilitate such sharing. • The State should not eliminate or decrease funding for school employee benefits. • We support legislation that 1) establishes a mechanism for local appeal to the State of the calculated Local Composite Index (LCI); and 2) amends the LCI formula to recognize the land use taxation value, rather than the true value, of real property. Literary Fund: • The State should discontinue seizing dollars from the Literary Fund to help pay for teacher retirement. • We urge state financial assistance with school construction and renovation needs, including funding for the Literary Loan and interest rate subsidy programs. Environmental Quality The Planning District’s member localities believe that environmental quality should be funded and promoted through a comprehensive approach, and address air and water quality, solid waste management, land conservation, climate change and land use policies. We support protection and enhancement of the environment and recognize the need to achieve a proper balance between environmental regulation and the socio-economic health of our communities within the constraints of available revenues. Such an approach requires regional cooperation due to the inter-jurisdictional nature of many environmental resources, and adequate state funding to support local and regional efforts. Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act: • We oppose legislation mandating expansion of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act’s coverage area. Instead, we urge the State to 1) provide legal, financial and technical support to localities that wish to comply with any of the Act’s provisions; 2) allow localities to use other practices to improve water quality; and 3) provide funding for other strategies that address point and non-point source pollution. Biosolids: • We support the option for localities, as a part of their zoning ordinances, to designate and/or reasonably restrict the land application of biosolids to specific areas within the locality, based on criteria designed to further protect the public safety and welfare of citizens. Alternate On-Site Sewage Systems: • We support legislative and regulatory action to 1) ensure operation and maintenance of alternative on- site sewage systems in ways that protect public health and the environment, and 2) increase options for localities to secure owner abatement or correction of system deficiencies. Dam Safety: • We support dam safety regulations that do not impose unreasonable costs on dam owners whose structures meet current safety standards. Water Supply: • The State should be a partner with localities in water supply development and should work with and assist localities in addressing water supply issues, including investing in regional projects. Program Administration: • The State should not impose a fee, tax or surcharge on water, sewer, solid waste or other local services to pay for state environmental programs. General Government The Planning District’s member localities believe that since so many governmental actions take place at the local level, a strong local government system is essential. Local governments must have the freedom, flexibility and tools to carry out their responsibilities. Internet-based Businesses and Services: • We oppose legislation that would single out internet-based businesses and services for special treatment or exceptions. Rather, the State should support local authority concerning collection and auditing of taxes, licensing and regulation. There should be a level playing field for competition among businesses offering goods and services to ensure safety, reliability and fair access to such offerings by consumers and the general public. Local Government Operations: • We oppose intrusive legislation involving purchasing procedures; local government authority to establish hours of work, salaries and working conditions for local employees; matters that can be adopted by resolution or ordinance; procedures for adopting ordinances; and procedures for conducting public meetings. • We support allowing localities to use alternatives to newspapers for publishing various legal advertisements and public notices. • We support local flexibility regarding public parking regulation and enforcement. • We oppose attempts to reduce sovereign immunity protections for localities and their employees, to include regional jail officers. State-Supported Positions: • Localities should have maximum flexibility in providing compensation increases for state-supported local employees (including school personnel), as local governments provide significant local dollars and additional personnel beyond those funded by the State. Elections: • As elections administration has become more complex and both federal and state financial support for elections has been decreasing, we urge funding to address coming critical shortfalls in elections administration dollars. We also support state funding for voting equipment replacement, as many older voting machines are exhibiting end-of-life problems. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA): • We request that any changes to FOIA preserve 1) a local governing body’s ability to meet in closed session, 2) the list of records currently exempt from disclosure, and 3) provisions concerning creation of customized records. • We support changes to allow local and regional public bodies to conduct electronic meetings as now permitted for state public bodies. Quality of Life Issues: • We oppose changes to state law that further weaken a locality’s ability to regulate noise or the discharge of firearms. • We support expanding local authority to regulate smoking in public places. Health and Human Services The Planning District’s member localities recognize that special attention must be given to developing circumstances under which people, especially the disabled, the poor, the young and the elderly, can achieve their full potential. Transparent state policies and funding for at-risk individuals and families to access appropriate services are critical. The delivery of such services must be a collaborative effort by federal, state and local agencies. Funding: • We oppose changes in state funding or policies that increase the local share of costs for human services. We also oppose any shifting of Medicaid matching requirements from the State to localities. • The State should provide sufficient funding to allow Community Services Boards (CSBs) to meet the challenges of providing a community-based system of care. We believe children with mental health needs should be treated in the mental health system, where CSBs are the point of entry. • We support increased investment in the ID waiver program for adults and young people and Medicaid reimbursement for children’s dental services. • We support sufficient state funding assistance for older residents, to include companion and in-home services, home-delivered meals and transportation. Social Services: • We support the provision of sufficient state funding to match federal dollars for the administration of mandated services within the Department of Social Services, and to meet the staffing standards for local departments to provide services as stipulated in state law. • We support changes to the Code to provide that a judicial finding be controlling of administrative findings in alleged child abuse and neglect cases. Prevention: • We support continued operation and enhancement of early intervention and prevention programs. This includes the Virginia Preschool Initiative, Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (infants and toddlers), and federal reauthorization of funding for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) in order to provide health coverage for vulnerable children. Childcare: • The legislature should provide full funding to assist low-income working and TANF (and former TANF) families with childcare costs. These dollars help working-class parents pay for supervised daycare facilities and support efforts for families to become self-sufficient. Housing The Planning District’s member localities believe that every citizen should have an opportunity to afford decent, safe and sanitary housing. The State and localities should work to expand and preserve the supply and improve the quality of affordable housing for the elderly, disabled, and low- and moderate- income households. Regional planning and solutions should be implemented whenever possible. Affordable Housing: • We support the following: 1) local flexibility in the operation of affordable housing programs and establishment of affordable dwelling unit ordinances; 2) creation of a state housing trust fund; 3) grants and loans to low- or moderate-income persons to aid in purchasing dwellings; and 4) the provision of other funding to encourage affordable housing initiatives. Homelessness: • We support measures to prevent homelessness and to assist the chronic homeless. Historic Structures: • We support incentives that encourage rehabilitation and preservation of historic structures. Public Safety The Planning District’s member localities encourage state financial support, cooperation and assistance for local law enforcement (and state police), emergency medical care, criminal justice activities and fire services responsibilities carried out locally. Funding: • We urge the State to make Compensation Board funding a top priority, fully funding local positions that fall under its purview. It should not increase the local share of funding Constitutional offices or divert money away from them, but increase dollars needed for their operation. • We support returning funding responsibility for the Line of Duty Act (LODA) to the State. In the absence of that, there should be no new or enhanced benefits that increase locality costs. • We urge state funding of the HB 599 law enforcement program in accordance with Code of Virginia provisions. • The State should increase funding to the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act program, which has cut in half the number of juvenile justice commitments over the past decade. • We support funding for mental health and substance abuse services at juvenile detention centers. Jails: • As the state prisoner reimbursement rate is insufficient to cover actual costs, the State should restore per diem payments to localities 1) for housing state-responsible prisoners to $14 per day, and 2) for housing local responsible offenders to $8 per day. If a state-responsible prisoner is sentenced to serve in jail for more than one year, then the State should compensate the jail for the actual cost of incarceration. • The State should not shift costs to localities by altering the definition of state-responsible prisoner. • The State should continue to allow exemptions from the federal prisoner offset. Offender Programs and Services: • We support continued state funding of the drug court program and the Offender Reentry and Transition Services (ORTS), Community Corrections and Pretrial Services Acts. • We support continued state endorsement of the role and authority of pretrial services offices. • We support authorization for the court to issue restricted driver’s licenses to persons denied them because of having outstanding court costs or fees. Body Cameras: • We support the ability of local governments to adopt policies regarding law enforcement body worn cameras that account for local needs and fiscal realities. Transportation Funding and Devolution The Planning District’s member localities recognize that revenues for expanding and maintaining all modes of infrastructure are critical for meeting Virginia’s well-documented transportation challenges and for keeping pace with growing public needs and expectations. We believe the state should continue to enhance funding for local and regional transportation needs, including the Revenue Sharing Program with localities. We also remain opposed to attempts to transfer responsibility to counties for construction, maintenance or operation of current or new secondary roads. Transit Capital Funding: • Capital Project Revenue bonds, approved in 2007 to provide $600 million over 10 years for transit capital, are expiring. Failure by the state to provide replacement funding will jeopardize safe and reliable transit service and will result in the loss of federal funds if they are unable to be matched, which would mean a double hit for transit agencies funded primarily at the local/regional level. Therefore, it is critical that the State identify new funding sources for transit capital investments. Smart Scale: • As the State continues to implement the prioritization process established by HB 2 (2014), known as “Smart Scale,” and the distribution formula for highway construction projects established by HB 1887 (2015), there should be adequate funding, and local authority to generate transportation dollars, for important local and regional projects. Devolution: • We believe that efficient and effective transportation infrastructure, including the secondary road system, is critical to a healthy economy, job creation, a cleaner environment and public safety. Accordingly, we oppose shifting the responsibility for secondary roads to local entities, which could result in vast differences among existing road systems in different localities, potentially placing the state at a competitive economic disadvantage with other states when considering business and job recruitment, and movement of goods. Local and Regional Authority: • We support additional authority to establish mechanisms for funding transit in our region. • We support VDOT utilizing Metropolitan Planning Organizations and regional rural transportation staff to carry out local transportation studies. Water Quality The Planning District’s member localities support the goal of improved water quality, but as we face ongoing costs for remedies, including stormwater management and to address revised water quality criteria, we believe major and reliable forms of financial and technical assistance from the federal and state governments is necessary if comprehensive improvement strategies are to be effective. Funding: • We urge aggressive state investment in meeting required milestones for reducing Chesapeake Bay pollution to acceptable levels. • We believe these investments include authority, funding and other resources to achieve success, and must ensure that cost/benefit analyses are conducted of solutions that generate the greatest pollution reductions per dollar spent. • We support dollars being targeted to stormwater management, for permitted dischargers to upgrade treatment plants and for any retrofitting of developed areas, and to aid farmers with best management practices. Stormwater Management: • We request that any stormwater requirements be balanced and flexible, and that adequate funding and training be available for the State and local governments to meet ongoing costs associated with local stormwater programs. • We support continued investment in the Stormwater Local Assistance Fund to assist localities with much-needed stormwater projects. • We will oppose proposals that would result in new or expanded mandates or requirements, including elimination of current “opt-out” provisions, or financial burdens on local governments. • We oppose further amendments to the regulation of stormwater which would require a locality to waive stormwater charges. Nutrient Allocations: • We oppose efforts that would require re-justification of nutrient allocations for existing wastewater treatment facilities in our region or that would reduce or eliminate nutrient allocation or related treatment capacity serving the region. CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENTS FOR THE 2018 GENERAL ASSEMBLY SESSION Endorsement of TJPD and VML Priority Statements As a member of the TJPD, Virginia First Cities and of the Virginia Municipal League, we are supportive of the 2018 Legislative Positions presented by those organizations. On a few issues the City’s interests may differ, and those issues are included within our position statements following below. Children’s Education, Services and Programs We appreciate state funding currently being provided to support implementation by local school divisions of extended school day/ extended school year programs, and encourage continuation of these dollars. Also, the State should increase funding to the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCCA) program, which has cut in half the number of juvenile justice commitments over the past decade. Affordable housing We strongly advocate that the State should consider enactment of legislation authorizing inclusionary zoning ordinances. In localities where there is an affordable housing crisis, market forces are not delivering new affordable units, and the over-complexity of the density bonus provisions within Virginia Code § 15.2-2305 (the provisions of which do not appear to have been reviewed since 2008 for economic feasibility) make that statute difficult to interpret and apply. We encourage the General Assembly to establish a comprehensive state Affordable Housing Program that delegates authority to all Virginia municipalities consistent with the more general authorization within Virginia Code § 15.2-2304. Finally, we support any and all legislative action that would allow localities greater flexibility in (i) the range of methods that may be applied to implement local affordable housing programs, and (ii) in the use of public funding for the promotion and establishment of affordable housing. Public Service Corporations’ Use of Public Rights of Way We oppose any legislative action that would further expand the ability of telecommunications companies or other entities to install new above-ground poles or other support structures in City rights-of-way, on terms or conditions mandated by state law. However, we encourage legislators to support doubling the scope of Dominion Virginia Power’s Pilot Program for Undergrounding Utility lines, either by legislation or by approval of state funding. We encourage legislators to authorize Dominion Virginia Power to spend up to 10% of their revenue on undergrounding lines and to include an “open ditch” policy allowing the burial of power lines either within or adjacent to a public Right of Way ROW. Dominion should be allowed to impose a surcharge on affected customers, if undergrounding is requested by a locality to coincide with local projects removing and replacing natural gas, water and sewer lines within a public ROW. Local authority to regulate the use and development of land We oppose any legislative action that would limit our local authority to regulate the nature and intensity of specific uses of land, in relation to their location(s) within our city; we oppose any legislation that would single out specific land uses for special treatment throughout the Commonwealth without regard to the impact of such land uses in particular locations. We appreciate the state’s willingness to work with localities to coordinate land use and transportation planning, including multi-modal transportation planning. We ask legislators to provide state funding and incentives to support localities’ acquisition, preservation and maintenance of open space. 1 Stormwater management; water quality The City of Charlottesville asks legislators to oppose any legislation which would require a locality to waive stormwater utility fees, or to exempt railroad companies or other entities from the requirement to pay local Stormwater utility fees--all landowners should be required to share in the cost of stormwater utility programs. The state should substantially increase funding for the Stormwater Local Assistance Fund (SLAF), the program that provides matching grants to localities for stormwater management projects. The state should also provide reliable state funding for Agriculture Best Management Practices Cost-Share programs. We ask your support for the provision of adequate funding and training as well as an expansion of allowable stormwater management “best practices” (including, but not limited to, the use silva cell technology to filter stormwater runoff while sustaining street trees that would enable the State and local governments to meet total daily maximum load (TMDL) nutrient reduction requirements, and ongoing costs associated with local stormwater management programs that became effective in 2014). We encourage our legislators to oppose any legislation that would result in new or expanded mandates or requirements. Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act The City of Charlottesville does not oppose expansion of the CBPA beyond its current tidal river boundaries. In this regard, our position differs from TJPD’s. Clean energy initiatives The City of Charlottesville is committed to reducing its community-wide greenhouse emissions associated with energy use. Increasing the availability of financial resources available to a broader range of community members is one key to our success. We encourage our representatives to endorse legislation, funding, and data sharing proposals that support energy efficiency and renewable energy use. We support Virginia entering the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) with proceeds supporting residential energy efficiency improvements, and we encourage establishing a renewable energy portfolio standard. We support legislation for community-owned solar facilities and legislation that would enhance the ability of landowners to implement solar energy facilities for residential dwellings, consistent with zoning regulations applicable within local historic districts. The net metering program requirements should be amended to allow for oversizing, when a utility customer can demonstrate projected growth/use of electricity over a 5- year period. We support legislation that would allow local governments to aggregate the electric loads of their buildings, facilities and governmental operations for the purpose of net metering, and we request legislators to support action that would raise the net-metering limit for non-residential customers. Transportation Funding and Devolution We urge legislators to increase state funding for the expansion and maintenance of all modes of our transportation infrastructure, to keep pace with growing public needs and expectations. As the State continues to implement the Smart Scale project prioritization process, adequate funding is critical for important local and regional projects, including those that promote walking and cycling as viable modes of transportation for commuting (not just recreation). We also encourage legislators to support the establishment of a “Smart Scale- type” prioritization for rail and transit projects. We ask our legislators to advocate for an increase in the lane- mileage rates for funding of local street maintenance (primary/urban funds). Easing restrictions on obtaining restricted driver’s licenses We encourage legislation that would allow restricted driver licenses to be issued for as long as a court deems appropriate, and to allow courts to issue restricted licenses when necessary to facilitate the employment, or continued employment of an individual who is otherwise subject to revocation of his or her driver license. 