 All right. Sound the alarm proclamation. Whereas Durham is committed to ensuring the safety and security of all those living in and visiting the city. And whereas home fires continue to be a serious public safety concern both locally and nationally. And homes are where people are at the greatest risk from fire. And whereas home fires killed 3,400 people and injured 14,670 people in the United States in 2017, according to the National Fire Protection Association. And whereas the risk of dying in a home fire is cut in half in homes with working smoke alarms. And whereas more than one third of home fire deaths result from fires in which no smoke alarms are present. And whereas more than half of home fire deaths result from fires reported at night between 11 PM and 7 AM when most people are asleep. And whereas residents should install smoke alarms in every sleeping room outside each separate sleeping area and on every level of the home. Now, therefore, I, Stephen M. Schul, mayor of the city of Durham, North Carolina, who hereby proclaim, as April 27th, but I'll say April 15, 2019, as sound the alarm day in Durham and hereby urge all citizens to be prepared and to support the efforts of protecting their homes and families. We encourage all residents to ensure their home is protected with working smoke alarms. Witness my hand and the corporate seal of the city of Durham, North Carolina, this 15th day of April, 2019. Chiefs, all of us. Mayor Schul, members of council, on behalf of the 418 men and women of the Durham Fire Department, and I'm trying to say Durham better. Yeah, thank you. I'm working really hard at that. Thank you so much for the proclation tonight. I wanna tell you really why it's the 27th and what's it about. It's about our fire department getting into the community every Saturday all summer long for 19 straight weeks. There are 19 stations in the fire department. That's why we're doing 19 weeks. That means for two hours every Saturday, we're going door to door, put up smoke detectors and share our safety message. We're gonna be focused, thank you. We're gonna be focused on one station every week. That's why there's 19 and we're really looking forward to getting it out in the community. If I could real quick introduce with me, Captain Carol Reardon. Really fast on April 27th, along with 12 of the chapters of the Red Cross and over 300 volunteers, we will be doing a Sound the Alarm event. We'll be installing 1,000 smoke alarms across the city of Durham. We're staging at Whitted School and we will be working across the city. So this is a great opportunity for Durham. Raleigh installed 800 last year, so we're at least gonna do 800 one. I'm going for 1,000. I have 1,000 installed and we're gonna get, we're gonna do 1,000. Thank you. Thank you so much, council member. Thank you, captain and chief. We appreciate you. For our last item, me gustaria invitar al porio al calde Juan Pablo Barquero y a todos nuestros amigos de nuestra nueva ciudad de Mana de Chilaran Costa Rica. Woo! Yeah! Everybody got in on tonight. Tambien. Seven of us got up there. Me gustaria invitar a Ilba Prego, presidenta del comité de Chilaran, Iraq Santa George, presidenta de la asociacion de Costa Rica, a unirse a nosotros. Come on up everybody. And I'm gonna ask council member Caballero to join me. She's our, right? Please come up. Keep coming. Room for everybody. Esta noche, en mi oficina el al calde y yo, formamos un acuerdo de cooperacion entre nuestras dos ciudades. Quiero dar la bienvenida el al calde Barquero a Durham junto con todos nuestros nuevos amigos de Costa Rica. Esperamos una relacion larga y fuerte entre la gente de Durham y la gente de Chilaran. Ahora tendremos algunos comentarios del al calde Barquero. Good evening. My English is not good, but I will try. So I apologize for this. Yesterday, I had the opportunity needed to hear in the Church of Duke that only successful people get up again. A phrase that reflects the history of Durham because when the American tobacco left Durham, you managed to get up and threw Durham into an impressive city which evidences its development in every corner. The regulation of buildings and the management of public space reflects an excellent planning order and have managed to build a beautiful city. My country, Costa Rica, is small, but has many things to offer and experiences to chair. I am one of the youngest mayors in Costa Rica. And I feel so happy that today we can say this agreement to establish this twinning with a successful city like yours. Chilaran is a beautiful town with an exuberant nature with many landscapes surrounded by mountains and wind and friendly, honest and hardworking people. Chilaran was the first city in Latin America to produce energy based on wind. And is where the largest lake in our country is located where water based energy is also produced. Our region produced 44% of energy of Costa Rica and in my town, that two main energy sources of the percentage are located. Today it's all like to thank God for being here to all of you, to the mayor, to sister cities, especially to Mr. Brady, to the community of Chilaran in Durand, especially to Mrs. Ilba, who is for her than we are here. To Melisa, to Patricia, and the all members of the Costa Rican Association in Durand, represented by its president, Roxana. Where are these that you can be here in this important day? I hope we can continue building bonds on friendship and on behalf of our entire Costa Rican delegation. I want to thank you for the welcome you have given us. They have made you feel like, I want to end with the words that characterize my country. The phrase is, my country, the phrase is pura vida, pura vida, pure life. When you use, when you use it for everything, to welcome pura vida, to say goodbye, pura vida, to say that we are well, pura vida. So, every time you hear this phrase, pura vida, that symbolize that there is a Costa Rican. Thank you, thank you very much, pura vida. I'm gonna ask Ilba Prego, if she would also just like to say a quick word to us. Would you like to add