2 Public Safety Firearms--we encourage the General Assembly to consider reasonable firearms regulations in densely populated localities, including expanding the list of urban localities in which the state prohibits individuals from carrying certain loaded semi-automatic rifles and pistols, and certain shotguns, in public places. In densely populated areas, such as Charlottesville and the other localities already listed in this existing state statute, the carrying of such firearms presents special risks and hazards—and the General Assembly has already acknowledged this within 18.2-287.4. We encourage legislation allowing urban localities enhanced authority to regulate the discharge of firearms. Cell Phone Use While Driving--according to the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, and a 2013 study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, distracted driving accounts for 10% of all fatal motor vehicle accidents. Reaching for a phone, checking contacts, and dialing makes an accident three times more likely. Given practical limitations of enforcing Virginia’s “no-texting-while-driving” law we ask legislators to consider enacting a flat ban on drivers using handheld phones (exempting only the use of a GPS device which can be monitored by police). Procurement We oppose any legislative action that would restrict our ability to make local procurement decisions that are best for the citizens we serve. Any erosion of local authority to implement the policies of the Virginia Public Procurement Act, through means tailored at the local level to assure acquisition of the best goods and services at the most competitive rates, is contrary to fiscal responsibility objectives. We ask legislators to continue to support any legislation that would authorize use of preferences by public bodies for goods, services, and construction produced in the locality in which the public body is located, and that would authorize preferences for award of contracts to persons, firms, or corporations having principal places of business in the locality in which the procuring public body is located. We also ask you to support any legislation that would allow localities the ability to procure goods and services by competitive negotiation, in situations where job creation and tax base expansion would be part of a “best value” analysis of competitive proposals. State budget and local Revenues, generally We encourage legislators to improve the process for evaluating local fiscal impacts of proposed legislation. Actions that would impose additional administrative burdens on local governments without sufficient financial resources or administrative flexibility will jeopardize the quality of services delivered at the local level, and will ultimately jeopardize the potential success of state programs and initiatives. We oppose any shift of the cost(s) of state programs to localities, and we oppose any legislative or budgetary action that would remove or reduce any existing sources of local funding (e.g., HB599 funding for law enforcement; diversion of fines, fees and forfeitures relating to violations of local ordinances; etc.). We oppose across-the-board state cuts to education funding. Likewise, we request our legislators to change the manner in which transportation funding is provided to localities; localities should have flexibility to apply transportation funding in a manner that they deem most beneficial to their own communities. Localities should have the right to determine whether allocations of state funding should be spent for maintenance of existing streets or for new construction. Taxing, licensing and regulating internet-based businesses and services We oppose any state legislation that would single out any internet-based businesses and services for special treatment for purposes of local taxation, licensing and regulation. We request our legislators to protect our local ability to regulate businesses on a level playing field, whether they are traditional, electronic, internet-based, virtual, or otherwise. Creating a level playing field for completion among businesses offering goods and 3 services is the best way to ensure safety, reliability, and fair access to goods and services for consumers. The state should not carve out exceptions to business licensing, or local taxes, for special interest groups; in doing so, state legislators would harm traditional local businesses and deprive local governments of stable and reliable sources of revenue. Requests to Legislators for Specific Bills (1) Safety of Public Parks, Public Buildings and other Public Spaces. Authority to Control the Safety of Public Spaces and Buildings. We ask our legislators to sponsor a bill that would create an exception to the restrictions set forth within Virginia Code § 15.2-915 specifically: to authorize municipalities and other local governments to prohibit the possession of firearms (including concealed firearms carried with a permit) and weapons by any individual who is at a meeting conducted by, or on property owned, operated, managed or under the control of the local government. This authority would apply to the grounds of a public park or other similar public place, during times at which entry to that public place is controlled at entrances where law enforcement or security officers are present, and metal detection devices are employed. Notice of any such prohibition would need to be posted on the property during times when the prohibition would be in effect. The state of Tennessee adopted such legislation, which took effect July 1, 2017, see TN ST § 39-17-1359. The availability of this legislatively-delegated authority contributed significantly to the successful management of a rally conducted in Shelbyville, Tennessee in October 2017. Prohibition of certain firearms in Charlottesville. We ask our legislators to sponsor a bill that would add the City of Charlottesville to the list of other urban jurisdictions in which, pursuant to Virginia Code § 18.2-287.4, it is unlawful for any individual to carry a loaded: (a) semi-automatic center-fire rifle or pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material and is equipped at the time of the offense with a magazine that will hold more than 20 rounds of ammunition or designed by the manufacturer to accommodate a silencer or equipped with a folding stock or (b) shotgun with a magazine that will hold more than seven rounds of the longest ammunition for which it is chambered, on or about his person, on any public street, road, alley, sidewalk, public right-of-way, or in any public park or any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public. Prohibition of burning torches in public places, with intent to intimidate. We ask our legislators to sponsor a bill that would make it a crime for an individual to carry a burning torch on any highway or other public place, with the intent of intimidating any person or group of persons. This legislation could be added to Title 18.2 of the Virginia Code, where there already exist similar provisions prohibiting the burning of a cross or other object on public property, and prohibiting the display of a noose on a highway or other public place in a manner having a direct tendency to place another person in reasonable fear or apprehension of death or bodily injury. (2) Authority to make local decisions on Confederate monuments: We ask our legislators to sponsor a bill that would exempt municipalities from the restrictions and requirements of Virginia Code §§ 15.2-1812, for any monuments or memorials erected in such municipality prior to July 1, 1997. Further, we ask the legislators to introduce bills (i) to grant municipalities immunity from suit under the provisions of 15.2-1812.1 as to any such monuments or memorials, and (ii) to clarify that a locality is immune from prosecution for a violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-137 with respect to any monument or memorial owned by such locality. (3) Authority for Members of Governing Bodies to Serve as Members of a Convention and Visitors’ Bureau: We ask our legislators to sponsor a bill that would amend the current provisions of Virginia Code 4 15.2-1535(B), to authorize members of local governing bodies to be named by that governing body to serve as a member of a local convention, visitors’ and/or tourism board, bureau, commission, committee or agency. The City of Charlottesville and County of Albemarle have jointly established the Charlottesville Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau, and the governing bodies of both the City and County desire clarification that they may serve as members of that public body. (4) Speed Cameras: We ask our legislators to sponsor a bill that would enable certain local governments to adopt policies regarding the deployment of automated speed cameras in school zones and residential neighborhoods at no cost to the Commonwealth of Virginia. We have several residential neighborhoods, and school zones, experiencing significant traffic safety hazards due to motorists traveling at speeds well above posted limits—at levels which enhanced enforcement and enhanced penalties have not deterred. 5 This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 20, 2017 Action Required: Direction from Council Presenters: Mike Murphy, Assistant City Manager Staff Contacts: Maurice Jones, City Manager Mike Murphy, Assistant City Manager Alfred Thomas, Chief of Police Brian O’Donnell, Police Lieutenant Charlene Green, Manager Office of Human Rights Title: Citizen Review Board and Charlottesville Police Citizens Advisory Panel Background: In the spring of 2008, the City Manager’s Office, Police Department and City Attorney’s Office examined whether a citizen review initiative (“CRI”) would be appropriate for the City of Charlottesville’s police department, and if so what form it would take. The implementation and appointment of the Citizens Advisory Panel was a product of that process and Council appointed the inaugural panel in October of 2008. It was Council’s belief that the panel would enhance the Police Department’s community relations efforts by providing the Chief of Police with the opportunity to consult on a regular basis with a diverse group of residents and/or business owners on important policing and community issues. In the fall of 2015 Chief Timothy Longo presented to Council on the possibility of changes to the Citizens Advisory Panel. The following options were presented at that time: (1) Direct the Citizen’s Advisory Panel and the Human Rights Commission individually to review the President’s 21st Century Policing Report and use it as a substantive road map to determine how they can work with the Charlottesville Police Department in implementing the recommendations that are set forth, (2) Merge the Citizens Advisory Panel with the Human Rights Commission and provide them with the specific direction set out in above in option 1, or (3) Retain the existing Citizens Advisory Panel and reframe their current responsibilities with a view towards specifically tasking them with a role in police recruitment, selection, retention, training, and enhancing police and community relations or some combination thereof, and further provide them specifically to review the President’s 21st Century Policing Report and use it as a substantive roadman to determine how they can work with the police department in implementing the recommendations that are set forth in the report. No significant changes were made to the structure of the panel prior to Chief Longo’s departure in May 2016 and the Council has not considered this topic on their agenda. Discussion: In 2008 concerns from citizens and Council led to the charge and structure of the current advisory panel. The stated mission on the City of Charlottesville website is: Serves as an advisory group assisting the Police Chief and City Manager in building positive citizen relationships, encouraging widespread police and citizen engagement, and ensuring that issues that arise in the aftermath of a critical event are assessed in a manner that properly balances legitimate policing practices and community values and expectations. Review of police interactions has been considered in the past as a product of the Task Force on Disproportionate Minority Contact in the Juvenile Justice system. Some discussion of citizen review of investigative detentions or “stop and frisks” was considered but not initiated due to training, legal, and privacy concerns. Council has recently received feedback about citizen review of law enforcement after a series of significant community events in 2017. Citizen review has been requested that places emphasis on oversight and accountability. The current CPCAP has made recommendations to Council that are attached. Staff would summarize their recommendation as a request to continue their work, modify their charge, and include citizen review as a component that is necessarily paired with an effort to improve community policing strategies. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This initiative aligns with Strategic Plan Goals 1: An Inclusive Community of Self Sufficient Residents, and 2: A Healthy and Safe City. Budgetary Impact There is currently no budget impact. The current CPCAP has made a budget request that is attached. Resources required will be dependent on the future direction of this initiative. Recommendation: Staff believes that it is time for Council to consider the charge of any panel meant to interact with citizens or review law enforcement actions. Relationship building, community trust, and citizen engagement are as critical today for police as they have ever been. Our community faces many new challenges after the events of the past six months, and some of the concerns raised are not new. Citizens are eager to provide input about a role they can play in reviewing law enforcement activity. Staff agrees that a formal outlet for citizen feedback and education about civilian review structures is warranted. Staff believes a structured review of investigative detentions, use of force incidents, and internal affairs appeals could build community trust in the work of the Charlottesville Police Department. There are a number of legal constraints, liability concerns, privacy issues, and training considerations to be heard by the public and weighed by Council. Staff suggests a process to research best practices, outline possible structures, and engage the public on this topic. Staff requests Council provide direction on next steps. Attachments: CPCAP cover letter CPCAP proposal CPCAP budget and staffing request CPCAP bylaws November​ ​6,​ ​2017 Mike​ ​Signer,​ ​Mayor Wes​ ​Bellamy,​ ​Vice-Mayor Kristin​ ​Szakos,​ ​City​ ​Councilor Kathy​ ​Galvin,​ ​City​ ​Councilor Bob​ ​Fenwick,​ ​City​ ​Councilor Dear​ ​City​ ​Councilors, In​ ​our​ ​letter​ ​dated​ ​October​ ​10,​ ​we​ ​expressed​ ​our​ ​concern​ ​that,​ ​in​ ​its​ ​current​ ​form,​ ​the Charlottesville​ ​Police​ ​Citizens​ ​Advisory​ ​Panel​ ​(CPCAP)​ ​has​ ​not​ ​been​ ​fully​ ​effective​ ​and​ ​that​ ​a change​ ​is​ ​needed.​ ​ ​You​ ​charged​ ​us​ ​with​ ​researching​ ​different​ ​options​ ​and​ ​reporting​ ​our findings.​ ​ ​We’ve​ ​heard​ ​the​ ​concerns​ ​of​ ​citizens,​ ​examined​ ​other​ ​civilian​ ​review​ ​boards​ ​(CRB), and​ ​consulted​ ​with​ ​the​ ​Charlottesville​ ​Commonwealth’s​ ​Attorney​ ​Elect​ ​and​ ​Command​ ​Staff​ ​at the​ ​Charlottesville​ ​Police​ ​Department.​ ​ ​Our​ ​findings​ ​and​ ​recommendations​ ​include​ ​the​ ​following: 1. A​ ​board​ ​focused​ ​solely​ ​on​ ​civilian​ ​review​ ​of​ ​complaints​ ​is​ ​unnecessary​ ​and​ ​will​ ​be counter-productive.​ ​ ​Building​ ​a​ ​more​ ​effective​ ​community-policing​ ​model​ ​will​ ​go​ ​further toward​ ​improving​ ​community​ ​relations​ ​and​ ​building​ ​community​ ​trust.​ ​Implementing​ ​a strict​ ​CRB​ ​will​ ​be​ ​obstructive​ ​to​ ​building​ ​that​ ​model. 2. A​ ​balanced​ ​response​ ​to​ ​the​ ​issues​ ​facing​ ​Charlottesville​ ​is​ ​more​ ​appropriate​ ​and effective​ ​than​ ​a​ ​one-dimensional​ ​solution.​ ​ ​We​ ​will​ ​lose​ ​an​ ​enormous​ ​opportunity​ ​to create​ ​other​ ​positive​ ​solutions​ ​if​ ​we​ ​focus​ ​solely​ ​on​ ​one. 3. A​ ​one-dimensional​ ​solution​ ​will​ ​respond​ ​to​ ​the​ ​concerns​ ​of​ ​some​ ​citizens,​ ​while​ ​failing​ ​to meet​ ​the​ ​needs​ ​of​ ​the​ ​community​ ​as​ ​a​ ​whole. 4. The​ ​CPCAP​ ​is​ ​capable​ ​of​ ​becoming​ ​more​ ​effective​ ​in​ ​its​ ​current​ ​purpose​ ​and​ ​function, while​ ​adding​ ​a​ ​component​ ​of​ ​civilian​ ​review​ ​of​ ​police​ ​actions.​ ​ ​We​ ​are​ ​perfectly​ ​situated to​ ​use​ ​our​ ​history,​ ​and​ ​our​ ​recent​ ​research​ ​and​ ​discussion​ ​to​ ​improve​ ​and​ ​expand​ ​our purpose. There​ ​has​ ​been​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​talk​ ​in​ ​the​ ​community​ ​about​ ​implementing​ ​a​ ​CRB​ ​to​ ​provide​ ​oversight​ ​of the​ ​police​ ​department.​ ​ ​ ​This​ ​issue​ ​has​ ​been​ ​discussed​ ​in​ ​the​ ​community​ ​for​ ​some​ ​time,​ ​going back​ ​at​ ​least​ ​to​ ​July​ ​2015​ ​when​ ​a​ ​group​ ​of​ ​citizens,​ ​including​ ​members​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Disproportionate Minority​ ​Contact​ ​in​ ​Juvenile​ ​Justice​ ​Task​ ​Force​ ​(DMC),​ ​suggested​ ​civilian​ ​oversight​ ​as​ ​one remedy​ ​for​ ​improving​ ​relationships​ ​between​ ​police​ ​and​ ​the​ ​community.​ ​ ​We​ ​agree​ ​that​ ​civilian review​ ​is​ ​a​ ​necessary​ ​component​ ​to​ ​building​ ​and​ ​maintaining​ ​those​ ​relationships.​ ​ ​ ​Our​ ​letter was​ ​prompted​ ​by​ ​that​ ​belief,​ ​but​ ​through​ ​our​ ​research​ ​and​ ​discussions​ ​we’ve​ ​realized​ ​the complex​ ​issues​ ​which​ ​face​ ​our​ ​community​ ​require​ ​a​ ​more​ ​complex​ ​response.​ ​ ​The​ ​Panel​ ​feels that​ ​it​ ​is​ ​poised​ ​to​ ​assist​ ​with​ ​that​ ​response. We​ ​will​ ​assist​ ​the​ ​Chief​ ​in​ ​developing​ ​a​ ​more​ ​robust​ ​community-policing​ ​model​ ​in Charlottesville,​ ​in​ ​addition​ ​to​ ​implementing​ ​civilian​ ​review.​ ​ ​It’s​ ​essential​ ​to​ ​use​ ​civilian​ ​review​ ​in conjunction​ ​with​ ​other​ ​collaborative​ ​strategies​ ​that​ ​engage​ ​the​ ​community​ ​and​ ​police​ ​in dialogue.​ ​ ​This​ ​is​ ​supported​ ​by​ ​the​ ​“Report​ ​from​ ​the​ ​President’s​ ​Task​ ​Force​ ​on​ ​21st​ ​​ ​Century Policing,”​ ​which​ ​details​ ​a​ ​broad​ ​range​ ​of​ ​strategies​ ​for​ ​improving​ ​policing​ ​and​ ​community relations.​ ​ ​This​ ​is​ ​also​ ​supported​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Human​ ​Rights​ ​Commission’s​ ​conversations​ ​with community​ ​members,​ ​in​ ​which​ ​the​ ​primary​ ​concerns​ ​expressed​ ​by​ ​citizens​ ​included​ ​better communication,​ ​as​ ​well​ ​as​ ​increasing​ ​trust,​ ​accountability,​ ​and​ ​transparency.​ ​ ​We​ ​are concerned​ ​that​ ​empanelling​ ​a​ ​group​ ​focused​ ​strictly​ ​on​ ​civilian​ ​review​ ​will​ ​create​ ​an​ ​obstacle​ ​to these​ ​other​ ​strategies,​ ​and​ ​will​ ​narrow​ ​the​ ​scope​ ​of​ ​support​ ​which​ ​city​ ​leadership​ ​should​ ​be offering​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Charlottesville​ ​community. The​ ​Panel​ ​can​ ​see​ ​merit​ ​in​ ​the​ ​criticism​ ​that​ ​a​ ​group​ ​which​ ​is​ ​creating​ ​relationships​ ​between​ ​the police​ ​and​ ​community​ ​will​ ​not​ ​be​ ​viewed​ ​as​ ​impartial.​ ​ ​ ​Critics​ ​suggest​ ​that​ ​in​ ​order​ ​to​ ​have credibility,​ ​civilian​ ​review​ ​must​ ​be​ ​undertaken​ ​independently​ ​from​ ​other​ ​strategies.​ ​However,​ ​this Panel​ ​is​ ​composed​ ​of​ ​a​ ​diverse​ ​group​ ​of​ ​people​ ​who​ ​are​ ​critical​ ​thinkers​ ​and​ ​have​ ​the​ ​ability​ ​to assess​ ​and​ ​review​ ​information,​ ​and​ ​render​ ​fair​ ​decisions.​ ​ ​We​ ​are​ ​capable​ ​of​ ​developing credibility​ ​with​ ​the​ ​community​ ​while​ ​working​ ​collaboratively​ ​with​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department. The​ ​justification​ ​for​ ​creation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​CPCAP​ ​is​ ​no​ ​less​ ​valid​ ​now​ ​than​ ​when​ ​the​ ​group​ ​was formed.​ ​ ​ ​Our​ ​successes​ ​and​ ​failures​ ​in​ ​the​ ​past,​ ​as​ ​well​ ​as​ ​our​ ​research​ ​and​ ​review​ ​of​ ​current issues,​ ​have​ ​created​ ​a​ ​great​ ​deal​ ​of​ ​perspective​ ​on​ ​what​ ​we​ ​can​ ​and​ ​should​ ​do​ ​to​ ​support​ ​the community.​ ​ ​Now​ ​is​ ​the​ ​time​ ​for​ ​us​ ​to​ ​take​ ​these​ ​lessons​ ​and​ ​grow​ ​the​ ​Charlottesville​ ​Police Citizens​ ​Advisory​ ​Panel​ ​to​ ​meet​ ​its​ ​potential.​ ​ ​ ​We​ ​want​ ​to​ ​incorporate​ ​“civilian​ ​review”​ ​as​ ​one part​ ​of​ ​a​ ​strategic​ ​plan,​ ​which​ ​will​ ​fully​ ​support​ ​both​ ​the​ ​citizens​ ​and​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department.​ ​ ​We are​ ​asking​ ​for​ ​your​ ​help​ ​in​ ​achieving​ ​this​ ​and​ ​we​ ​thank​ ​you​ ​for​ ​your​ ​time​ ​and​ ​consideration. Sincerely, Charlottesville​ ​Police​ ​Citizens​ ​Advisory​ ​Panel David​ ​Simmons,​ ​Chair Heather​ ​Walker,​ ​Member Mary​ ​Feamster,​ ​Member Nick​ ​Matthews,​ ​Member Nana​ ​Ghartey,​ ​Member Ida​ ​Lewis,​ ​Member Tara​ ​Hodges,​ ​Member Charlottesville​ ​Police​ ​Citizen​ Advisory ​ ​ Panel ​ Increasing​ ​Panel​ ​Effectiveness​ ​and​ ​Building​ ​Trust​ ​Between​ ​the Charlottesville​ ​Community​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Police​ ​Department I. ​ ​In​ ​addition​ ​to​ ​its​ ​current​ ​functions,​ ​CPCAP​ ​will​ ​work​ ​with​ ​the​ ​CPD​ ​to​ ​incorporate a​ ​civilian​ ​review​ ​process​ ​into​ ​current​ ​police​ ​procedures,​ ​building​ ​a​ ​culture​ ​of transparency​ ​and​ ​accountability​ ​within​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department.​ ​ To ​ ​ ​this​ ​end​ ​the Panel​ ​will: A.​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​Develop​ ​a​ ​“Civilian​ ​Review​ ​Committee” The​ Committee ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​consist​ of ​ ​ two ​ ​ (2) ​ ​ Members ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ CPCAP ​ ​ and ​ ​ will ​ ​ work ​ ​ in ​ conjunction​ with ​ ​ two ​ ​ ​(2)​ Members ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Human ​ ​ Rights ​ ​ Commission. ​ ​ ​ It ​ ​ will ​ ​ include ​ three​ (3) ​ ​ non-voting, ​ ​ advisory ​ ​ members: ​ ​ ​ the​ ​ Manager ​ ​ of​ ​ the ​ ​ Office ​ ​ of ​ ​ Human ​ Rights,​ as ​ ​ well ​ ​ ​as​ ​a​ ​liaison​ ​from​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department​ ​and​ ​the​ ​office​ of ​ ​ the ​ Commonwealth’s​ Attorney. ​ ​ ​ Its ​ ​ function ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​be​ ​to​ ​review​ ​investigative​ ​detention data,​ ​incidents​ ​of​ use ​ ​ of ​ ​ force, ​ ​ and ​ ​ civilian ​ ​ complaints. ​ Committee​ Members ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​receive​ the ​ ​ appropriate ​ ​ training ​ ​ and ​ ​ credentials ​ ​ in ​ ​ order ​ to​ ​access​ and ​ ​ evaluate ​ ​ ​privileged​ information. ​ ​ ​ The ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of ​ ​ Police ​ ​ or ​ ​ his ​ ​ designee ​ will​ ​assist​ ​CPCAP​ ​in​ ​developing​ ​departmental​ ​procedures​ to ​ ​ create ​ ​ an ​ ​ effective ​ ​ and ​ cooperative​ complaint ​ ​ ​review​ process, ​ ​ and ​ ​ will ​ ​ advise ​ ​ committee ​ ​ operations ​ ​ so ​ ​ that ​ they​ ​are​ ​legal,​ ​informed,​ and ​ ​ supportive ​ ​ of​ ​ necessary ​ ​ policing ​ ​ practices. ​ B.​ ​ ​ ​ ​Implement​ ​a​ ​review​ ​protocol​ ​in​ ​conjunction​ ​with​ ​the​ ​current​ ​procedure for​ ​citizen​ ​complaints The​ Committee ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​review​ any ​ ​ complaints, ​ ​ ​which​ ​are​ ​appealed​ ​by​ ​the​ ​complainant, after​ a​ ​ thorough ​ ​ internal ​ ​ review ​ ​ has ​ ​ been ​ ​ completed ​ ​ by ​ ​ the ​ ​ police ​ ​ department. ​ ​ ​ ​ It ​ will​ ​also​ ​conduct​ ​a​ ​quarterly​ ​review​ ​of​ ​all​ ​complaints​ ​submitted​ ​to​ ​the​ ​department and​ produce ​ ​ a​ ​ written ​ ​ report ​ ​ on ​ ​ its ​ ​ findings ​ ​ to ​ ​ submit ​ ​ to ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council. ​ As​ part ​ ​ of ​ ​ his ​ ​ written ​ ​ response ​ ​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ complainant, ​ ​ the ​ ​ Chief​ ​ will ​ ​ notify ​ ​ them ​ ​ of: ​ ​ ​ 1)​ the​ result ​ ​ of ​ ​ his ​ ​ investigation; ​ ​ 2)​ ​ his ​ ​ determination; ​ ​ ​ and ​ ​ 3) ​ ​ the​ ​ complainant’s ​ ​ right ​ to​ ​appeal​ ​his​ ​decision​ to ​ ​ CPCAP. ​ ​ ​ ​ Committee ​ ​ procedures ​ ​ from ​ ​ this ​ ​ point ​ ​ will ​ ​ require ​ more​ clarification, ​ ​ ​ with ​ ​ input ​ ​ from ​ ​ the ​ ​ Chief, ​ ​ City ​ ​ Attorney, ​ ​ and ​ ​ Commonwealth’s ​ Attorney​ to ​ ​ ensure ​ ​ that ​ ​ suitable ​ ​ ​safeguards​ ​are​ ​in​ ​place​ ​to​ ​address​ legal ​ ​ ​and​ ​privacy concerns.​ ​ The ​ ​ committee ​ ​ will ​ ​ also ​ ​ work ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ Human ​ ​ Rights ​ ​ Commission ​ ​ in​ order​ to ​ ​ identify ​ ​ barriers ​ ​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ complaint ​ ​ process ​ ​ and ​ ​ assist ​ ​ in ​ ​ finding ​ ​ solutions ​ which​ remove ​ ​ them. ​ C.​ ​ ​ ​ ​Develop​ ​procedures​ ​for​ ​reviewing​ ​investigative​ ​detention​ ​reports The​ Chief ​ ​ or ​ ​ his ​ ​ designee ​ ​ will ​ ​ work ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ committee ​ ​ to ​ ​ begin ​ ​ review ​ ​ of​ ​ all ​ investigative​ ​detentions,​ ​so​ that ​ ​ ​it​ ​can​ ​assist​ ​in​ ​increasing​ transparency ​ ​ and ​ accountability​ ​within​ ​the​ ​department.​ ​ ​This​ ​will​ ​help​ ​the​ ​department​ ​to​ ​develop training,​ ​ ​policies,​ ​and​ ​practices​ ​which​ ​are​ ​supportive​ of ​ ​ bias-free ​ ​ policing. ​ D.​ ​ ​ ​ ​Assist​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department​ ​in​ ​evaluating​ ​use-of-force​ ​incidents The​ Chief ​ ​ or ​ ​ his ​ ​ designee ​ ​ will ​ ​ work ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ committee ​ ​ to ​ ​ review ​ ​ all ​ ​ use ​ ​ of​ ​ force ​ investigations.​ ​ The ​ ​ committee ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​ensure​ that​ ​ ​all​ ​use​ ​of​ ​force​ ​incidents​ are ​ compliant​ ​with​ ​existing​ ​laws​ ​and​ ​departmental​ ​policies​ ​,​ ​so​ ​that​ ​future​ ​interactions with​ the ​ ​ community ​ ​ are ​ ​ safer ​ ​ for ​ ​ citizens ​ ​ and ​ ​ police ​ ​ officers. ​ II. The​ ​Panel​ ​requests​ ​the​ ​following​ ​from​ ​City​ ​Council,​ ​in​ ​order​ ​to​ ​develop​ ​its potential​ ​and​ ​implement​ ​civilian​ ​review: A.​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​More​ ​visibility​ ​within​ ​the​ ​community The​ Panel ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​develop​ ​and​ ​maintain​ ​ ​its​ ​own​ ​website​ ​or​ ​Facebook​ ​page​ ​in​ ​order​ to ​ have​ autonomy ​ ​ in ​ ​ disseminating ​ ​ information ​ ​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ community. ​ ​ ​ ​ It ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​also produce​ written ​ ​ literature, ​ ​ to ​ ​ be ​ ​ included ​ ​ in ​ ​ the ​ ​ water ​ ​ bill ​ ​ ​or​ similar, ​ ​ in ​ ​ order ​ ​ to ​ advise​ every ​ ​ resident ​ ​ of ​ ​ its ​ ​ purpose ​ ​ and ​ ​ function. ​ ​ ​B.​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​Administrative​ ​staff​ ​support The​ Panel ​ ​ requests ​ ​ that​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager ​ ​ ​include​ ​funding​ ​in​ ​the​ ​budget​ ​for​ staff ​ support,​ which ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​act​ ​as​ ​liaison​ ​to​ ​the​ ​City​ ​Manager,​ ​City​ ​Council,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Police Department.​ ​ Staff ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​also:​ ​1)​ ​perform​ administrative ​ ​ tasks, ​ ​ ​for​ which ​ ​ the ​ all-volunteer​ ​Panel​ ​does​ ​not​ ​have​ ​the​ ​resources;​ 2) ​ ​ maintain ​ ​ website ​ ​ or ​ ​ Facebook ​ page,​ in ​ ​ order ​ ​ to ​ ​ facilitate ​ ​ FOIA ​ ​ requirements ​ ​ and ​ ​ increase ​ ​ communication ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ community;​ and ​ ​ 3) ​ ​ work ​ ​ closely ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ ​Chair​ to ​ ​ perform ​ ​ all ​ ​ other ​ ​ tasks ​ necessary​ in ​ ​ order ​ ​ to​ ​ facilitate ​ ​ the ​ ​ mission ​ ​ and ​ ​ purpose ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel.​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ More​ ​ C.​ ​ ​input​ ​on​ ​the​ ​appointment​ ​of​ ​members​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Panel Candidates’​ names ​ ​ and ​ ​ contact ​ ​ ​information​ will ​ ​ ​be​ ​provided​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ Chair ​ ​ by ​ the​ Clerk ​ ​ of ​ ​ Council ​ ​ so ​ ​ that​ ​ candidates ​ ​ can ​ ​ be​ ​ invited ​ ​ to ​ ​ a​ ​ regular ​ ​ meeting ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ Panel.​ ​ ​ ​ ​The​ Panel ​ ​ ​and​ ​candidates​ ​will​ ​discuss​ ​mutual​ ​expectations​ ​in​ ​order​ ​to ensure​ that ​ ​ all ​ ​ ​candidates​ ​are​ ​willing​ ​and​ ​able​ ​to​ ​serve.​ ​ ​ ​Each​ ​new​ ​Member​ ​will​ ​be reviewed​ by ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ on ​ ​ or ​ ​ around ​ ​ the ​ ​ anniversary ​ ​ of ​ ​ their ​ ​ appointment, ​ ​ the ​ results​ of ​ ​ which ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​be​ ​provided​ to ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council. ​ ​ ​D.​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​Increased​ ​engagement​ ​from​ ​the​ ​City​ ​Council​ ​Liaison The​ Liaison ​ ​ will ​ ​ assist ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ ​in​ ​receiving​ timely ​ ​ support ​ ​ from ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council ​ ​ and ​ feedback​ when ​ ​ necessary, ​ ​ as ​ ​ well ​ ​ as ​ ​ assist ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel​ ​ ​in​ ​determining​ community ​ needs​ and ​ ​ Council ​ ​ response ​ ​ to ​ ​ those ​ ​ needs. ​ ​ ​ This ​ ​ will ​ ​ be ​ ​ most ​ ​ effectively ​ accomplished​ by ​ ​ consistent ​ ​ attendance ​ ​ at ​ ​ ​CPCAP​ meetings. ​ E.​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​Assistance​ ​in​ ​defining​ ​the​ ​Panel’s​ ​role​ ​in​ ​the​ ​civilian​ ​review​ ​process The​ Panel ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​work​ ​with​ ​City​ ​Council,​ ​the​ ​City​ ​Manager,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Chief​ ​of​ Police ​ ​ in ​ order​ to ​ ​ create ​ ​ an ​ ​ effective ​ ​ framework ​ ​ for ​ ​ the ​ ​ complaint ​ ​ review ​ ​ process. ​ ​ ​ ​ It ​ ​ is ​ ​ the ​ goal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Panel​ ​to​ ​provide​ a​ ​ resource ​ ​ for ​ ​ community ​ ​ members ​ ​ to ​ ​ have ​ ​ their ​ complaints​ ​addressed,​ and ​ ​ to ​ ​ provide ​ ​ feedback ​ ​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ police ​ ​ department ​ ​ in ​ ​ a​ constructive​ and ​ ​ collaborative ​ ​ ​manner. III. In​ ​addition​ ​to​ ​developing​ ​complaint​ ​review,​ ​the​ ​Panel​ ​requests​ ​the​ ​following from​ ​the​ ​Chief​ ​of​ ​Police,​ ​in​ ​order​ ​to​ ​develop​ ​its​ ​potential: A.​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​Practical​ ​and​ ​timely​ ​training As​ ​soon​ as ​ ​ possible ​ ​ after ​ ​ their ​ ​ appointment, ​ ​ all ​ ​ ​new​ ​Panel​ ​Members​ ​will​ ​receive​ ​a suggested​ ​minimum​ ​of​ ​ Citizens ​ ​ Police ​ ​ Academy ​ ​ (four-week ​ ​ abbreviated ​ ​ version), ​ DOJ​ ​Fourth​ Amendment ​ ​ training, ​ ​ and ​ ​ consistent ​ ​ Ride-Alongs. ​ ​ Review ​ ​ Committee ​ Members​ ​will​ ​receive​ other ​ ​ trainings ​ ​ relevant ​ ​ to ​ ​ law ​ ​ ​enforcement​ and ​ ​ case ​ ​ review, ​ to​ ​include: 1. legal​ ​and​ ​evidentiary​ ​standards; 2. criminal​ law; ​ 3. ​ investigative ​ ​ practices; ​ 4. fair​ and ​ ​ impartial ​ ​ ​policing The​ Chief ​ ​ of ​ ​ Police, ​ ​ City ​ ​ Attorney, ​ ​ and ​ ​ Commonwealth ​ ​ Attorney ​ ​ will ​ ​ assist ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ development​ ​of​ an ​ ​ appropriate ​ ​ “curriculum,” ​ ​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Chief​ of ​ ​ Police ​ ​ or​ ​ his ​ ​ designee ​ will​ ​be​ ​responsible​ ​for​ scheduling ​ ​ all ​ ​ ​trainings​ ​in​ ​a​ ​timely​ ​manner. B.​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​Critical​ ​Incident​ ​Planning The​ Panel ​ ​ ​Chair​ will ​ ​ ​be​ ​included​ ​in​ ​the​ ​chain​ ​of​ communication ​ ​ from ​ ​ the​ ​ Chief ​ ​ when ​ critical​ ​incidents​ occur. ​ ​ ​ Information ​ ​ provided ​ ​ by ​ ​ the ​ ​ Chief​ ​ will ​ ​ allow ​ ​ the​ ​ Panel ​ ​ to ​ more​ effectively ​ ​ address ​ ​ community ​ ​ concerns ​ ​ after ​ ​ incidents. ​ ​ ​ ​ The ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ will ​ ​ work ​ with​ ​the​ ​Chief​ in ​ ​ developing ​ ​ procedures ​ ​ to ​ ​ increase ​ ​ effectiveness ​ ​ for ​ ​ future ​ incidents,​ based ​ ​ on​ ​ community ​ ​ feedback. ​ C.​ ​ ​ ​ ​Consistent,​ ​open​ ​communication​ ​on​ ​community​ ​and​ ​departmental​ ​issues The​ Panel ​ ​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Chief,​ or ​ ​ his​ ​ designee, ​ ​ will ​ ​ identify ​ ​ needs ​ ​ in ​ ​ the​ ​ community ​ ​ and ​ within​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department.​ ​ ​They​ will ​ ​ ​seek​ ​solutions​ ​which​ ​focus​ ​on: 1. facilitating​ ​communication​ ​between​ ​the​ ​public​ ​and​ ​the​ ​department; 2. improving​ the ​ ​ manner ​ ​ in ​ ​ which ​ ​ the ​ ​ department ​ ​ offers ​ ​ services; ​ 3. reviewing​ policies ​ ​ to ​ ​ ensure ​ ​ they ​ ​ satisfy ​ ​ the ​ ​ rule ​ ​ of ​ ​ law, ​ ​ while ​ ​ also ​ responding​ directly​ ​ to ​ ​ identified ​ ​ community ​ ​ needs ​ ​ and ​ ​ concerns; ​ 4. increasing​ the ​ ​ public ​ ​ ​trust​ ​in​ ​the​ ​fair​ application ​ ​ ​of​ ​procedural​ justice. ​ Staffing​ ​and​ ​Budget​ ​Recommendations It’s​ ​difficult​ ​to​ ​predict​ ​the​ ​degree​ ​of​ ​staff​ ​support​ ​the​ ​Panel​ ​will​ ​require​ ​going​ ​forward,​ ​and​ ​we recognize​ ​it​ ​may​ ​be​ ​problematic​ ​to​ ​provide​ ​staff​ ​from​ ​the​ ​current​ ​pool​ ​of​ ​employees​ ​in​ ​the​ ​police department​ ​or​ ​in​ ​City​ ​Hall.​ ​ ​All​ ​current​ ​employees​ ​have​ ​their​ ​own​ ​tasks​ ​and​ ​are​ ​probably over-extended​ ​as​ ​it​ ​is.​ ​ ​This​ ​is​ ​particularly​ ​true​ ​of​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department,​ ​where​ ​they​ ​are currently​ ​without​ ​a​ ​Public​ ​Information​ ​Officer,​ ​and​ ​where​ ​their​ ​Internal​ ​Affairs​ ​Officer​ ​is​ ​also acting​ ​as​ ​the​ ​FOIA​ ​Officer.​ ​ ​She​ ​is​ ​currently​ ​several​ ​months​ ​behind​ ​on​ ​FOIA​ ​requests​ ​as​ ​a result. It’s​ ​the​ ​suggestion​ ​of​ ​this​ ​Panel​ ​that​ ​city​ ​leadership​ ​include​ ​funding​ ​in​ ​its​ ​budget,​ ​for​ ​a​ ​full-time Public​ ​Information​ ​Officer​ ​at​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department.​ ​ ​This​ ​person​ ​would​ ​be​ ​available​ ​to​ ​act​ ​as PIO,​ ​assist​ ​in​ ​fulfilling​ ​FOIA​ ​requests,​ ​and​ ​act​ ​as​ ​support​ ​staff​ ​for​ ​the​ ​CPCAP.​ ​ ​We​ ​recommend that​ ​25%​ ​of​ ​their​ ​work​ ​week​ ​be​ ​allocated​ ​to​ ​CPCAP​ ​support.​ ​ ​ ​This​ ​would​ ​dramatically​ ​improve the​ ​police​ ​department’s​ ​communication​ ​and​ ​responsiveness​ ​to​ ​the​ ​public,​ ​as​ ​well​ ​as​ ​providing support​ ​staff​ ​to​ ​assist​ ​the​ ​Panel​ ​with​ ​implementing​ ​civilian​ ​complaint​ ​review​ ​and​ ​enhancing​ ​its other​ ​functions.​ ​ ​These​ ​are​ ​things​ ​which​ ​the​ ​community​ ​has​ ​asked​ ​for​ ​repeatedly,​ ​and​ ​in​ ​light​ ​of current​ ​events​ ​is​ ​drastically​ ​needed.​ ​ ​ ​The​ ​Assistant​ ​City​ ​Manager​ ​has​ ​offered​ ​staffing​ ​to​ ​the Panel​ ​as​ ​a​ ​short​ ​term​ ​solution,​ ​but​ ​we​ ​feel​ ​that​ ​a​ ​long​ ​term​ ​solution​ ​would​ ​be​ ​more​ ​appropriate and​ ​funding​ ​a​ ​full-time​ ​position​ ​at​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department​ ​would​ ​serve​ ​several​ ​objectives. Additionally,​ ​the​ ​Panel​ ​is​ ​recommending​ ​that​ ​it​ ​receive​ ​a​ ​small​ ​budget​ ​of​ ​its​ ​own,​ ​in​ ​order​ ​to fulfill​ ​its​ ​purpose​ ​and​ ​function.​ ​ ​This​ ​would​ ​support​ ​several​ ​initiatives:​ ​1)​ ​ ​increasing​ ​community engagement;​ ​2)​ ​increasing​ ​visibility​ ​in​ ​the​ ​community;​ ​ ​and​ ​3)​ ​creating​ ​a​ ​responsive​ ​and credible​ ​review​ ​process​ ​through​ ​training​ ​and​ ​continuing​ ​education. Category Amount Community​ ​Events​ ​ ​ ​(4​ ​annually) $4000 Parking $500 Printing $1,000 Office​ ​Supplies $500 Postage $1000 Training $5,000 $12,000 BYLAWS ARTICLE​ ​I​ ​–​ N ​ AME​ ​AND​ ​AUTHORIZATION NAME The​ name ​ ​ as ​ ​ ​provided​ by ​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ of ​ ​ Charlottesville, ​ ​ Virginia, ​ ​ shall ​ ​ be ​ ​ ​known​ ​as​ ​the Charlottesville​ ​Police​ ​Citizen​ Advisory ​ ​ Panel, ​ ​ hereinafter ​ ​ referred ​ ​ to ​ ​ as ​ ​ “the ​ ​ Panel.” ​ AUTHORIZATION The​ Panel ​ ​ ​exists​ ​by​ ​the​ ​authority​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Charlottesville​ ​City​ ​Council​ ​and​ ​may​ ​be modified​ or ​ ​ abolished ​ ​ by ​ ​ action ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Charlottesville ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council. ​ ARTICLE​ ​II​ ​–​ ​PURPOSE​ ​AND​ ​FUNCTION PURPOSE The​ Panel ​ ​ ​shall​ ​serve​ ​as​ ​an​ ​advisory​ ​group​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Charlottesville​ ​Chief​ ​of​ ​Police,​ ​City Council,​ ​and​ ​City​ ​Manager.​ ​ ​ ​It​ ​will​ ​provide​ ​the​ ​opportunity​ ​for​ ​regular​ ​consultation regarding​ important ​ ​ ​community​ ​issues​ and ​ ​ police ​ ​ practices, ​ ​ so ​ ​ that ​ ​ ​the​ ​quality​ ​of police​ ​services​ can ​ ​ be ​ ​ assessed ​ ​ in ​ ​ an ​ ​ impartial ​ ​ manner. ​ ​ ​ ​It​ ​will​ ​provide​ ​the department​ ​with​ ​a​ ​resource​ ​for​ engaging ​ ​ ​the​ ​community​ ​in​ ​dialogue​ ​and​ ​will​ ​assist in​ ​facilitating​ ​mutual​ ​understanding​ ​with​ ​citizens.​ ​ ​ ​ ​The​ ​Panel​ ​will​ ​also​ ​assist​ ​the Chief​ of​ ​ Police ​ ​ in ​ ​ increasing ​ ​ transparency ​ ​ within ​ ​ the ​ ​ department ​ ​ and ​ ​ building ​ ​ ​trust between​ ​the​ ​department​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Charlottesville​ ​community. FUNCTION 1. Identify​ community ​ ​ ​concerns​ and ​ ​ address ​ ​ them ​ ​ in ​ ​ a​ ​ manner ​ ​ which ​ ​ is ​ mutually​ ​supportive​ ​and​ ​builds​ ​positive​ ​relationships​ ​between​ ​the community​ ​and​ ​Charlottesville​ ​Police​ ​Department,​ ​City​ ​Council,​ ​and​ ​City Manager.​ ​ ​It​ ​will​ ​achieve​ ​this​ ​by: a. working​ ​closely​ ​with​ ​individual​ ​citizens​ ​and​ ​citizen​ ​groups​ ​to understand​ their ​ ​ concerns; ​ b. developing​ ​methods​ to ​ ​ offer ​ ​ constructive ​ ​ feedback ​ ​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ police ​ department​ ​and​ ​city​ ​leadership​ ​team;​ ​ ​and c. communicating​ ​back​ ​to​ ​the​ ​community​ ​how​ ​those​ ​concerns​ ​are​ ​being addressed. 2. Assist​ the ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of ​ ​ Police ​ ​ in ​ ​ fostering ​ ​ a​ ​ culture ​ ​ of ​ ​ transparency ​ ​ and ​ accountability​ ​within​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department,​ ​thereby​ ​building​ ​and maintaining​ ​the​ ​public​ ​trust.​ ​ ​It​ ​will​ ​achieve​ ​this​ ​by​ ​providing​ ​him/her​ ​with an​ ​independent​ ​resource​ which ​ ​ evaluates ​ ​ and ​ ​ ​ensures​ impartiality ​ ​ ​in​ ​police practices. 3. Ensure​ that​ ​ ​community​ ​issues​ ​and​ ​police​ ​practices​ ​are​ ​assessed​ in ​ ​ a​ ​ manner ​ which​ properly ​ ​ balances ​ ​ ​the​ ​rule​ ​of​ ​law​ ​with​ ​community​ ​values​ ​and expectations.​ ​The​ ​Panel​ ​will​ ​act​ ​as​ ​a​ ​liaison​ ​between​ ​the​ ​community​ ​and​ ​the police,​ ​increasing​ open ​ ​ communication ​ ​ ​between​ ​the​ ​two. 4. Assist​ citizens ​ ​ in ​ ​ understanding ​ ​ police ​ ​ behavior ​ ​ and ​ ​ protocols, ​ ​ in ​ ​ order ​ ​ to​ develop​ ​relationships​ between ​ ​ the ​ ​ community ​ ​ and​ ​ police ​ ​ department ​ ​ which ​ are​ ​informed​ by ​ ​ factual ​ ​ and ​ ​ accurate ​ ​ information. ​ 5. Provide​ a​ ​ supportive ​ ​ and ​ ​ collaborative ​ ​ process ​ ​ which ​ ​ will ​ ​ assist ​ ​ the ​ department​ ​in​ ​further​ developing ​ ​ a​ ​ community-policing ​ ​ model ​ ​ in​ Charlottesville.​ ​ ​This​ will ​ ​ ​be​ ​accomplished​ by: ​ a. developing​ ​relationships​ with ​ ​ officers ​ ​ within ​ ​ the ​ ​ department ​ ​ in ​ ​ order ​ to​ ​determine​ what ​ ​ they ​ ​ need ​ ​ from ​ ​ the ​ ​ community; ​ b. constructively​ ​relaying​ ​community​ ​feedback​ ​to​ ​officers​ so ​ ​ they ​ ​ can ​ understand​ community ​ ​ needs; ​ c. developing​ ways ​ ​ in ​ ​ which ​ ​ officers ​ ​ and ​ ​ citizens ​ ​ can​ ​ work ​ ​ together ​ ​ to ​ bridge​ gaps ​ ​ in ​ ​ their ​ ​ communication ​ ​ and ​ ​ interaction; ​ ​ and ​ d. assisting​ the ​ ​ department ​ ​ to ​ ​ engage ​ ​ the ​ ​ community ​ ​ in ​ ​ conversations, ​ which​ build ​ ​ ​rapport​ ​between​ ​officers​ and ​ ​ the ​ ​ neighborhoods ​ ​ they ​ serve. 6. Assist​ the​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of ​ ​ Police ​ ​ in ​ ​ assessing ​ ​ critical ​ ​ incidents ​ ​ and ​ ​ provide ​ community​ feedback ​ ​ in ​ ​ a​ ​ manner ​ ​ which ​ ​ improves ​ ​ the ​ ​ police ​ ​ response ​ ​ to ​ future​ events.​ ​ ​ This ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​be​ ​accomplished​ by ​ ​ being ​ ​ involved ​ ​ in ​ ​ the ​ ​ chain ​ ​ of ​ communication​ during ​ ​ incidents, ​ ​ gauging ​ ​ ​citizen​ response, ​ ​ and ​ ​ relaying ​ ​ that ​ information​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ as ​ ​ part ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ police ​ ​ debriefing ​ ​ process. ​ 7. Assist​ the ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of ​ ​ Police ​ ​ in ​ ​ providing ​ ​ an ​ ​ independent ​ ​ civilian ​ ​ review ​ ​ process ​ which​ assesses ​ ​ police ​ ​ behavior ​ ​ and ​ ​ practices. ​ ​ ​ This ​ ​ will​ ​ be​ ​ accomplished ​ ​ by​ developing​ and ​ ​ maintaining ​ ​ ​a​ ​committee​ ​within​ ​the​ ​Panel,​ ​whose​ ​function​ ​is to​ work ​ ​ cooperatively ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ department ​ ​ on ​ ​ the ​ ​ following: ​ a. providing​ review ​ ​ of ​ ​ citizen ​ ​ complaints; ​ b. evaluating​ ​incidents​ ​involving​ ​use​ ​of​ ​force;​ and ​ c. assessing​ police ​ ​ practices, ​ ​ such ​ ​ as​ ​ investigative ​ ​ detention, ​ ​ in ​ ​ order ​ ​ to ​ improve​ their ​ ​ effectiveness ​ ​ and ​ ​ to ​ ​ build ​ ​ public ​ ​ trust ​ ​ in ​ ​ the ​ ​ fair ​ application​ ​of​ ​these​ ​practices. d. The​ Panel ​ ​ may ​ ​ also ​ ​ offer ​ ​ recommendations ​ ​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of​ ​ Police ​ regarding​ departmental ​ ​ ​policies​ and ​ ​ officer ​ ​ training, ​ ​ based ​ ​ on ​ ​ the ​ results​ ​of​ the ​ ​ independent ​ ​ review ​ ​ process. ​ ARTICLE​ ​III​ ​–​ ​MEMBERSHIP MEMBERS The​ Charlottesville ​ ​ Police ​ ​ Citizen ​ ​ Advisory ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ shall ​ ​ be ​ ​ composed ​ ​ of​ ​ nine ​ members​ appointed ​ ​ by ​ ​ the​ ​ Charlottesville ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council ​ ​ or ​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager, ​ ​ based ​ ​ on ​ qualifications​ ​and​ ​willingness​ ​to​ ​serve.