anything? Hola, good evening. I'm so grateful and so excited and for the support of both mayor to bring our two community together, our sister city and continue with the friendship. The product is the sister city idea, start with our exchange program for use. I believe in use, change in life and have this great opportunity. And I would like to say thank you, for being ready and the old member of the different community for the great support that I have with you, becoming the sister city. Melisa, the director of the school district, give a great support. And my husband, Tom, that always has been supported and is here. Thank you and we are so excited. Thank you. Thank you all so much. We appreciate having everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Great to have a new sister city. And I'm looking forward to my first trip to Tilaran. Oravida. Oravida. That's just a note. Oravida. So you're in Costa Rica. All right, council members. That was a lot more ceremonial items that we usually have, but okay, we're going with it. And we are very happy to have our friends in Costa Rica here. I think they've had a wonderful few days and it sure has been great getting to spend some time with them. Okay, now I'm going to ask, are there any announcements by members of the council? Council Member Alston. I'm sure. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to echo your words. That's to start out our meeting on recognition of the events from last week. So I'll just say simply that, you know, I want to express my sincere gratitude for the very swift and heroic work by our staff and many of our partners. I want to honor the life of Mr. Lee. I want to wish everyone who's been injured a swift recovery and also just again, kind of put a fine point on my gratitude to the fire department for the many lives that they certainly saved last week. And I just want to add our thanks for kind of our regional partners, including folks in Wake County and I believe Orange County who provided a tremendous amount of support. Last weekend and possibly even now. So just want to add that. Thank you. Thank you, thank you for that reminder. Other colleagues or anyone else would like to, Council Member Freeman. I would also like to echo those words and recognizing how quickly and efficiently everyone worked to make sure the communication was available. And I want to also add in there the work of American Red Cross. Can you say that again, I'm sorry. And the work of the American Red Cross. American Red Cross, thank you. But yes, thank you. Anyone else? Council Member Middleton. Mr. Mayor, thank you so much. Good evening everyone. I want to of course echo everything my colleagues have said. I used to fight with my little brother over getting one of those toys out of cereal boxes when I was a kid. And one time I pulled out a glow in a dark car and it wasn't working. My mom said, go in the bathroom and turn the light off. And she explained to me that glow in the dark toys worked when the lights are out. And then my Sunday school teacher told me that glow is the same word as glorious and that glory doesn't show up until the dark times come. Our first responders absolutely glowed last week. They were glorious. It was a dark time, but the best of us came out. I want to thank the Durham Fire Department, the Durham Police Department, all of our emergency responders. I think Councilor Austin recognized our system municipalities and those who sent help to us. It's hard to go through dark times and challenging times, but it's such that oftentimes our best glow comes out in those times. And we saw the best of Durham this past week and the darkest of hours. I'm so grateful and so proud of the city and our hearts continue to go out to the Kong family and to those that were injured. And we pray other speedy recovery. Thank you, Durham. Thank you, those that served, those that serve us. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Council Member. Any other announcements, Council Members? All right, thank you very much. And now I'll ask, are there any priority items by the city manager? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, everyone, members of council. And I too want to first, Mr. Mayor, members of council, thank you for taking the time to make those remarks and to recognize the work of a great, great group of employees. And I want to also extend my pride and appreciation to all of them, the leadership and the first responders and all of the employees who played a part, an important part in responding to that terrible situation last week. So thank you for that again. This evening, we do have one priority item, which is agenda item number 10, the general classification and compensation plan recommendations pursuant to some of the questions that you had asked during the work session. There is some additional information and response that has been added as an attachment to item six or attachment six to item 10. And I believe you notified of that earlier. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Manager. I don't believe we need to vote on that. And now Madam Attorney, any priority items? Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council and members of the community. City Attorney's office has no priority items to see. Thank you. Madam Clerk. Good evening, everyone. The City Clerk's office has no items. Thank you so much. And now we'll move to the consent agenda. The consent agenda is work that we have previously done and an item, the agenda can be approved by a single vote of the council. An item can be pulled by any member of the council or any member of the public. And if it is pulled, it would be held until for discussion until the end of the meeting. Item one, vacant positions performance audit, March, 2019. Item two, approval of city council minutes. Item three, selection of the external auditor on item four, comprehensive plan engagement services. Item six, families moving forward 2017-18, community development block grant, CDBG, or sub recipient contract for comprehensive case management services. Item