​ ​ The ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ shall ​ ​ ​be​ a​ ​ ​diverse​ group ​ ​ of ​ citizens​ and ​ ​ represent ​ ​ a​ ​ cross-section ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ community. ​ ​ ​ No​ ​ one ​ ​ may ​ ​ be ​ ​ denied ​ membership​ based ​ ​ on​ ​ race, ​ ​ creed, ​ ​ national ​ ​ origin, ​ ​ age, ​ ​ gender, ​ ​ or ​ ​ presence ​ ​ of ​ disability. The​ Panel ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​be​ ​advised​ by ​ ​ several ​ ​ non-voting ​ ​ members, ​ ​ to ​ ​ include ​ ​ at ​ ​ least ​ ​ ​one person​ from ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council, ​ ​ the ​ ​ Human ​ ​ Rights ​ ​ Commission, ​ ​ and ​ ​ the ​ ​ Police ​ Department.​ ​The​ function ​ ​ of ​ ​ these ​ ​ advisors ​ ​ will ​ ​ be ​ ​ to​ ​ act ​ ​ as ​ ​ a​ ​ liaison​ ​ and ​ ​ assist ​ ​ the ​ Panel​ ​in​ ​understanding​ ​policies​ ​and​ ​procedures,​ as ​ ​ well ​ ​ as ​ ​ to ​ ​ provide ​ ​ perspective ​ and​ ​networking​ ​from​ their ​ ​ respective ​ ​ groups. ​ ​ ​ Further, ​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council ​ ​ Liaison ​ ​ will ​ actively​ engage ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ ​to: 1. receive​ timely ​ ​ support ​ ​ from, ​ ​ and ​ ​ offer ​ ​ feedback ​ ​ to ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council, ​ ​ ​ when ​ necessary. 2. assist​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ ​in​ ​fully​ ​understanding​ ​community​ ​needs​ ​as​ ​they​ ​understand them​ ​and​ ​informing​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ of ​ ​ City​ ​ Council’s ​ ​ response ​ ​ to ​ ​ those ​ ​ needs. ​ APPOINTMENTS Members​ ​shall​ ​initially​ ​be​ ​appointed​ ​to​ ​a​ ​three-year​ ​term,​ ​and​ ​shall​ ​not​ ​serve​ ​more than​ ​two​ ​full,​ ​consecutive​ ​terms.​ ​ ​ ​Appointments​ ​may​ ​be​ ​made​ ​by​ ​either​ ​City​ ​Council or​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager. ​ A​ ​Member’s​ ​position​ ​shall​ ​become​ ​vacant​ ​on​ ​the​ ​occurrence​ ​of​ any ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ following: ​ 1. The​ expiration ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Member’s ​ ​ term ​ 2. The​ removal ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Member ​ ​ by ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council ​ ​ or ​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager ​ 3. The​ receipt ​ ​ of ​ ​ a​ ​ Member’s ​ ​ resignation ​ ​ by ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ Chair ​ It​ ​is​ ​the​ ​responsibility​ ​of​ City ​ ​ Council ​ ​ or ​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager ​ ​ to ​ ​ ensure ​ ​ an ​ ​ appointment ​ is​ ​made​ ​within​ ​forty-five​ (45) ​ ​ days ​ ​ of ​ ​ notification ​ ​ of ​ ​ a​ ​ vacancy. ​ ​ ​ If ​ ​ an ​ ​ appointment ​ ​ is ​ not​ ​made​ ​within​ ​45​ days, ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ ​shall​ ​have​ ​the​ ​authority​ ​to​ ​request​ ​an appointment​ ​to​ ​be​ ​placed​ ​on​ ​the​ ​agenda​ ​for​ ​the​ ​next​ ​available​ ​Council​ ​meeting. Appointment​ ​procedures: 1. The​ Panel ​ ​ will​ ​ ​advise​ ​the​ ​City​ ​Manager,​ ​City​ ​Council,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Clerk​ ​of​ ​Council that​ ​there​ ​is​ ​a​ ​vacancy,​ ​or​ imminent ​ ​ vacancy, ​ ​ on ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel. ​ 2. The​ Clerk ​ ​ of​ ​ Council ​ ​ will ​ ​ forward ​ ​ the ​ ​ names ​ ​ and ​ ​ contact ​ ​ information ​ ​ of ​ ​ all ​ current​ ​candidates​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Panel​ ​Chair. 3. The​ Chair​ ​ will ​ ​ invite ​ ​ all ​ ​ ​candidates​ ​to​ ​the​ ​next​ ​scheduled​ ​meeting​ ​so​ that ​ ​ ​they may​ ​discuss​ mutual ​ ​ ​expectations​ ​and​ ​ensure​ the ​ ​ candidate’s​ ​ ability ​ ​ ​and desire​ to ​ ​ meet ​ ​ the​ ​ time ​ ​ commitment ​ ​ required ​ ​ of ​ ​ members. ​ 4. The​ Chair ​ ​ will ​ ​ follow ​ ​ up ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager ​ ​ ​and​ ​City​ ​Council​ ​about​ ​which candidates​ ​are​ ​willing​ ​to​ ​serve. EXPECTATIONS All​ ​Panel​ ​Members​ ​will​ ​be​ ​advised​ ​of​ ​the​ ​meeting​ ​schedule​ ​prior​ to ​ ​ appointment. ​ Acceptance​ ​of​ their ​ ​ appointment ​ ​ is​ ​ an ​ ​ agreement ​ ​ to ​ ​ meet ​ ​ those ​ ​ scheduling ​ requirements.​ ​ ​ ​ All ​ ​ absences ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​be​ ​duly​ ​recorded​ in ​ ​ the​ ​ minutes ​ ​ and ​ ​ any ​ ​ Member ​ who​ ​is​ ​absent​ ​for​ more ​ ​ than ​ ​ two ​ ​ regularly-scheduled ​ ​ meetings ​ ​ may ​ ​ be ​ ​ removed ​ from​ the ​ ​ Panel, ​ ​ upon ​ ​ request ​ ​ from ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ Chair ​ ​ to ​ ​ the​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager. ​ ​ ​ Absences ​ from​ emergency ​ ​ or ​ ​ specially-convened ​ ​ meetings ​ ​ will ​ ​ not ​ ​ count ​ ​ against ​ ​ the​ ​ Member. ​ ARTICLE​ ​IV​ ​-​ ​ORGANIZATION OFFICERS​ ​AND​ DUTIES ​ The​ Panel ​ ​ shall ​ ​ ​elect​ ​a​ ​Panel​ ​Chair,​ ​Vice​ Chair, ​ ​ and ​ ​ Secretary, ​ ​ to ​ ​ serve ​ ​ terms ​ ​ of ​ ​ one ​ year.​ ​ They ​ ​ may ​ ​ not ​ ​ serve ​ ​ more ​ ​ than ​ ​ two ​ ​ consecutive ​ ​ terms. ​ ​ ​ The ​ ​ Officers ​ ​ shall ​ perform​ the ​ ​ duties ​ ​ as ​ ​ prescribed ​ ​ by ​ ​ these ​ ​ bylaws ​ ​ and ​ ​ by ​ ​ the ​ ​ parliamentary ​ authority​ ​adopted​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Panel. It​ ​is​ ​the​ ​Chair’s​ responsibility ​ ​ to ​ ​ ensure ​ ​ compliance ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ bylaws, ​ ​ appoint ​ ​ the ​ Chairs​ of ​ ​ each ​ ​ committee, ​ ​ notify ​ ​ Members ​ ​ of ​ ​ compliance ​ ​ issues, ​ ​ interact ​ ​ with ​ ​ City ​ Council,​ ​the​ ​Chief​ of ​ ​ Police, ​ ​ and ​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager, ​ ​ and ​ ​ direct ​ ​ questions ​ ​ to ​ ​ the​ ​ Office ​ of​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Attorney ​ ​ or ​ ​ Commonwealth ​ ​ Attorney, ​ ​ as ​ ​ necessary. ​ ​ ​ The ​ ​ Chair ​ ​ is ​ responsible​ for ​ ​ scheduling, ​ ​ setting ​ ​ the ​ ​ agenda ​ ​ for, ​ ​ and ​ ​ conducting ​ ​ meetings. ​ The​ Vice ​ ​ Chair ​ ​ is ​ ​ responsible ​ ​ for ​ ​ performing ​ ​ all ​ ​ duties ​ ​ in ​ ​ the ​ ​ absence ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Chair, ​ ​ or ​ at​ ​the​ ​direction​ of​ ​ the ​ ​ Chair. ​ The​ Secretary ​ ​ will ​ ​ be ​ ​ responsible ​ ​ for ​ ​ taking ​ ​ and ​ ​ distributing ​ ​ meeting ​ ​ minutes, ​ ​ and ​ performing​ other ​ ​ administrative ​ ​ and ​ ​ supportive ​ ​ tasks ​ ​ as ​ ​ deemed ​ ​ necessary ​ ​ by ​ ​ the ​ Chair. QUORUM A​ ​majority​ ​of​ Panel ​ ​ ​Members​ ​shall​ ​constitute​ ​a​ ​quorum.​ ​ ​No​ ​advisory recommendation,​ decision, ​ ​ opinion, ​ ​ or ​ ​ other ​ ​ action ​ ​ shall ​ ​ be ​ ​ deemed ​ ​ an ​ ​ action ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ Panel,​ ​unless​ ​and​ ​until​ ​it​ ​has​ ​been​ ​approved​ ​by​ ​a​ ​majority​ ​vote​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Panel.​ ​ ​An action​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ ​shall​ ​become​ ​effective​ once ​ ​ approved ​ ​ by ​ ​ a​ ​ vote ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ majority ​ ​ of ​ Panel​ ​Members​ ​present​ ​at​ ​a​ ​meeting​ ​conducted​ ​in​ ​accordance​ with ​ ​ the ​ requirements​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Virginia ​ ​ Freedom ​ ​ of ​ ​ Information ​ ​ Act ​ ​ (FOIA), ​ ​ and ​ ​ at ​ ​ which ​ ​ a​ quorum​ ​of​ the ​ ​ membership ​ ​ is ​ ​ in ​ ​ attendance. ​ VOTING​ RIGHTS ​ Each​ ​Member​ ​shall​ ​be​ ​entitled​ ​to​ ​one​ ​(1)​ ​vote​ ​and​ ​shall​ ​cast​ ​that​ ​vote​ ​on​ ​each​ ​item submitted.​ ​ ​Proxy​ ​votes​ ​and​ ​absentee​ ​ballots​ ​shall​ ​not​ ​be​ ​permitted.​ ​ ​When​ ​a Member​ ​has​ ​a​ ​conflict​ ​of​ interest ​ ​ prohibited ​ ​ by ​ ​ the ​ ​ State ​ ​ and ​ ​ Local ​ ​ Government ​ Conflict​ ​of​ Interest ​ ​ Act ​ ​ (COIA), ​ ​ the ​ ​ Member ​ ​ shall ​ ​ ​disqualify​ ​him/herself​ in ​ accordance​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ requirements ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ COIA ​ ​ and ​ ​ shall ​ ​ otherwise ​ ​ comply ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ requirements​ of ​ ​ COIA. ​ ​​A ​ ​ member ​ ​ who ​ ​ is​ ​ disqualified ​ ​ shall ​ ​ not ​ ​ sit ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel​ during​ ​its​ ​consideration​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ matter ​ ​ upon ​ ​ which ​ ​ the ​ ​ Member ​ ​ is ​ ​ disqualified, ​ ​ or ​ ​ in​ any​ ​way​ ​participate​ ​in​ ​the​ ​discussion​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ matter ​ ​ in​ ​ which​ ​ the ​ ​ Member ​ ​ is ​ disqualified.​ ​ Advisory ​ ​ Members ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ do ​ ​ not ​ ​ receive ​ ​ voting ​ ​ rights. ​ ARTICLE​ ​V​ ​-​ ​PANEL​ ​AND​ ​COMMITTEE​ ​OPERATIONS 1. The​ Panel ​ ​ shall ​ ​ ​have​ ​no​ ​authority​ ​other​ than ​ ​ ​as​ ​stipulated​ ​by​ ​the​ ​bylaws​ ​and approved​ by ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council. ​ 2. The​ Panel ​ ​ will​ ​ ​hold​ ​public​ ​meetings​ ​on​ ​a​ ​regular​ ​schedule,​ ​and​ ​with​ ​adequate notice​ ​to​ ​comply​ ​with​ ​the​ ​public​ ​meeting​ ​requirements​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Freedom ​ ​ of ​ Information​ ​Act.​ ​ ​The​ Panel ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​provide​ to ​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council ​ ​ Clerk’s ​ ​ Office ​ ​ a​ schedule​ of ​ ​ its ​ ​ meetings​ ​ and ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​ensure​ agendas ​ ​ and ​ ​ meeting ​ ​ minutes ​ ​ are ​ available​ ​to​ ​the​ ​public​ ​in​ ​accordance​ ​with​ ​the​ ​applicable​ ​provisions​ ​of​ ​the FOIA. 3. All​ ​meetings​ ​shall​ ​be​ ​properly​ ​noticed​ ​and​ ​otherwise​ conducted ​ ​ in ​ accordance​ with ​ ​ FOIA ​ ​ and ​ ​ Robert’s ​ ​ Rules ​ ​ of ​ ​ Order. ​ ​ ​ All ​ ​ Members ​ ​ shall ​ ​ be ​ notified​ in ​ ​ advance ​ ​ of ​ ​ a​ ​ meeting, ​ ​ and ​ ​ agenda ​ ​ materials ​ ​ shall ​ ​ be ​ ​ made ​ available​ ​to​ ​the​ ​members​ ​and​ ​to​ ​the​ ​public. 4. Special​ ​meetings​ ​and​ ​emergency​ meetings ​ ​ shall ​ ​ ​be​ ​scheduled,​ publicly ​ noticed,​ ​and​ ​conducted​ in ​ ​ accordance ​ ​ with ​ ​ FOIA. ​ 5. The​ Panel ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​develop​ ​committees​ ​as​ ​necessary,​ one ​ ​ of ​ ​ which ​ ​ whose ​ purpose​ shall​ ​ ​be: a. the​ ​review​ of ​ ​ complaints ​ ​ against ​ ​ ​the​ ​police​ ​department; b. the​ ​review​ of ​ ​ investigative ​ ​ detention, ​ ​ and ​ ​ other ​ ​ policing ​ ​ practices; ​ c. the​ ​review​ of ​ ​ incidents ​ ​ involving ​ ​ use ​ ​ of ​ ​ force.​ The​ review ​ ​ committee ​ ​ will ​ ​ consist ​ ​ of ​ ​ no ​ ​ more ​ ​ than ​ ​ two ​ ​ (2) ​ ​ members ​ ​ of ​ ​ the ​ Panel,​ ​and​ ​will​ ​collaborate​ ​with​ ​two​ ​(2)​ ​members​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Human​ ​Rights Commission.​ ​ ​ The ​ ​ committee ​ ​ shall ​ ​ consult ​ ​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of ​ ​ Police, ​ ​ City ​ Attorney,​ ​and​ ​Commonwealth​ ​Attorney,​ ​in​ ​order​ to ​ ​ determine ​ ​ the ​ ​ legal​ protocols​ necessary ​ ​ to ​ ​ fulfill ​ ​ its ​ ​ purpose. ​ ​ ​ The ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of​ ​ Police ​ ​ shall ​ ​ assist ​ ​ the ​ committee​ ​in​ ​developing​ ​an​ ​appropriate​ ​and​ ​comprehensive​ training ​ ​ model ​ for​ members, ​ ​ and ​ ​ will ​ ​ be ​ ​ responsible ​ ​ for ​ ​ providing ​ ​ the ​ ​ necessary ​ ​ training ​ ​ in ​ a​ ​timely​ ​manner. 6. The​ Panel ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​increase​ ​its​ ​visibility​ ​in​ ​the​ ​community​ ​with​ ​the​ ​active​ ​support of​ City ​ ​ Council, ​ ​ the ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of ​ ​ Police, ​ ​ and ​ ​ the ​ ​ City ​ ​ Manager. ​ ​ ​ The ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ will ​ develop​ ​best​ ​practices​ ​for​ increasing ​ ​ community ​ ​ awareness ​ ​ and ​ ​ engagement, ​ including,​ ​but​ ​not​ ​limited​ ​to,​ ​ ​social​ ​media​ ​presence​ and ​ ​ printed ​ ​ literature ​ distributed​ to ​ ​ all ​ ​ ​city​ ​residents. ARTICLE​ ​VI​ ​-​ ​STAFF​ ​SERVICES The​ City ​ ​ Council ​ ​ shall ​ ​ ​provide​ resources ​ ​ for ​ ​ a​ ​ staff ​ ​ person, ​ ​ who ​ ​ will ​ ​ provide ​ administrative​ ​and​ ​organizational​ ​support​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Panel.​ ​ ​Staff​ ​duties​ ​will​ ​include: 1. Assist​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ Chair ​ ​ to ​ ​ perform ​ ​ all ​ ​ necessary ​ ​ tasks ​ ​ to ​ ​ facilitate ​ ​ the ​ ​ purpose ​ and​ ​function​ ​of​ the ​ ​ Panel. ​ 2. Work​ closely ​ ​ with ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ ​Members​ ​to​ ​schedule​ meetings, ​ ​ arrange ​ ​ locations, ​ prepare​ and ​ ​ distribute ​ ​ agenda ​ ​ materials, ​ ​ maintain ​ ​ ​meeting​ ​minutes​ ​in​ ​a manner​ ​consistent​ ​with​ ​FOIA​ ​requirements. 3. Act​ as ​ ​ a​ ​ liaison ​ ​ between ​ ​ ​the​ ​Panel,​ ​City​ ​Council,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​City​ ​Manager​ ​to facilitate​ ​communication​ ​and​ ​flow​ ​of​ ​information.​ ​ Staff ​ ​ will ​ ​ ​forward​ ​to​ ​the appropriate​ person ​ ​ all ​ ​ ​reports,​ actions, ​ ​ and ​ ​ recommendations ​ ​ of​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel, ​ as​ well ​ ​ ​as​ ​notification​ ​of​ ​non-compliance​ ​by​ ​Panel​ ​Members​ ​or​ ​the​ ​Panel Chair,​ with ​ ​ bylaws ​ ​ ​or​ applicable ​ ​ ​law. 4. Assist​ the ​ ​ Chief ​ ​ of ​ ​ Police ​ ​ to ​ ​ schedule ​ ​ trainings ​ ​ for ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ Members. ​ 5. Maintain​ ​a​ ​Facebook​ ​page​ ​or​ ​other​ social ​ ​ media ​ ​ presence ​ ​ in ​ ​ order ​ ​ to ​ ​ increase ​ communication​ with ​ ​ the ​ ​ community ​ ​ around ​ ​ important ​ ​ issues, ​ ​ promote ​ ​ the ​ visibility​ of ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel, ​ ​ ​and​ ​to​ ​more​ fully ​ ​ ​support​ ​FOIA​ ​requirements. ARTICLE​ ​VII​ ​-​ ​REPORTING​ ​AND​ ​SUNSET​ ​PROVISION The​ Panel ​ ​ shall ​ ​ ​submit​ ​an​ ​annual​ ​report​ ​to​ ​City​ ​Council​ ​to​ ​include​ ​progress​ ​toward stated​ ​goals​ ​and​ ​objectives,​ ​and​ ​a​ ​work​ ​plan​ ​for​ ​the​ ​upcoming​ ​year. Every​ four ​ ​ years, ​ ​ beginning ​ ​ on ​ ​ January ​ ​ 1, ​ ​ 2018, ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ shall ​ ​ submit ​ ​ a​ ​ more ​ comprehensive​ report ​ ​ on ​ ​ its ​ ​ activities ​ ​ and ​ ​ accomplishments, ​ ​ for ​ ​ the ​ ​ purpose ​ ​ of ​ ​ a​ formal​ review ​ ​ by ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council, ​ ​ in ​ ​ consultation ​ ​ ​with​ ​the​ ​Chief​ of ​ ​ Police ​ ​ and ​ ​ City ​ Manager.​ ​ ​This​ is ​ ​ to ​ ​ determine ​ ​ whether ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ has ​ ​ been​ ​ effective ​ ​ in ​ ​ serving​ ​ its ​ purpose​ and ​ ​ function, ​ ​ and ​ ​ whether ​ ​ the ​ ​ Panel ​ ​ should ​ ​ continue ​ ​ its ​ ​ activities. ​ ARTICLE​ ​VIII​ ​-​ ​BYLAWS​ ​AND​ ​EFFECTIVE​ ​DATE These​ bylaws ​ ​ shall ​ ​ ​become​ ​effective​ upon ​ ​ review ​ ​ of ​ ​ City ​ ​ Council ​ ​ and ​ ​ adoption ​ ​ by ​ the​ Charlottesville ​ ​ Police ​ ​ Citizen ​ ​ Advisory ​ ​ Panel. ​ ​ ​ They ​ ​ may ​ ​ be ​ ​ amended ​ ​ at ​ ​ any ​ regular​ meeting ​ ​ of ​ ​ the​ ​ Panel ​ ​ ​by​ ​a​ ​majority​ ​vote​ ​of​ the ​ ​ Members, ​ ​ provided ​ ​ the ​ quorum​ and​ ​ voting ​ ​ requirements ​ ​ have ​ ​ been ​ ​ met, ​ ​ and ​ ​ the ​ ​ amendment ​ ​ was ​ submitted​ ​in​ ​writing​ ​at​ ​the​ ​previous​ regular ​ ​ meeting. ​ Revised​ November ​ ​ 6, ​ ​ 2017 ​ CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 6, 2017 Action Required: Consideration of a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) Rezoning (1st of 2 Readings) Presenter: Heather Newmyer, City Planner, Neighborhood Development Services Staff Contacts: Heather Newmyer, City Planner, Neighborhood Development Services Title: ZM17-00001 – 1021, 1023 and 1025 Park Street Planned Unit Development (PUD) Rezoning Request Background: Applicant Request Kurt Wassenaar, President of Wassenaar + Winkler Architects and Planners, is representing Monticello Area Community Action Agency (MACAA) and New Millennium Senior Living Communities (NMSLC), a development group based out of Roanoke, Virginia that specializes in senior housing, independent living, assisted living and nursing properties in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast regions of the United States. The applicant is seeking approval to rezone properties 1021, 1023 and 1025 Park Street (“Subject Properties”) from the existing single-family Low-Density Residential (R-1) zoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) with proffers. The rezoning request is subject to the following proffered conditions including: (i) providing two (2) duplexes (4 units total) of age restricted (62+) housing affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI), this effort to be coordinated with the Housing Program Coordinator on compliance and reporting; and, (ii) donation of $75,000 to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing fund. In addition to the R-1 zoning, 1025 Park Street (MACAA’s current site) has a special use permit granted by City Council in 1993 for a private school/education facility (community education center) and amended in 1995 to permanently close access to 250 Bypass. The applicant’s rezoning request proposes a PUD that allows for an “intergenerational campus” that would locate a senior housing facility, containing a mix of assisted living and independent living units (141 units proposed), on the current MACAA site (1025 Park Street), and to re- locate MACAA’s operation and facilities to the adjacent “Stone House” (1021 Park Street) 1 immediately North of the MACAA site. The applicant proposes to re-utilize and preserve the Stone House for MACAA’s executive offices and construct a new school building behind the Stone House for MACAA’s early childhood development program among its other programs. At 1023 Park Street, the applicant is proposing four (4) affordable, age restricted (62+) units in the form of two (2) duplexes fronting on Park Street. The total proposed mix of units including the senior living facility and the affordable dwelling units is 145 units. The PUD request proposes to maintain the closure of the access from the property onto Route 250 Bypass, allowing for Emergency Access only. Note: Provided below is a bullet list of major items that have been modified from the original application heard before Planning Commission August 8, 2017 to the application heard before Planning Commission October 10, 2017 (the current application): • Intersection Improvements at MACAA Drive/Park Street: Removed left turn out of MACAA Drive, allowing for only through and right-turn movement onto Davis Avenue and Park Street and addition of pedestrian flashing beacons at proposed crosswalk (North side crosswalk has been relocated to the south side as requested by neighborhood) • Reduced proposed total of units from 151 (all senior units (mix of assisted/independent/memory care)) to 145 (to included 141 senior units (mix of assisted/independent/memory care) and 4 units of affordable, age-restricted (62+) housing • Proposed Senior Living Facility Building proposed building has been reduced from 5 stories to 4 stories with a proposed maximum height of 55 feet • Surface parking has been reduced from 164 spaces to 140 spaces and 47 spaces are proposed as permeable pavers at the southern, western and eastern parking lots • Emergency Services Access off 250 Bypass has been removed to preserve Rock Hill Garden stone walls • The applicant has now included a proffer statement (there was no proffer statement provided in original application), where the proffers include: (i) providing two (2) duplexes (4 units total) of age-restricted (62+) housing affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI), this effort to be coordinated with the Housing Program Coordinator on compliance and reporting (ii) donation of $75,000 to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing fund For more detailed information on this application, please see the proposed PUD Development Plan (Attachment 5). Standard of Review City Council may grant an applicant a rezoning request, giving consideration to factors set forth within Z.O. Sec. 34-42 (Attachment 2) and Planning Commission’s recommendation (see Recommendation section below). Relevant code sections are listed below to assist in Council’s determination. 2 Relevant Code Sections • Zoning Ordinance Section 34-490 – Planned Unit Development Objectives (Attachment 3) Sec. 34-1123 – Lot Area Requirements - Residential uses The Subject Properties’ current zoning (R-1) limits residential uses to single-family detached dwellings (SFD), which may contain interior or exterior accessory dwelling units, limited to 1 SFD per 8,125 square foot lot effective density 5 DUA. • 2013 Comprehensive Plan The 2013 Comprehensive Plan’s General Land Use Plan specifies the Subject Property and its surrounding properties as Low Density Residential, where the recommended density range provided for Low Density Residential areas is “not to exceed 15 DUA.” • Streets That Work The Subject Property fronts on Park Street which is considered a Neighborhood A Street Typology. Chapter 3: Street Network and Typologies of the Streets That Work Plan include Neighborhood A streets and the remaining street typologies with their associated design parameters. To access the full Streets That Work Plan, follow this link: http://www.charlottesville.org/departments-and-services/departments-h-z/neighborhood- development-services/streets-that-work/streets-that-work-plan Discussion: Overview of Staff Analysis Staff reviewed the PUD rezoning request in light of the Subject Property’s current zoning, Streets That Work Guidelines, the PUD Objectives set forth in Sec. 34-490, and the Comprehensive Plan. Overall, staff finds the proposed PUD Development Plan provides a unique opportunity for an “intergenerational campus” that provides housing for the growing 65+ population, sustains MACAA, an organization that provides programs that meet many of the City’s goals in serving the low-income community and commits to providing four (4) affordable, age restricted (65+) units on-site in coordination with the City’s Housing Coordinator. In addition, the concept layout demonstrates efforts to use environmentally sensitive design by utilizing the existing building site in order to preserve the environmental and historic features of the site (environmental features at rear of site: critical slopes, heavily wooded areas, meadows, Rock Hill Gardens, flood plain), which otherwise might not be preserved in a by-right scenario. The applicant has demonstrated their intent to improve connectivity and access through the proposed improvements at the Park/Davis Ave/MACAA Drive intersection, many of which comply with Streets That Work, and the proposed future public access via an agreement with City Parks and 3 Recreation to allow for public access to the historic Rock Hill Gardens and the existing John Warner Parkway trail system. Staff believes the designation of a PUD allows for the unique, integrated mix of uses that would be a benefit to this community and a site layout that is, for the most part, cohesive and environmentally sensitive. Staff would like to state that overall, they are supportive of the concept. Many of staff’s previous concerns have been addressed in the updated application; however, there are concerns that remain. Staff’s concerns are as follows: • Proposed Density: The proposed density of 16 DUA exceeds the by-right density (effective density for R-1: 5 DUA) and the Comprehensive Plan density range for Low Density Residential, where for those areas it states to “not exceed 15 DUA.” While staff sees an argument for a higher density than allowed by-right in light of the Subject Properties’ size (9.312 acres), its isolated location (existing tree buffers and heavily wooded slopes on the west side), staff has concern with the proposed density exceeding the by-right density and what is intended to be the maximum density listed in the Comprehensive Plan for Low Density Residential areas. Staff also notes that in a by-right scenario, an R-1 property is allowed to have up to 8 Adult Assisted Living Residents. • Massing: The proposed massing and scale of the senior living facility, reduced from 5 stories to 4 stories with a maximum height of 55’ is an improvement from the original 75’ maximum height in comparison to the surrounding neighborhood that contains single- family residences not to exceed 35’ in height per their R-1 zoning. Staff notes that the size of the building is arguably more hidden given the location of the site and the preserved wooded areas and the location of the building situated back behind the three structures that front on Park Street (proposed not exceed the existing by-right height of 35’). While staff believes the updated proposed massing and scale would be better hidden behind the tree-line and provide for a better transition than the original proposed massing and scale, staff still has concern the scale is larger than what would be allowed in the current zoning and in light of the surrounding neighborhood. • Surface Parking: Staff believes the applicant has made an effort to address this concern providing for an improved layout from the original application, where the total number of parking spaces provided has been reduced 20 spaces and there is an increase in permeable parking spaces. The applicant has also noted relocation of trees that are eight-inch caliper or greater to other places on-site to help preserve more trees. The reason this is still listed as a concern is because staff believes the scale (number of units) and business model of the senior living facility is the driving force behind the large number of parking spaces, where a smaller-scale senior living facility would require less parking. The amount of surface parking throughout the site detracts from the overall site’s layout’s attempt to be innovative in its arrangement of uses (See PUD Objectives 1, 2). However, staff commends the applicant’s efforts to utilize shared sparking, reduce the amount of spaces from the original application and provide an increase in permeable paving. 4 *For a more detailed review of staff’s analysis, see the Staff Report dated October 2, 2017 provided at the Joint City Council and Planning Commission Public Hearing held October 10, 2017 (Attachment 4 OR follow the link to the staff report with application materials attached: http://www.charlottesville.org/home/showdocument?id=56194 ) Planning Commission The Planning Commission discussed the special use permit request at their October 24, 2017 special meeting. The topics of discussion that the Commission focused on were: • The importance of separating the MACAA organization’s mission from the land use and zoning practices being proposed as the Planning Commission deliberated a recommendation for City Council • The environmental benefits of the proposal (preservation of Rock Hill Gardens, preservation of slopes/wooded areas, and provision of public access) • Whether the proposal met certain Planned Unit Development (PUD) objectives; where some Commissioners felt the proposed land use and layout did not necessarily meet the intent of certain objectives (for example, innovative arrangement of buildings), others stated the layout did • Parking: concern over the amount of surface parking, specifically: o for portions of the layout (north and southeast sides), although it is proposed to be screened, parking took up the majority of area directly adjacent to the neighboring residences o How one would have to traverse a parking lot if going from the MACAA school building and/or playground to the senior living facility • The senior living facility building as it related to different sides of the neighborhood (250 Bypass versus the adjacent residences) Alignment with City Council’s Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: The proposed Joint Use Agreement with the City of Charlottesville to provide public access through the Subject Properties, specifically the historic Rock Hill Gardens and a connection to the greater City trail system (John Warner Parkway trail, Schenk’s Branch and McIntire Park) align with the City Council Vision of A Connected Community and Strategic Plan, Goal 3.3, “provide a variety of transportation and mobility options.” The concept layout’s demonstrated effort to use environmentally sensitive design by utilizing the existing building site in order to preserve the environmental and historic features of the site (environmental features at rear of site: critical slopes, heavily wooded areas, meadows, Rock Hill Gardens, flood plain), which otherwise might not be preserved in a by-right scenario contributes 5 to both the City Council Vision A Green City and Strategic Plan, Goal 3.4, “protect historic and cultural resources” and Goal 3.5, “be responsible stewards of natural resources.” Providing for housing for the aging population (65+) in a central location in the City while sustaining an organization that provides programs that meet many of the City’s goals in serving the low-income community contributes to aspects of the City Council Vision Quality Housing Opportunities For All, specifically, “our housing stock is connected with parks, trails, and services” and “our neighborhoods feature a variety of housing types…pedestrian and transit- oriented housing at employment and cultural centers.” Community Engagement: The Planning Commission held a joint public hearing with City Council on this matter at their meeting on October 10, 2017. Please see Attachment 6 for an excerpt of the October 10, 2017 meeting minutes for a detailed list of individual public comments made during the rezoning’s Public Hearing. Per Sec. 34-41(c)(2), the applicant held a community meeting on July 17, 2017 (a City Planner attended as a NDS representative). The applicant held additional meetings outside of City requirements in continued efforts to answer questions and address neighborhood concerns. Many residents have sent individual comments to Staff; this correspondence can be found in Attachment 6. A summary and overview of comments from the public throughout this process regarding the PUD Rezoning request are: • Concern around increased in traffic generated from the senior living facility • Concern the use is commercial in nature • Concern the scale of the project is too large in proximity to low-residential neighborhood • Concern around noise generated from the use (e.g. dumpsters, food deliveries) • Desire for a public or commercial space (café or restaurant) in the development for neighborhood residents to gather • Desire for the site to remain single-family residential in nature to maintain the neighborhood feel. • Concern the duplexes don’t fit with the adjacent single-family residences. • Desire for bicycle accommodations along Park Street 6 Budgetary Impact: A Senior Housing Project at 1021, 1023 and 1025 Park Street, based on 145 residential units is expected to generate - $580,000 in annual city revenue. This includes applicable real property taxes, personal property taxes, sales taxes, meals taxes, Business Professional and Occupational License (BPOL) and utility taxes. In addition, there would be an estimated one time increase of $150,000 in BPOL and permitting fees. A number of construction related jobs (40-60) would be demanded during the construction period which is expected to last 18-24 months. The number of permanent jobs created by this project will depend on the specific needs and business model of the operator but could be expected to be in the 60-75 range. The parcels involved in this project are currently tax exempt and do not generate any city revenue annually. Recommendation: The Planning Commission took the following action: Mr. Clayborne moved to recommend approval of this application to rezone the Subject Properties zoned R-1 Low Density Residential, to PUD with proffers provided on August 28, 2017 on the basis that the proposal would serve the interests of the general public welfare and good zoning practice. This recommendation of approval is based on Sec. 34-42(1) Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan and Sec. 34-42(2) Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community. Mr. Santoski seconded the motion. The Commission voted 4-2 (Green-Santoski) to recommend approval of the application to rezone the aforementioned parcels. Alternatives: City Council has several alternatives: (1) by motion, take action to approve the attached ordinance for rezoning (as recommended by the Planning Commission); (2) by motion, take action to deny the attached ordinance for rezoning; or (3) by motion, defer action on the attached ordinance for rezoning. Attachment: (1) Proposed Resolution Approving a Planned Unit Development (2) Sec. 34-42 – Commission study and action; Sec. 34-43 – Council study and action (3) Sec. 34-490 – PUD Objectives (4) Planning Commission Staff Report, October 10, 2017 (5) Proffer Statement and PUD Development Plan, August 28, 2017 (6) Public Comments: (i) Meeting Date October 10, 2017 Minutes Excerpt: MACAA Public Hearing Comments and (ii) Public Written Correspondence received 7 ZM17-00001 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICABLE TO PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE MACAA INTERGENERATIONAL CAMPUS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (“PUD”) WHEREAS, the Monticello Area Community Action Agency and 1023 Park Street, LLC (“Landowners”) have submitted application number ZM17-00001, seeking a rezoning of property located at 1021, 1023 and 1025 Park Street (City Tax Map 47, Parcels 7.1, 8 and 11) consisting, of approximately 405,631 square feet of land (9.312 acres) (collectively, the “Subject Property”) in order to change the zoning district classification of the Subject Property from R-1 to PUD, subject to proffered development conditions (“Proposed Rezoning”); and WHEREAS, a joint public hearing on the Proposed Rezoning was held before the City Council and Planning Commission on October 10, 2017, following notice to the public and to adjacent property owners as required by law; and WHEREAS, legal notice of the public hearing held on October 10, 2017 was advertised in accordance with Va. Code Sec. 15.2-2204; and WHEREAS, as part of its Proposed Rezoning the Landowners proffered two development conditions, and the proffers tendered by the Landowners were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission on October 10, 2017; and WHEREAS, on October 24, 2017, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Proposed Rezoning to the City Council, based on a finding that the Proposed Rezoning is required by the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice; and WHEREAS, in connection with the Proposed Rezoning, the Landowners submitted: (i) a written PUD Development Plan, dated August 28, 2017, titled “MACAA Intergenerational Campus”, and (ii) proffered development conditions submitted in writing to the City on August 28, 2017; and WHEREAS, this Council finds and determines that the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice requires the Proposed Rezoning; that the existing zoning classification as well as the proposed PUD zoning are both reasonable; that the Proposed Rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and that the proffered development conditions are reasonable; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the Zoning District Map Incorporated in Section 34-1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Code of the City of Charlottesville, 1990, as amended, be and hereby is amended and reenacted as follows: Section 34-1. Zoning District Map. Rezoning from R-1 Residential to Planned Unit Development (“PUD”), the property designated on City Tax Map 47 as Parcels 7.1, 8 and 11 (1021, 1023, and 1025 Park Street) (the “Property”), consisting of approximately 405,631 square feet of land (9.312 acres) subject to the following proffered development conditions, which were tendered by the Applicant in accordance with law and are hereby accepted by this City Council: Proffered Development Conditions The use and development of the Property shall be in conformity with the following development conditions proffered by the Landowners: 1. Two duplexes (4 units, total) within the MACAA Intergenerational Campus PUD shall be age-restricted dwelling units, for individuals 62 years of age or older, and shall be affordable to households earning up to eighty percent (80%) of the area median income for the City of Charlottesville. Landowner(s) will coordinate with the City’s Housing Program Director on compliance reporting. 2. Landowners will donate the amount of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund, for affordable workforce housing. Attachment 2 Sec. 34-42. - Commission study and action. (a) All proposed amendments shall be reviewed by the planning commission. The planning commission shall review and study each proposed amendment to determine: (1) Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan; (2) Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community; (3) Whether there is a need and justification for the change; and (4) When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. (b) Prior to making any recommendation to the city council, the planning commission shall advertise and hold at least one (1) public hearing on a proposed amendment. The planning commission may hold a joint public hearing with the city council. (c) The planning commission shall review the proposed amendment and shall report its findings and recommendations to the city council, along with any appropriate explanatory materials, within one hundred (100) days after the proposed amendment was referred to the commission for review. Owner-initiated petitions for zoning map amendments shall be deemed referred to the commission as of the date on which: (i) city council, by motion or by resolution, refers an amendment to the commission for review, or (ii) the first planning commission meeting following referral by the director of neighborhood development services pursuant to section 31-41(c)(3). Failure of the commission to report to city council within the 100-day period shall be deemed a recommendation of approval, unless the petition is withdrawn. In the event of and upon such withdrawal, processing of the proposed amendment shall cease without further action. (9-15-03(3); 10-19-15(3)) Sec. 34-43. - Council study and action. (a) Before enacting any proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance, the city council shall advertise and hold at least one (1) public hearing thereon. The city council may hold a joint public hearing with the planning commission. (b) Council may make appropriate changes or corrections in the proposed ordinance or amendment as a result of the public hearing; provided, however, that no land may be rezoned to a more intensive use classification than was identified in the public notice of the public hearing without an additional public hearing conducted after notice as required by law. Where substantial changes have been made in a rezoning application following a public hearing, the city council may hold an additional public hearing. (c) Once a petition seeking an amendment of the zoning ordinance has been advertised for a public hearing, the city council shall not consider another petition which is substantially the same as that advertised for a period of one (1) year from the date the advertised petition was accepted by the director of neighborhood development services. (9-15-03(3)) Page 1 Attachment 3 Sec. 34-490. - Objectives. In reviewing an application for approval of a planned unit development (PUD) or an application seeking amendment of an approved PUD, in addition to the general considerations applicable to any rezoning the city council and planning commission shall consider whether the application satisfies the following objectives of a PUD district: (1) To encourage developments of equal or higher quality than otherwise required by the strict application of zoning district regulations that would otherwise govern; (2) To encourage innovative arrangements of buildings and open spaces to provide efficient, attractive, flexible and environmentally sensitive design. (3) To promote a variety of housing types, or, within a development containing only a single housing type, to promote the inclusion of houses of various sizes; (4) To encourage the clustering of single-family dwellings for more efficient use of land and preservation of open space; (5) To provide for developments designed to function as cohesive, unified projects; (6) To ensure that a development will be harmonious with the existing uses and character of adjacent property, and/or consistent with patterns of development noted with respect to such adjacent property; (7) To ensure preservation of cultural features, scenic assets and natural features such as trees, streams and topography; (8) To provide for coordination of architectural styles internally within the development as well as in relation to adjacent properties along the perimeter of the development; and (9) To provide for coordinated linkages among internal buildings and uses, and external connections, at a scale appropriate to the development and adjacent neighborhoods; (10) To facilitate access to the development by public transit services or other single-vehicle- alternative services, including, without limitation, public pedestrian systems. (9-15-03(3)) Page 1 Attachment 4 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT APPLICATION FOR A REZONING OF PROPERTY JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF HEARING: October 10, 2017 APPLICATION NUMBER: ZM17-00001 The following rezoning request went before Planning Commission at their August 8, 2017 meeting. The following report includes much of the same information that was provided to Planning Commission at their August 8th meeting; however, the current application moving forward has been modified by the applicant (information submitted August 28, 2017) from the original application in efforts to respond to concerns posed by the surrounding neighborhoods, Planning Commission and Council. Additional staff analysis regarding the updated application is reflected in the text in the color blue and italicized for ease of finding new analysis based off of the updated information given by the applicant. Project Planner: Heather Newmyer, AICP Date of Staff Report: October 2, 2017 Project Name: Monticello Area Community Agency (MACAA) Intergenerational Campus – Planned Unit Development (PUD) Rezoning Applicant: Monticello Area Community Agency (MACAA) and New Millennium Senior Living Communities (NMSLC) Applicants Representative: Kurt Wassenaar, President of Wassenaar + Winkler Architects and Planners Current Property Owner: Monticello Area Community Agency (MACAA) and 1023 Park St, LLC Application Information Property Street Addresses: 1021, 1023 and 1025 Park Street Tax Map/Parcel #: Tax Map 47, Parcels 7.1, 8, 11 Total Square Footage/Acreage Site: 9.312 acres or 405,630.7 square feet Comprehensive Plan (Land Use Plan) Designation: Low Density Residential 1 Current Zoning Classification: R-1 & R-1 with SUP for a Community Education Center at 1025 Park St (TM 47 P 7.1) Tax Status: No delinquent taxes Application Timeline March 22, 2017: Pre-Application Meeting required per Sec. 34-41(b)(1) April 5, 2017: Preliminary