seven, North Durham phase three hydraulic model. Item eight, Southeast region lift station award of construction contractor, Heron Construction Company, Inc. Item nine, fourth amendment of the management agreement by and among city and county of Durham and global spectrum LP. Item 11, agreement to support MOGFest 2019 operated by MOG Institute, Inc. Using city of Durham grant funds. Item 12, amendment to manage security network and services, Carolinas IT contract. Item 21, resolution support of the Medicare for all act of 2019. And I'm going to now accept the motion that we approve the consent agenda. So moved. And moved to second that we approve the consent agenda. Madam clerk, will you please open the vote? Please close the vote. The motion passes seven zero. Thank you very much. We do have here someone who has come who wanted to speak on one of the items and I'm going to go ahead and let that happen now. I believe Dr. Heather Kim is here. Dr. Kim. Dr. Heather Kim here. Dr. Kim, could you please come to this microphone right here? And you have two minutes. You have two minutes, Dr. Kim. We're glad you're here. I will try to make it very fast. So first of all, I'd like to thank the city council for the opportunity to speak here in support of the resolution to support Medicare for all act of 2019 on behalf of coalition for healthcare of North Carolina. I'm currently a fourth year psychiatry resident and I spent most of last Friday just arguing with insurance companies on prior authorizations. This is very fleshed in my mind. So we as a country spend an enormous amount of money on healthcare collectively and individually and we spend more than any other developed country on earth and we don't really have the outcomes to show for it. Our current system forces people to change doctors every time they change their job if they're lucky enough to have insurance. It forces doctors to become bureaucrats. It forces patients to make impossible choices. And just in the four years that I've been practicing in Durham, I don't know how many people have told me that they've only refilled their medication just once in the last three months because they didn't have enough money to pay their copay every month. And I don't know how many people who I admitted overnight for a hypertensive crisis or a heart failure or a heart attack or suicide whose admission could have been prevented by cheap preventative routine healthcare and medications they could have gotten as outpatient. And I don't know how many people I didn't admit because they never just made it there. And these are people who have insurance. These aren't even people who aren't insured. Even though the ACAS decreased the percentage of the uninsured by 50% during that time, people who are underinsured, so people who have insurance and can't afford to use their insurance has doubled in that time. So how can we wonder why do we have the worst outcomes for the most amount of money that we can spend? Our current system is a failure. It doesn't take care of patients. It doesn't make doctors happy. And it's incredibly cost inefficient if the human suffering isn't enough to sway your mind. The only people whose needs are met by the system are the health insurance executive and the for-profit hospitals and pharmaceutical executives. So considering where this discussion was just a few years ago, it makes me incredibly hopeful and optimistic to see that this resolution is being considered. And I really do hope it's passed tonight. By itself, it is not sufficient, but it's a necessary step forward in making our healthcare system work a little bit better for everyone else. Thank you. Dr. Kim, thank you very much for being here. We appreciate it. And just to be clear, we did just pass that resolution. And I hope it's influential. All right, we'll now move to item 10, general classification and compensation plan recommendations. We have a number of speakers to this item, but I believe we're first going to hear a presentation from staff. And not a presentation, Mr. Mayor, just staff is prepared to make any comments. Okay, staff. Okay, great. Good evening, Regina Youngblood, human resources presentation was provided on the 4th of April, so I'm here to answer any additional questions that were not answered by the attachment that the manager referenced earlier. Thank you so much. All right, I think what we will do is we will now proceed to hear from some speakers, council members, if this meets with your approval, and then we'll follow that up with questions and comments. And Ms. Youngblood, we'll get you back when we're speakers are done. I have one, two, three. I have four speakers signed up for this item, and if you all could come down here to my right, and I will call you in this order. Could y'all come down here, please? Thanks. First will be Dante Strabino, second will be Donald Quick, third will be Romy Gaddy, and fourth will be Sarah Vukalich. Mr. Strabino, you're first. Welcome, please give us your name and address, and you have three minutes. Greetings, City Council. Dante Strabino, 2400 Yorkdale Court, Field Organizer with the Durham City Workers, U.E. Local 150. I was hoping to go after some of the city workers, but... That's okay, if you'd like to do that, we can arrange for that. Dante, if you'd like to do that, I don't mind that, it's okay with me. Yeah, that would be great. All righty, then I will call Donald Quick. Mr. Quick, welcome, you have three minutes. Please give us your name and address. Hi, y'all doing this evening? Good. On behalf of the Durham City Workers, U.E. 150, we came with some, I guess it's an issue or whatnot, but over in our department, I'm over in public works. Right now we got like 15.3% no hires, over in water management that got like 11.1. Now, I know water management is supposed to be moving to their own facility. And once they move, then public works will be there. The thing I'm saying is, we need some help because all this building, all this space we're gonna have, I mean, who's gonna be down there working? Right now, you know, they