Discussion Meeting with Council Members (Wes Bellamy & Kathy Galvin). Discussion included the following: mass of building surrounded by surface parking versus alternative ways to address parking, access to the historic Rock Hill Gardens, walkability, and affordability of units on-site. April 11, 2017: Preliminary Discussion Planning Commission (Attachment 5) April 25, 2017: Rezoning Application Submittal #1 (Rejection Letter May 8, 2017; Attachment 3) May 23, 2017: Rezoning Application Submittal #2 (Rejection Letter June 5, 2017; Attachment 3) June 19, 2017: Rezoning Application Submittal #3 July 17, 2017: Community Meeting held per Sec. 34-41(c)(2) August 8, 2017: Informal Public Hearing Planning Commission (Staff Report, Attachment 6) August 15, 2017: Meeting with Applicant and Housing Program Coordinator August 28, 2017: Rezoning Application Submittal #4 with updates in response to concerns of neighborhood, Planning Commission and Council (Attachment 1) September 25, 2017: Additional Community Meeting held Applicant’s Request Kurt Wassenaar, President of Wassenaar + Winkler Architects and Planners, is representing Monticello Area Community Action Agency (MACAA) and New Millennium Senior Living Communities (NMSLC), a development group based out of Roanoke, Virginia that specializes in senior housing, independent living, assisted living and nursing properties in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast regions of the United States. The applicant is seeking approval to rezone properties 1021, 1023 and 1025 Park Street (“Subject Properties”) from the existing single-family Low-Density Residential (R-1) zoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) with proffers. The rezoning request is subject to the following proffered conditions including: (i) providing two (2) duplexes (4 units total) of age restricted (62+) housing affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI), this effort to be coordinated with the Housing Program Coordinator on compliance and reporting; and, (ii) donation of $75,000 to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing fund. In addition to the R-1 zoning, 1025 Park Street (MACAA’s current site) has a special use permit granted by City Council in 1993 for a private school/education facility (community education center) and amended in 1995 to permanently close access to 250 Bypass. The applicant’s rezoning request proposes a PUD that allows for an “intergenerational campus” that would locate a senior housing facility, containing a mix of assisted living and independent living units (141 units proposed 151 total units proposed), on the current MACAA site (1025 Park Street), and to re-locate MACAA’s operation and facilities to the adjacent “Stone House” (1021 Park Street) immediately North of the MACAA site. The applicant proposes to re-utilize and 2 preserve the Stone House for MACAA’s executive offices and construct a new school building behind the Stone House for MACAA’s early childhood development program among its other programs. At 1023 Park Street, the applicant is proposing four (4) affordable, age restricted (62+) units in the form of two (2) duplexes fronting on Park Street. The total proposed mix of units including the senior living facility and the affordable dwelling units is 145 units. The PUD request proposes to maintain the closure of the access from the property onto Route 250 Bypass, allowing for Emergency Access only. Note: This item went before the Planning Commission August 8, 2017. Provided below is a bullet list of major items that have been modified from the original application heard before Planning Commission August 8th in the current application (Please reference the updated PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2)): • Intersection Improvements at MACAA Drive/Park Street: Removed left turn out of MACAA Drive, allowing for only through and right-turn movement onto Davis Avenue and Park Street and addition of pedestrian flashing beacons at proposed crosswalk (North side crosswalk has been relocated to the south side as requested by neighborhood) • Reduced proposed total of units from 151 (all senior units (mix of assisted/independent/memory care)) to 145 (to included 141 senior units (mix of assisted/independent/memory care) and 4 units of affordable, age-restricted (62+) housing • Proposed Senior Living Facility Building proposed building has been reduced from 5 stories to 4 stories with a proposed maximum height of 55 feet • Surface parking has been reduced from 164 spaces to 140 spaces and 47 spaces are proposed as permeable pavers at the southern, western and eastern parking lots • Emergency Services Access off 250 Bypass has been removed to preserve Rock Hill Garden stone walls • The applicant has now included a proffer statement (there was no proffer statement provided in original application), where the proffers include: (i) providing two (2) duplexes (4 units total) of age-restricted (62+) housing affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI), this effort to be coordinated with the Housing Program Coordinator on compliance and reporting (ii) donation of $75,000 to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing fund 3 Vicinity Map 2016 Aerial 4 Zoning Map Purple Dashed Outline: Special Use Permit (SUP), Yellow: R-1 (Single-Family), Blue Cross-Hatch: Individual Protected Property (IPP), Green: Parks, Brown: McIntire-5th Residential (MR) 2013 Comp Plan Yellow: Low Density Residential, Green: Park or Preserved Open Space Standard of Review City Council may grant an applicant a rezoning request, giving consideration to a number of factors set forth within Z.O. Sec. 34-42. The role of the Planning Commission is to make an advisory recommendation to the City Council, as to whether or not Council should approve a proposed rezoning based on the factors listed in Z.O. Sec. 34-42(a): 5 (a) All proposed amendments shall be reviewed by the planning commission. The planning commission shall review and study each proposed amendment to determine: (1) Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan; (2) Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community; (3) Whether there is a need and justification for the change; and (4) When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. Preliminary Analysis The Subject Properties are approximately 9.312 acres and include three (3) lots. The Subject Properties collectively have frontage on Park Street and Route 250 Bypass. The Subject Properties, specifically the current MACAA site (1025 Park Street), are unique in that they are somewhat isolated from the adjacent stretch of single-family residential homes along Park Street. The Subject Properties are bounded by heavily wooded slopes on the west side, which connect directly to the John Warner Parkway trail system, Schenk’s Branch and McIntire Park. The Subject Properties contain environmental features including: large stand of trees, critical slopes and are home to the historic Rock Hill Gardens. The proposed conceptual plan (Attachment 2 PUD Development Plan – see specifically Component 2(a) & Component 2(b)) proposes five four structures throughout the Subject Properties: (1) Existing repurposed 2-story “Stone House” (1021 Park Street) fronting on Park St to house MACAA administrative offices (2) A newly constructed 2-story school building located behind existing “Stone House” (3) Two (2) newly constructed duplexes (4 units total) of age restricted (62+) independent living cottages affordable to households earning 80% of AMI (4) A newly constructed 4-story 5-story Senior Living Center to locate in the middle/rear of site and replace existing MACAA buildings/facilities containing 141 150 units The plan proposes a total of 144 parking spaces 164 parking spaces. This number has been reduced 20 spaces from the original application, where the applicant has indicated the MACAA parking lot (parking lot closest to the MACAA office (Stone House) and school building) will be shared with the senior living facility staff and visitors during MACAA’s off hours. MACAA’s operations are from 7:15am-3:00pm, allowing for shared parking during the weekday after 4:00pm. The applicant states most visitors for the senior housing facility come between the hours of 4:00pm and 8:00pm. In addition, the applicant has been in coordination with CAT regarding the existing Route 11 which serves Park Street but stops at North Avenue just north of MACAA Drive. The applicant, should this request be approved, will continue to coordinate with CAT by requesting that Route 11 be extended to include a bus stop location within the MACAA campus given the proposed use as a senior housing project. 6 140 of those spaces are proposed in the form of surface parking spaces ancillary to the proposed senior living facility and education uses and the remaining 4 spaces are within the affordable independent cottages which will have garages; 47 spaces are called out as permeable spaces (originally there were 33 permeable parking spaces) and, included in the permeable parking spaces, there is a portion to be used as a shared use plaza for NMSLC/MACAA gatherings in off- hours (See Component 2(b) of the PUD Development Plan, Attachment 2). The buildings featured on the PUD Development Plan collectively are proposed to have up to approximately no greater than 219,500 gross square feet (5.04 acres) with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.54. The applicant is proposing a total of 145 units (units includes a mix of memory care, assisted living and independent living units) which equates to an approximate density of 16 DUA. 141 of those units would locate in the proposed 4 story senior living facility with the remaining units replacing the existing single-family dwelling on 1023 Park Street with two (2) newly constructed duplexes (4 units total) of age restricted (62+) independent living cottages affordable to households earning 80% of AMI (Residential proposed at a range of 165,000 – 200,000 gross square feet (GSF)). The applicant proposes to maintain MACAA’s current operations on-site, which include a 2-story school building (proposed at a range of 13,500-15,000 GSF) and the MACAA offices that would locate in the existing Stone House (approximately 3,800-4,500 GSF). Lastly, a temporary sales office is proposed in what will be one of the affordable independent living cottages fronting on Park St mentioned above. Should this PUD be approved, the property would be limited to the following proposed uses that include the Senior Living Facility (mix of Adult Assisted Living and Independent Living), Education Facility: Vocational, and four (4) affordable, age restricted (62+) independent living cottages that are monitored by the Housing Program Coordinator per the proposed proffer statement. A full breakdown of uses that includes Open Space is included on Component 2(b) of the PUD Development Plan. Building Heights range from 35’ maximum height along Park Street to maximum 55’ 75’ height at the rear of the property where the senior living facility would locate. The updated proposed total number of units on-site, including the senior living facility (mix of assisted, independent and memory care) and affordable independent living cottages is 145, down 6 units from the original proposed 151 units. The residential density proposed remains the same when taking into account the reduction in units, equaling 16 dwelling units per acre (DUA) which exceeds what would be allowed under by-right zoning. The by-right zoning (R-1) limits residential uses to single-family detached dwellings (SFD), which may contain interior or exterior accessory dwelling units, limited to 1 SFD per 8,125 square foot lot (effective density 5 DUA). Based off of the total area of the site, this would equate to approximately 46 units total. This does not, however, take into account the area needed for new road/utility construction or the large portion of the site in the rear that contains critical slopes/floodplain area. Staff has approximated that if those environmental areas are taken into account, a more realistic by-right unit number would be between 25-30 SFD units total (Note: this is an approximate figure is given to provide an approximate comparison to the proposed 151 units). The zoning specific to 1025 Park Street (existing MACAA site) also allows for a Community Education Center allowed via SUP granted in 1993. 7 Open Space: The proposal preserves existing natural areas located at the rear of the site and make up approximately 3.30 acres as Open Space. The Preserved Natural Areas (3.30 acres) contain the Rock Hill Gardens and are proposed to remain. Within this portion of the Open Space, the plan calls for a “Joint Use Agreement between NMSLC and Charlottesville Parks and Rec Department” to allow for future public access to the natural areas, Rock Hill Gardens and for future connectivity to the John Warner Parkway trail, Schenk’s Branch and McIntire Park. -Total Open Space: 58.92% or 5.49 acres -Total Open Space includes Preserved Natural Areas (3.30 Acres), landscaped areas, resident gardens and courtyard, and playground -Net Loss Vegetative Cover: 7.03 acres (pre-development vegetative cover) – 5.78 acres 5.72 acres (post-development vegetative cover) = 1.32 Acres 1.25 acres **Full % Site Area breakdown found on Component 2(b) of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2) Traffic Impact: The traffic impact is an important part of the discussion given the existing condition versus the proposed condition of the MACAA Drive/Davis Avenue intersection, the limited visibility along Park Street and the amount of trips estimated as a result of the proposed use of a senior living facility that would be in addition to the existing MACAA operation on-site. Existing Conditions Under existing conditions, traffic on Park Street in front of the proposed site is approximately 11,000 20,000 VPD (Vehicles per Day); the 11,000 VPD figure has been verified by traffic counts done in early August 2017 by the City Traffic Engineering Department. The existing use of the MACAA site generates approximately 86 trips per day (43 in/43 out). The driveway for MACAA creates its own difficulties. The current orientation of the driveway does not line up with Davis Ave across the street and there is a vertical curve on Park Street that limits visibility to both MACAA Drive and Davis Ave. Along with this orientation, there is an existing stone wall along the west side of Park Street that greatly reduces visibility. Due to this constraint, there is currently a “No Left Turn” sign for the MACAA driveway. Pedestrian movements in this location are limited to a single, skewed, crosswalk from the south side of Davis to the south side of the MACAA driveway. Proposed Improvements Under the proposed intersection improvements, traffic will increase from approximately 86 trips per day, to 486 trips per day, an approximated 400 trip increase. Much of this traffic will be due to staff for the senior living facility which has shift changes in off peak hours creating less of an impact to the existing traffic patterns. In working with the applicant on what may be appropriate to deal with traffic at the site, several improvements have been proposed (Please see Component 3(b) – Transportation Plan of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2) to see the proposed improvements). First, to deal with the additional traffic, the applicant has proposed the installation of a left turn lane into their site so that traffic on northbound Park St. will not be backed up waiting for a vehicle to turn into 8 MACAA. Secondly, to deal with sight distance issues, they have proposed several improvements: • Realigning MACAA Drive to orient it directly across from Davis Ave. This creates better traffic efficiencies and gives drivers a more conventional intersection to anticipate driver movements • Modifications to the existing stone wall will increase the sight distance from 100’ to over 225’. While this does not meet the VDOT criteria for stopping sight distance for a 25mph roadway, the applicant proposes to install a warning sign with an advisory speed limit of 20mph on Park Street to alert drivers of the upcoming intersection. • The updated application has removed the originally proposed left turn out of MACAA Drive to match the existing conditions (“No Left Turn” sign out of MACAA Drive). The proposed improvements show a left turn out of MACAA Drive onto Park Street. The Traffic Engineer considers this not ideal due to the crest in the hill and notes should this PUD Development Plan get approved, the left turn could be removed per the Traffic Engineer requiring it under site plan review. • Installation of the left turn lane to the south provides room to provide a landscaped island to the north. • The north side crosswalk has been moved back to the south location (as requested by neighbors) and flashing beacons with pushbuttons are proposed, which provides greater pedestrian safety. There may be additional opportunity through the site plan process to enhance this crossing further with a rapid flashing beacon, which would provide greater pedestrian safety in this sensitive area. Currently, there is no rapid flashing beacon proposed. By Right Comparison The site was preliminarily evaluated for developable land after removing critical slopes and roadway needed to provide access and it was found that approximately 25-30 SFD could be built on the site. This would generate approximately 366 trips per day versus the proposed 486 trips per day. The nature of single family homes versus the combination of the senior living facility and MACAA would have very minimal difference on the peak hour traffic as the difference both in the morning and afternoon peaks are single digit vehicles (5 and 4 respectively). Conclusion The City Traffic Engineer concludes the following: • While there will be an increase in daily trips from existing conditions (MACAA operations: 86 trips per day) to what is proposed in the PUD Development Plan (Senior Living Facility + MACAA operations: 486 trips per day), much of this traffic will be due to staff for the senior living facility that will occur in off peak hours creating less of an impact to existing traffic patterns along Park Street. 9 • The project’s approximated trips compared to a potential by-right scenario have minimal difference, specifically peak hour morning and afternoon trips (the difference of both am/pm peak hours are in the single digits: 5 and 4 respectively). • The proposed improvements to the intersection will benefit sight distance and provide increased pedestrian connectivity and increased pedestrian safety via the south crosswalk location and proposed beacons. • Improvements generally comply with the Streets That Work Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood A Street Typology; however, the proposal does not account for a climbing bike lane along Park Street, where bicycle facilities are listed as the highest priority element within the Neighborhood A Street Typology. Z.O. Sec. 34-42(a) 1. Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan; a. Land Use The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the applicant’s Narrative Statement and Zoning Compliance on Sheet N2 of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2). Staff Analysis The Subject Properties are currently zoned R-1, where 1025 Park Street also has a Special Use Permit for a community education center to operate MACAA. All by- right, provisional, and special uses allowed within this zoning district are found in Sec. 34-420 – Use Matrix - Residential zoning district, where single-family detached housing is the most common of these uses. Existing Uses Address Zone Use 1021 Park Street R-1 Single-Family House 1023 Park Street R-1 Single-Family House (Stone House) 1025 Park Street R-1 with SUP for private Existing MACAA facility site school/education facility (community education center) The Subject Properties’ current zoning (R-1) limits residential uses to single-family detached dwellings (SFD), which may contain interior or exterior accessory dwelling units, limited to 1 SFD per 8,125 square foot lot effective density 5 DUA. The 2013 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates the Subject Properties to remain as 10 Low Density Residential, where the recommended density range provided for Low Density Residential areas is “not to exceed 15 DUA.” The residential density proposed is 16 DUA and exceeds what would be allowed under by-right zoning and the recommended Comprehensive Plan Low Density Residential range. Should this PUD be approved, the property would be limited to the following proposed uses found in the PUD Development Plan only. These include the Senior Living Facility (mix of Adult Assisted Living and Independent Living – total 141 units 151 units), Education Facility: Vocational (MACAA operations) and four (4) affordable, age restricted (62+) independent living cottages that are monitored by the Housing Program Coordinator per the proposed proffer statement. Staff finds the proposed density is not consistent with the City’s future Land Use Map; and, further, is not consistent with what is allowed by-right. Staff sees an argument for a higher density than allowed by-right in light of the Subject Properties’ size (9.312 acres), its isolated location (existing tree buffers and heavily wooded slopes on the west side), and the proposed use of a senior living facility having most traffic being generated from its employees; however, staff reserves concern with the proposed density (16 DUA) exceeding what is intended to be the maximum density listed in the Comprehensive Plan for Low Density Residential areas (not to exceed 15 DUA) and the by-right zoning allowance of 5 DUA in light of the surrounding R-1 neighborhood. Staff wants to note the reduction from 151 to 145 units, 4 of which are being proffered as affordable, is an improvement from the original application. While the proposed density is not consistent with the Future Land Use Map or by- right zoning density allowance, the PUD Development Plan contributes to other goals within the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The PUD Development Plan conforms to the following Land Use goals: Goal 2 – Mixed Use • Creates a unique opportunity for an “intergenerational campus,” where the children of the MACAA programs could interact and have joint programs with the residents of the Senior Living Facility. The proposed public access to the site allows neighborhood residents to enjoy the site’s environmental features and historic Rock Hill Gardens as well provide connection to the John Warner Parkway trail system. • Goal 2.3 Enhance pedestrian connections between residences, commercial centers, public facilities, amenities and green spaces. The PUD Development Plan conforms to Goal 2.3 by enhancing the MACAA Drive/Davis Ave intersection and proposing public access through an agreement with City Parks and Recreation Department to the historic Rock Hill Gardens and future connectivity to the John Warner Parkway trail system adjacent to Schenk’s Branch and McIntire Park. 11 Goal 3 – Public Space • Goal 3.1 Respect natural resources and sensitive environmental areas, including designated flood plain areas, river and streams. The PUD Development Plan stays largely out of the back portion of the site that contains the following significant environmental features: large stand of trees, critical slopes, flood plain, historic Rock Hill Gardens. Instead, the project proposes to retain this area as Open Space and allow for a portion thereof to be dedicated for public access. b. Community Facilities The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the applicant’s Narrative Statement and Zoning Compliance on Sheet N2 of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2). Staff Analysis Staff finds that the central location of the Subject Properties would be well serviced by many of the existing community facilities. The applicant notes the proposed project will conform to all applicable fire codes and regulations and will provide appropriate primary and secondary emergency ingress and egress points for fire, police and emergency responders. As part of the PUD Development Plan, the applicant provided (per Sec. 34-517(a)(7-8)) confirmation from Charlottesville’s Fire and Public Utilities Departments that there is adequate fire flow and water/wastewater capacities at the Subject Properties. [The proposed PUD Development Plan notes there are emergency access points of ingress and egress proposed at 1) the primary MACAA Drive entrance off Park Street, 2) access point adjacent to the Stone House along the existing driveway to Park Street with demountable bollards, and 3) the existing 250 Bypass onramp with demountable bollards. The Traffic Engineer and Fire Department have assessed that the two access points off of Park Street are adequate for EMS response and the access point off of 250 is not needed. In addition, the existing access has parts of the original stone wall of the Rock Hill Gardens located on either side as well as existing curb, grass strip and shared use path as a result of the interchange project. Staff has concern that while the applicant has noted to staff in e-mail correspondence that they will no longer propose this as an EMS access point, it is noted as a proposed EMS route on the PUD Development Plan currently proposed. The existing width of the access point (12’) is not wide enough for an emergency vehicle (standard width required is 20’), leaving staff to believe if this were to be used as an access point, the columns of the original wall and existing infrastructure (curb/shared use path) would be at risk. Because staff prefers the original stone wall be preserved and the access point is not needed or usable in its current state, staff is not in support of this EMS access point as shown on the current plan.] 12 UPDATE: The EMS access point originally proposed off of the 250 Bypass, posing risk to the original columns of the Rock Hill Gardens, has been removed. c. Economic Sustainability The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the applicant’s Narrative Statement and Zoning Compliance on Sheet N2 of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2). Staff Analysis Staff finds that NMSLC partnering with MACAA to support MACAA and its programs conforms to Goal 3 - Partnerships in the Economic Sustainability Chapter. Staff also finds the PUD Development Plan conforms to Goal 6 – Workforce by creating between 75-85 full and part-time positions associated with NMSLC and retaining 25 positions associated with MACAA operations at the Park Street location. d. Environment The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the applicant’s Narrative Statement and Zoning Compliance on Sheet N2 of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2). Staff Analysis Staff finds the PUD Development Plan conforms to Goal 3 – Urban Landscape & Habitat Enhancement, “protect, increase, and provide an interconnected system of green space and buffers….” The PUD Development Plan includes a Protection Plan (Component 3(h)) where approximately 3.3 acres to the rear of the site that contain critical slopes, heavily wooded areas, Rock Hill Gardens, successional meadow and space for a stormwater garden BMP are called for preservation). [While staff commends the applicant for placing the building structures generally within the existing MACAA building site and preserving many significant environmental features of the site, staff notes there would be an increase in impervious area, shown at approximately 20% on Component 2(b) of the PUD Development Plan. Staff also has concern that the majority of parking is shown as surface parking (impervious area), where a small portion of parking is proposed as permeable paving. Staff has concern there are trees of eight-inch caliper or larger that are proposed to be removed in the area called out to be surface parking and had asked the applicant previously to consider tuck-under parking or a portion thereof, where more of these existing trees could be preserved. In addition, staff does have concern there is discrepancy with the figures listed for ‘Total Tree Canopy Removed’ throughout the PUD Development Plan (See 13 Component 3(f), Component 3(h) and Component 4(a)). There are at least two figures listed (40,000 SF vs. 50,000 SF) that need to be clarified. Should this PUD Development Plan be approved, a tree canopy calculation that lists tree type, number of trees, and canopy per tree will be required during the site plan review process.] UPDATE: The impervious area has been reduced from 20% to 15%. The applicant in response to the concern of the amount of surface parking has reduced the amount of surface parking spaces from 164 to 140 and increased the amount of proposed permeable parking spaces from 33 to 47 spaces. In addition, the Protection Plan proposes to relocate a portion of the existing trees of 8” caliper or greater to other locations on-site (See Component 3h of the PUD Development Plan, Attachment 2). Please note the Total Tree Canopy to remain (SF) does not reflect potential canopy preserved from relocation of trees. The applicant has also clarified the Tree Canopy Removed figure at 50,000 SF. 14 Current stormwater regulations will prevent the subject properties from discharging additional stormwater above current levels. A detailed Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Stormwater Management Plan will be required at site plan review should the PUD be approved. PUD approval does not relieve the applicant from the responsibility of adhering to and meeting all federal, state and local design standard requirements prior to final site plan approval. e. Housing The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the applicant’s Narrative Statement and Zoning Compliance on Sheet N2 of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2). Staff Analysis Staff finds the PUD Development Plan contributes to the following Housing goals: Goal 2 – Maintain & Improve Housing Stock • Goal 2.5 “…providing support to programs and organizations serving the homeless and near-homeless population.” Part of the MACAA program offers housing and intensive case management for families facing homelessness in the community. Goal 7 – Design Options • “Offer a range of housing options to meet the needs of Charlottesville’s residents, including those presently underserved” By 2030, residents of Virginia who are 65 and older are approximated to double to 1.8 million and grow to 19% of the overall population.1 Residents who are 65 and older currently make up approximately 9.2% of Charlottesville’s population.2 It is staff’s opinion the PUD Development Plan provides a type of housing the Charlottesville can benefit from. [However, there was discussion at the April 5, 2017 preliminary meeting with Councilors Wes Bellamy & Kathy Galvin in attendance over potential partnerships that would enable a portion of the senior living units 1 Cai, Qian, “Virginia’s Diverse and Growing Older Population,” The Virginia Newsletter (Vol. 8, No. 2), April 2009, < http://www.coopercenter.org/sites/default/files/publications/vanl0409.pdf> 2 US Census Burea, 2011-2015 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates 15 to be subsidized at a more affordable rate. This was not indicated as part of the proposed PUD Development Plan.] Update: The applicant has proffered two (2) newly constructed duplexes (4 units total) of age restricted (62+) independent living cottages affordable to households earning 80% of AMI, this effort to be coordinated with the Housing Program Coordinator on compliance and reporting. In addition, the applicant has proffered a donation of $75,000 to the City’s Affordable Housing fund. f. Transportation The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the applicant’s Narrative Statement and Zoning Compliance on Sheet N2 of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2). Staff Analysis Staff finds the PUD Development Plan contributes to Goal 1 – Complete Streets in the Transportation chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The Transportation Plan featured on Component 3(b) of the PUD Development Plan depicts improvements that conform to the Neighborhood A Street Typology Design Guidelines found in the Streets That Work Plan. The improvements include: a newly constructed 5’ sidewalk, 4’ curbside buffer strip along MACAA Drive and street trees every 40 feet. The proposal does not include a 4’ curbside buffer along Park Street in order to maintain adequate sight line. The proposal includes a raised, landscaped median strip along Park Street. However, the proposal does not account for a climbing bike lane along Park Street, where bicycle facilities are listed as the highest priority element within the Neighborhood A Street Typology. A climbing lane should be incorporated with the pedestrian refuge. Staff supports the increased pedestrian connectivity throughout the site, specifically the public access piece of the proposal. [However, the PUD Development Plan does not show a connection from the existing 250 Bypass shared use path to the internal walkways within the site that connect to Park Street. This access would be required during site plan review should the PUD Development Plan be approved.] Update: The PUD Development Plan now calls for a pedestrian connection from the existing 250 Bypass shared use path to the internal walkways within site (See Component 2b, 3a). [Staff is concerned the PUD Development Plan only partially contributes to Goal 5 – Parking, to “provide parking to adequately meet demand and support economic vitality without sacrificing aesthetics, while minimizing environmental impacts and accommodating pedestrians, bicycles, transit users and disabled individuals.” While the proposal provides adequate parking spaces, staff has concern with the majority of the parking being provided as surface parking, where it was suggested by Staff and Council members to consider tuck-under parking.] Update: The applicant has 16 indicated after exploring tuck-under parking that this would not be financially feasible; however, efforts to address the concern has reduced the overall parking spaces from 164 to 144. The applicant justifies the reduction by stating the MACAA parking lot will be shared with senior living facility staff and visitors during MACAA’s off hours (MACAA’s operating hours are 7:15am-3:00pm). In addition, the applicant has increased the amount of permeable parking spots from 33 to 47 spaces. Staff believes the increased permeable paving locations are intentional as they are in close proximity to the proposed courtyards to the west and existing tree cover to the south. Staff believes that while the plan still contains a high number of parking spaces due to the scale of use, the reduced parking combined with the increase in permeable parking spaces is an improvement from the original application. Bicycle Parking is also not identified on the PUD Development Plan and would be required per Sec. 34-881 as part of the site plan review should the PUD Development Plan be approved. g. Historic Preservation & Urban Design The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the applicant’s Narrative Statement and Zoning Compliance on Sheet N2 of the PUD Development Plan (Attachment 2). The applicant has also provided a history of the Rock Hill Gardens (Sheet H1 of the PUD Development Plan). Staff Analysis Staff finds certain elements of the proposed PUD Development Plan are consistent with the Historic Preservation and Urban Design goals of the Comprehensive Plan in that the proposal is largely centered around preserving existing mature landscape to the rear portion of the Subject Properties, preserving the historic Rock Hill Gardens, and refurbishing the existing Stone House (1021 Park Street). [In addition, the PUD Development Plan includes Architectural Design Guidelines (Sheet G1 of the PUD Development Plan) for the MACAA school building and senior living facility in efforts to provide a context-sensitive design. While staff believes the scale of the proposed MACAA school building (2-story; maximum height 35’), the Independent Living Cottages (maximum height 35’), and the existing Stone House are context sensitive (located appropriately to front on Park Street and adjacent to existing single-family residences), staff has concern with the scale of the proposed senior living facility being proposed at 4-5 stories (75’ maximum height) when the surrounding properties zoned R-1 have a by-right maximum height of 35’. Staff does understand that given its location, the existing tree lines and grade would help mitigate the transition of this larger building; however, there is concern with the scale of the building in comparison to the surrounding area.] Update: The applicant has reduced the senior living facility by a full story, where the maximum height is 55’. In addition, the applicant has provided more detail on proposed materials of the 17 building to break up the massing. Please see Sheet G1 of the PUD Development Plan for details. Staff notes this is an improvement from the 75’ maximum height and believes the building, now that it is articulated differently, will be transition better given the location (existing tree lines and grade). The PUD Development Plan includes a Protection Plan (Component 3(h)) which specifically calls out the preservation of the historic Rock Hill Gardens, contributing to Goal 6, “provide effective protection to the City of Charlottesville’s historic resources.” The PUD Development Plan notes “Potential Public Open Space” as part of the Land Use Plan (Component 2(b)), where it notes there will be a “joint-use agreement between NMSLC and Charlottesville Parks and Recreation Department” for public access to the Rock Hill Gardens. This would likely be in form of a trail easement, the details of which would be worked out during the site plan review process should the PUD Development Plan be approved. Parks and Recreation staff has already had preliminary discussions with the applicant about the idea of opening this area up to the public for connectivity and access to the Rock Hill Gardens and are supportive of the joint-use agreement. [Staff does want to point out that on the Protection Plan (Component 3(h)), there is a note which states “This area may be included in a “joint use agreement” with the City defined for public access.” Staff’s only concern is the language on this sheet differs from the Land Use Plan provided and could be interpreted in the future as something that isn’t required as part of the PUD Development Plan.] Update: The language on Component 3(h) has been changed to “This area will be included in a “joint use agreement.” Staff believes preserving the Rock Hill Gardens and opening them to the public for access is a vital part of this PUD Development Plan for resource protection. During the Interchange project, the City compiled a treatment plan for the Rock Hill Gardens as part of the Section 106 process (federal funds on a historic property) which notes the gardens are eligible to be listed on the National Register (http://www.charlottesville.org/home/showdocument?id=33962). However, the Rock Hill Gardens are currently not listed and the PUD Development Plan provides definitive protection over this historic resource. 2. Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s furtherance of the general welfare of the entire community is provided in the applicant’s narrative statement. Staff Analysis Overall, staff agrees the concept of providing a senior living facility with the addition of four (4) affordable, age restricted units in a central location to serve the aging population in 18 conjunction with sustaining MACAA, which provides a number of services to the community (Head Start, Hope House, Project Discovery and Rural Outreach), is a benefit to Charlottesville. 3. Whether there is a need and justification for the change; The applicant has provided information on the factors that lead to a request to rezone the subject properties form R-1 to a PUD in the Narrative section of their application (Sheet N1 of the PUD Development Plan). Staff Analysis Staff finds the proposed uses of a senior living facility and MACAA are both assets to the Charlottesville community given the aging population and the programs run by MACAA that serve facets of the community in need. In addition, staff is aware the partnership between NMSLC and MACAA will sustain MACAA where otherwise MACAA might not be able to continue given their financial situation. As stated before, staff agrees with the overall concept paired with the uniqueness of the site it would locate on; [however, has concerns with scale, density and aspects of the layout (e.g. amount of surface parking, elements of intersection design) in relation to the surrounding residential neighborhood.] Update: Staff believes the scale of the building and the parking improvements (reduced number and increase in permeable parking spots) is an improvement to the overall layout of the site. Staff reserves concern with the density of the project; however, believes the uniqueness of the site (approximately 9 acres in size, somewhat of an isolated location with its grade and tree lines) will provide a buffer to the surrounding neighborhood, improving the transition. 4. When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. The location of the subject properties is currently served by existing public utilities and facilities. As part of the PUD Development Plan, the applicant provided per Sec. 34- 517(a)(7-8) confirmation from Charlottesville’s Fire Department and Public Utilities Department that there is adequate fire flow and water and wastewater capacities at the Subject Properties. Staff Analysis Any development on the subject properties would be evaluated during site plan review and need to meet all current regulations related to public utilities and facilities. Staff believes the overall concept of the PUD Development Plan as an “intergenerational campus” is appropriate for inclusion in the proposed zoning district. More detailed analysis provided in the following section: PUD Considerations. 19 PUD Considerations The applicant’s own analysis of the objectives listed as part of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district (Sec. 34-491) are included on Sheet N3 of the PUD Development Plan. Staff Analysis In reviewing an application for approval of a planned unit development (PUD) or an application seeking amendment of an approved PUD, in addition to the general considerations applicable to any rezoning the city council and planning commission shall consider whether the application satisfies the following objectives of a PUD district: (1) To encourage developments of equal or higher quality than otherwise required by the strict application of zoning district regulations that would otherwise govern; On Objective 1: Staff concludes that the applicant does meet this PUD objective. Strict application of the zoning would not allow for a larger senior living facility (R-1 allows for up to 8 Adult Assisted Living Residents) in conjunction with MACAA, preserving the Head Start and other programs that serve low-income families throughout the region. In addition, the proposed concept of the “intergenerational campus” is centered largely around preserving the environmental features located on the back of the property, including the preservation of and creating public access to the Rock Hill Gardens, which otherwise could be altered by a private property owner. The proposal includes preservation of the existing Stone House at 1021 Park Street, which currently has no overlay protection. In addition, the proposal provides connection to the existing John Warner Parkway trail, Schenk’s Branch and McIntire Park. It is staff’s opinion that current zoning would create a lesser quality site layout as the zoning designations would not support the opportunity presented in the PUD Development Plan, and rather, would promote a future development of single-family dwellings, in which the Rock Hill Gardens and existing Stone House aren’t protected and would not necessarily be preserved. The environmental features of the back portion of the property do have some protection as a developer would be required to apply for a Critical Slope Waiver if the proposed development disturbed any portion of the critical slope area; however, the future trail allowing public access to the Rock Hill Gardens and connections to the John Warner Parkway trail, Schenk’s Branch and McIntire Park would not be required in a by-right scenario. (2) To encourage innovative arrangements of buildings and open spaces to provide efficient, attractive, flexible and environmentally sensitive design. On Objective 2: Staff concludes that the applicant does overall meet this PUD objective. The applicant has proposed an environmentally sensitive development in the sense that the applicant has located the buildings within the existing MACAA operation building site, some of which front closer to the Park Street. The location of the buildings is in efforts to stay out of the preserved natural areas (3.30) at the back of the site which contain critical slopes, heavily wooded areas and 20 the Rock Hill Gardens. The PUD Development Plan depicts 58.92% of the site as Open Space to include the preserved natural areas (3.30 Acres) at the rear of the property. [However, staff does want to note it has a few comments in regards to the arrangement of proposed buildings on the building site. Staff would have liked to see more of an effort made to arrange the parking in such a way that it was more environmentally sensitive (use of “tuck-under” parking), where more of the existing trees of eight-inch caliper or greater located where the surface parking is proposed could be preserved.] Update: Staff believes that while the plan still contains a high number of parking spaces due to the scale of use, the reduced parking combined with the increase in permeable parking spaces is an improvement from the original application. (3) To promote a variety of housing types, or, within a development containing only a single housing type, to promote the inclusion of houses of various sizes; On Objective 3: Staff concludes the applicant does meet this PUD objective. The applicant’s proposal provides a mix of independent, assisted and memory care units within the senior living facility that will serve different needs within the aging community of Charlottesville. (4) To encourage the clustering of single-family dwellings for more efficient use of land and preservation of open space; On Objective 4: Staff concludes that the applicant does meet this PUD objective. Though there are no single-family dwellings proposed, the applicant has proposed a development plan with buildings clustered closer to Park Street and largely within the existing MACAA building site in order to preserve the 3.30 acres of natural areas at the back of the site. (5) To provide for developments designed to function as cohesive, unified projects; On Objective 5: Staff concludes that the applicant does meet this PUD objective. The proposed development plan provides a unique concept of an “intergenerational campus” that locates a senior living facility and the MACAA operations/school in the same place, where the applicant states shared programs will occur between the NMSLC and MACAA. Staff is eager to learn more about the future shared programming as these events would make the site a true “Intergenerational Campus.” The PUD Development Plan indicates a parking/event space designed with pavers, landscaping and lighting to encourage during off hours shared evening events. In addition, the site is unified through close proximity and connected walkways. (6) To ensure that a development will be harmonious with the existing uses and character of adjacent property, and/or consistent with patterns of development noted with respect to such adjacent property; On Objective 6: Staff concludes the applicant has improved its application to does not meet this PUD objective. The PUD Development Plan includes more detailed Architectural Design Guidelines (Sheet G1 of the PUD Development Plan) for the MACAA school building and senior living facility in 21 efforts to provide a context-sensitive design. Staff believes the scale of the proposed MACAA school building (2-story; maximum height 35’), the affordable, age-restricted Independent Living Cottages (maximum height 35’), and the existing Stone House are context sensitive and locate appropriately to front on Park Street (adjacent to existing single-family residences). Staff believes the senior living facility is improved in overall scale now that it has been reduced a full story, with a new maximum height of 55’. The surrounding properties zoned R-1 have a by-right maximum height of 35’. Staff does understand that given its location, the existing tree lines and grade would help mitigate appearance of the 4-story building and provide for a transition; however, staff still has concern with the building in light of the building’s proposed scale and density. The proposed density (16 DUA) exceeds what would be allowed under by-right zoning (5 DUA) and the recommended Comprehensive Plan Low Density Residential range (not to exceed 15 DUA). (7) To ensure preservation of cultural features, scenic assets and natural features such as trees, streams and topography; On Objective 7: Staff concludes that the applicant does significantly contribute to this PUD objective. The applicant is preserving 3.3 acres of the back portion of the site that include critical slopes, floodplain, large stand of trees and the historic Rock Hill Gardens. (8) To provide for coordination of architectural styles internally within the development as well as in relation to adjacent properties along the perimeter of the development; and On Objective 8: Staff concludes the applicant meets this PUD objective and has included a unified architectural style internally to the development as shown in the Architectural Design Guidelines (Sheet G1 of the PUD Concept Plan). The structures closer to Park Street are of most concern in their relation to the adjacent properties and staff believes their scale and style will coordinate appropriately with the adjacent single-family residences. (9) To provide for coordinated linkages among internal buildings and uses, and external connections, at a scale appropriate to the development and adjacent neighborhoods; On Objective 9: Staff concludes that the applicant does meet this PUD objective. The proposed development plan provides a shared use plaza/park space (permeable paver area) for NMSLC/MACAA events and gatherings, internal and external walkways available for use by the potential users and neighboring residents, an area dedicated for a future public trail allowing access to the historic Rock Hill Gardens and connection to the John Warner Parkway trail system, 5’ sidewalks along the perimeter of the site and a realigned intersection with pedestrian refuge for crossing Park Street from Davis Ave. In addition, the PUD Development Plan now shows a connection from the existing 250 Bypass shared use path to the internal walkways within the site that connect to Park Street. (10) To facilitate access to the development by public transit services or other single-vehicle- alternative services, including, without limitation, public pedestrian systems. 22 On Objective 10: Staff concludes that the applicant does meet this PUD objective. The proposed development improves the Park Street/Davis Ave/MACAA Drive intersection and both NMSLC and MACAA use their own multi-person transit vans and JAUNT. The applicant has also expressed should the PUD Development Plan be approved, they would inquire about a Charlottesville Area Transit (CAT) bus route to the site. Bicycle Parking is not identified on the PUD Development Plan and would be required per Sec. 34-881 as part of the site plan review should the PUD Development Plan be approved. Proffers The applicant did not provide a proffer statement as part of this application. The updated application includes a proffer statement proffering the following: (i) Providing two (2) duplexes (4 units total) of age restricted (62+) housing affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI), this effort to be coordinated with the Housing Program Coordinator on compliance and reporting; and, (ii) Donation of $75,000 to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing fund. Public Comments Received Per Sec. 34-41(c)(2), the applicant held a Community Meeting on July 17, 2017. There have been several neighborhood residents who have sent separate written correspondence to NDS that are attached to this report (Attachment 4). General comments from the public regarding the PUD Rezoning request are: • Concern around increased in traffic generated from the senior living facility • Missing portion of sidewalk along Davis not included as part of intersection improvements • Desire for applicant to maintain the already established crosswalk that runs from south side of Davis to south side of MACAA Drive Update: Applicant has removed the crosswalk from the north side and relocated to south side at neighbors request (with the addition of flashing beacons) • The proposed intersection showing a left turn onto Park Street out of MACAA Drive where currently there is a “No Left Turn” sign Update: The proposed intersection improvements have eliminated the left turn and proposed a pork chop to force traffic right • Concern around noise generated from the use (e.g. dumpsters, food deliveries) • Desire for a public or commercial space (café or restaurant) in the development for neighborhood residents to gather • Desire for the site to remain single-family residential in neighbor to maintain the neighborhood feel. Concern the duplexes don’t fit with the adjacent single-family residences. For more detailed public comment, please see correspondence in Attachment 4. 23 Staff Recommendation Overall, staff finds the proposed PUD Development Plan provides a unique opportunity for an “intergenerational campus” that provides housing for the growing 65+ population, sustains MACAA, an organization that provides programs that meet many of the City’s goals in serving the low-income community and commits to providing four (4) affordable, age restricted (65+) units on- site in coordination with the City’s Housing Coordinator. In addition, the concept layout demonstrates efforts to use environmentally sensitive design by utilizing the existing building site in order to preserve the environmental and historic features of the site (environmental features at rear of site: critical slopes, heavily wooded areas, meadows, Rock Hill Gardens, flood plain), which otherwise might not be preserved in a by-right scenario. The applicant has demonstrated their intent to improve connectivity and access through the proposed improvements at the Park/Davis Ave/MACAA Drive intersection, many of which comply with Streets That Work, and the proposed future public access via an agreement with City Parks and Recreation to allow for public access to the historic Rock Hill Gardens and the existing John Warner Parkway trail system. Staff believes the designation of a PUD allows for the unique, integrated mix of uses that would be a benefit to this community and a site layout that is, for the most part, cohesive and environmentally sensitive. Staff would like to stress that overall, they are supportive of the concept. Many of staff’s previous concerns (listed below) have been addressed in the updated application; however, there are concerns that remain. Please see the original list of staff’s concerns below with updates so that Planning Commission can take these into consideration when making their recommendation: 1. The proposed intersection improvements (Component 3(b) of the PUD Development Plan) show a left turn out of MACAA Drive onto Park Street (existing conditions: “No Left Turn” sign out of MACAA Drive). The Traffic Engineer considers this not ideal due to the crest in the hill and notes should this PUD Development Plan get approved, the Traffic Engineer can require the left turn be removed under site plan review. The application no longer includes the left turn out of MACAA Drive and has proposed to install a “pork-chop” to direct traffic right. 2. The PUD Development Plan does not show a connection from the existing 250 Bypass shared use path to the internal walkways within the site that connect to Park Street. This access could provide an integral connection to the greater City trail systems and staff notes this would be required during site plan review should the PUD Development Plan be approved per Sec. 34- 897. The application includes allowance for pedestrian access from the existing 250 Bypass shared use path to the internal walkways within the site connecting to Park Street. 3. The proposed density of 16 DUA exceeds the by-right density (effective density for R-1: 5 DUA and the Comprehensive Plan density range for Low Density Residential, where for those areas it states to “not exceed 15 DUA.” While staff sees an argument for a higher density than allowed by-right in light of the Subject Properties’ size (9.312 acres), its isolated location (existing tree buffers and heavily wooded slopes on the west side), and the proposed use of a senior living facility having most traffic being generated from its employees, staff has concern with the proposed density (16 DUA) exceeding the by-right density (5 DUA) and what is intended to be the maximum density listed in the Comprehensive Plan for Low Density Residential areas (not to exceed 15 DUA). Staff still holds its concern with the propose density, 24 but wants to note the new layout and reduction of height in the proposed senior living facility building is an improvement from the original application in countering the impact of the number of units proposed. 4. The proposed massing and scale of the senior living facility, reduced from 5 stories to 4 stories with a maximum height of 55’ is an improvement from the original 75’ maximum height in comparison to the surrounding neighborhood that contains single-family residences not to exceed 35’ in height per their R-1 zoning. Staff notes that the size of the building is arguably more hidden given the location of the site and the preserved wooded areas and the location of the building situated back behind the three structures that front on Park Street (proposed not exceed the existing by-right height of 35’). While staff believes the updated proposed massing and scale would be better hidden behind the tree-line and provide for a better transition than the original proposed massing and scale, staff still has concern the scale is larger than what would be allowed in the current zoning and in light of the surrounding neighborhood. 5. [Staff has concern with the amount of surface parking for the following: resulted loss of some of the existing trees of eight-inch caliper or greater and there being more innovative and environmentally sensitive approaches (“tuck-under” parking) that might not have been explored.] Staff believes the applicant has made a considerable effort to address this concern providing for an improved layout, where the total number of parking spaces provided has been reduced 20 spaces and there is an increase in permeable parking spaces. The applicant has also noted relocation of trees that are eight-inch caliper or greater to other places on-site to help preserve more trees. While staff believes the scale (number of units) is the driving force behind the large number of parking spaces, where a smaller-scale senior living facility would require less parking, staff believes this is an improvement from the original application and commends the applicant’s efforts to utilize shared sparking and permeable paving. 6. Staff has concern with the proposed EMS access point off of 250 Bypass being that the recently constructed shared use path as part of the Interchange project blocks that access of and that part of the original Rock Hill Garden walls are on either side of the existing access, putting them at risk. Traffic Engineering and Fire Department have confirmed the two EMS access points off of Park are adequate. It is of staff’s opinion this should not be an EMS access point and should remain permanently closed. Staff does not support the proposed EMS access point as shown on the PUD Development Plan currently proposed plan. Staff will note the applicant has stated through e-mail correspondence the EMS point would be removed and there would be no change; however, staff has to evaluate the proposed PUD Development Plan as shown. The EMS access point off of the 250 Bypass has been removed. 7. In light of the public comment received, staff would like to note it supports maintaining the existing crosswalk that runs from south side of Davis to south side of MACAA Drive. The applicant has proposed to maintain existing crosswalk that runs from south side of Davis to south side of MACAA Drive and has proposed flashing beacons for improved pedestrian safety. 25 8. Regarding the “joint use agreement between NMSLC and Charlottesville Parks and Recreation” for the public access to the Rock Hill Gardens, staff is slightly unclear about the note provided on the Protection Plan (Component 3(h)), which states “This area may be included in a “joint use agreement” with the City defined for public access.” Staff’s only concern is the language on this sheet differs from the Land Use Plan provided (Component 2(b)) and could be interpreted in the future as something that isn’t required as part of the PUD Development Plan. The applicant has clarified the discrepancy in language regarding the area called that is called out for a joint use agreement between NMSLC and Charlottesville Parks and Recreation for public access to the Rock Hill Gardens, noting that the area will be under a joint-use agreement. 9. Staff has concern there is discrepancy with the figures listed for ‘Total Tree Canopy Removed’ throughout the PUD Development Plan (See Component 3(f), Component 3(h) and Component 4(a)). There are at least two figures listed (40,000 SF vs. 50,000 SF) that need to be clarified. Should this PUD Development Plan be approved, a tree canopy calculation that lists tree type, number of trees, and canopy per tree will be required during the site plan review process. The applicant has clarified the Total Tree Canopy Removed figure as being 50,000 SF. Attachments (1) Application (2) PUD Development Plan, dated August 28, 2017 (3) Application Rejection Letters dated May 8 and June 5, 2017 (4) Public Comments Received (5) PC Preliminary Discussion Report, dated April 11, 2017 (6) PC Informal Public Hearing Staff Report, August 8, 2017: https://www.charlottesville.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=55723 Suggested Motions 1. I move to recommend the approval of this application to rezone the properties located on Tax Map 47, Parcels 7.1, 8, 11 from R-1, and SUP for Community Education Center on Tax Map 47, Parcel 7.1 to PUD, on the basis that the proposal would serve the interests of the general public welfare and good zoning practice. 2. I move to recommend denial of this application to rezone properties located on Tax Map 47, Parcels 7.1, 8, 11 from R-1, and SUP for Community Education Center on Tax Map 47, Parcel 7.1, to PUD for the following reasons: 3. I move to recommend deferral of this application to rezone properties located on Tax Map 47, Parcels 7.1, 8, 11 from R-1, and SUP for Community Education Center on Tax Map 47, Parcel 7.1, to PUD for the following reasons: 26 Attachment 5 . L\t ASSENAAR • m rNKLER ARCHITtCTS I l'LANNT•S Augu.« '.?ii, 2017 ~(s. I TC2thcr Nc:w1nyc.t J\1<..:1> C:iry f>l::inoet C:iry of C'.h:a.rklttts\'ille Vhguua 610 r.1."IT \f:arket St.tftl Owioncsnlle. \' .:\ 22'XJ2 Re: MC\C:\..\ hlt~ r"'-rioo CampusPL'D R~ Arrlioarioo ff.M 47:1'7.1, 8, and 111 t >c:ar Heath~ P lc:::t'IC fin d in ilie atht<.:hed tt\·i.3cd :tpplie:arion for tfue al>ovc proj<."C't. We npprcci.tce th.... l!me you., t-iti."JiY C:rc:iiqr, ~d lltt'JlJl.IUl Duuc:1.n have "lpetir heltling U3 tu ttfuu: our 11uhmi..111!iioo b:lseJ •Jll itaff, cnmrnunity ~oi.i pL:uining commiuion cnnlm(';rlt$. 1\s we Wcu1111cd in C'IUr 1-:a'lr n1c:-.cti.t1g v;..: ha\·c included :1. '"'red line'' ruttr:lltl.vc and '"clouded.. P l!l). pl.a-a ''t'm:uU of the ltlbmi!litil')fl tndkauog th~ :lrc:t!l U'hic.h h2~t- betlJ. tt\·.bt:c.1 :ll -o,.•c0 ~ :l fuuJ ~<:k:ao" ,-t:aWn U OW' rc:TU~ Nhmi:ssioo.. \"(.c- bcl"=: rlur cioos and alh-icc snd 'C'C :iipprc::ciace yuur wods. wu:h us. \X'c h2n also indud..J an CXSe CU:mpV'11C:Ut» of the comprehensive plao ....-bic-h u't: have coordin-:ilOO \\•1th the J 10\.UtinA Prnw:un Olrocto: al the City. We :a.re in the p t •X:CSS o($cltiug up M)mc !lddirinn;il. oou:uu.Wlity mtt:dnR1' for the pmjoct ~.s \•tell av iuWvidwJ mcctinQ' wh.h couccmed ncighbo~ !lnd (: ily Offidals u.·hctc srp ropri:uc. \Ve \\111 u oti:fy ynu (')f these mteti:ogs as tlu:y dc:vcl(')f> nnd wookl wdcomc your urcnd2ncc a nd 00tllmt'tlt5. A~ mu noted "'·e: will be ptcpatUlA 2 pm:cr poiru ~~tit:>n fut rhc 'Pb.nning Comn:u:sswu mcmnji; in Octnbcr :tod J "'ill grt ttm to you in :ufv:lnce of th'"' mrxting u -on:D u £"2['CI' ,·enio.n fur the Phnn"'S eo.mw..iuu md Ciiy C.aww:a ~ We hn-c -uDChod ~ SUtmmt)' vf the written conccms you .,1cnaficd lD the ~12ff n:port and our !tipOllSCS m th<>.;e which att included in me rerised ml)Jnis.""1 poc:bae- Pl.... fed fro<, tu kt me nr ~ny n~rnber of our temi kn<>W if' yl)U have additiotD.l quatioru or c:t>nC(n\s wh.it:h arise 2.s yon t'C'ricw our te\·ised :;ubmJ5sjon. ~ rl a:5!5dtur, 1 .1 Rq>....,,,.,;vc for Ml.SLC and MAC:AA C.c ~"- R"""' Hcdcick. Ms Harrier Ksplao. ~IL o.,·i