telling us weekend work, we gotta work on the weekend. Well, pretty much volunteer, they saying, you know, if people don't volunteer, then we'll have to work on the weekend. We wanna spend time with our families, just like everybody else wanna spend time with their families. Also in water management, we asking that, you know, these guys, I mean, they pretty much work round the clock. And it's sad that, you know, they have to do this because they got families also. On the other hand, Mr. Barnfield, we also gave you a letter, we sent you a letter concerning the issues of eight hours comp time for every week. We are on call currently, earn seven hours. Number two, to be paid daily overtime, for any time work beyond eight hours workdays. Number three is to be allowed to take a day off after overtime or on call without losing vacation time, no additional on call day requirements for a year. Four year is enough. And basically, that's my issue. We need some help, you know, right now we just, I mean, we doing the best for what we got, but we getting the work done. And I know it's about numbers because every quarter they come to us and they let us know the numbers of the pot holes and the water and sewer repairs. And if y'all look around Durham, they putting up houses everywhere and we going to get this work done, pavement failures, all that. So our concern is, you know, we need some help. And I know they needed over in water management. I know they do. Because like I say, don't guys work round the clock. I mean, we had a main line bus. Them guys came out there and jumped on it and took care of it. So my thing to counsel and, you know, the city manager, you know, let's get on this thing about getting us some help. Because I don't know exactly what the requirements are. I know they did back up some stuff to where, you know, we can hire more laborers and whatnot, but we also need to be skilled when we out there. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Quinn. We appreciate you. Thank you very much. Romy Gatti. Hello, my name is Nelson Walker and I work for General Service. Sir, excuse me, is Romy, I don't see Romy. Is Romy here? Okay, sir, you can go ahead and speak. You have three minutes. Once you've finished, I want you to go over there please and sign one of these cards, okay? All right. All right, go ahead. You have three minutes. Give us your name. I'm speaking for General Service. First of all, we appreciate the raise we are supposed to receive this year. And the workers appreciate because we work through rain, sleet, and snow. And we are still waiting on to receive some better equipment. And not awarding basis or certification in the future. There are important certifications that are no longer going to be awarded with compensation, such as the water distribution and the collection certificate. General Service also has a pesticide certificate and there are others. This incentive was important for employees to better themselves and seek compensation. Folding that into an unfair merit and evaluation simply does not guarantee employees will be compensated for going above and beyond retaining their certificate. So employees would like to get better pay and compensation on this award in the future. Thank you very much. We appreciate you being here. Sarah Vukulich. Ms. Vukulich, welcome. Please give us your name and address. You have three minutes. Sarah Vukulich, 710 Underwood Ave in Durham. I do want to say it really briefly and there's a lot to say. So I'll be super brief about this. Our, I and our union and the Durham Workers Assembly really stand in support and applaud the city council on the Medicare for all resolution. That's something that our national union is taking up around the country and all of our locals. We're going to be pushing that issue with other progressive forces. And I just want to say briefly, it's great. We're excited that y'all are pushing that on the federal level and we just to put on your radar would be really excited to be pulling together with other progressive forces and with y'all to host like a town hall to keep raising the profile that issue and building around it. So I just want to put that on your radar. I also want to like the other workers who are speaking tonight support and applaud the city council for creating a step plan. That's something I know the union's been fighting for since before I joined it, years before I joined it. And it's a huge step in the right direction. I can't stand up here and not mention that part-time workers are still excluded from that that the city has still not yet raised the bottom that, you know, I have coworkers who work three part-time jobs and nobody should have to work three part-time jobs. In fact, one of my coworkers worked part-time, Durham, Parks and Recreation, part-time carry, part-time recreation and part-time acaffeinate until now. And, you know, it's a scheduling nightmare. We don't have healthcare. So it's sort of the least the city can do is actually pay part-time workers $15 an hour. I know it's a value people hold on the council and it just hasn't been moved forward yet. So again, applauding the compensation plan overall, the main issues that we have as city workers are around these work issues, you know, and another issue that I'm going to speak to a little bit is the process, the process through which the city came to the conclusions that it did about how we should work. The occupational panels that the city hosted, where they asked employees what they thought about their jobs, about the classification systems, about what would make sense. 209 employees were part of those panels and we, public records requested that list and got it back. We sent it to y'all to look at. I really encourage you to look at it. It's very troubling. It's, you know, all of the department directors, the assistant directors, the head of HR, the city manager himself counted as a worker. I mean, that's actually ridiculous. And the city manager's office, the deputy city managers, these are the workers who were, whose input counted as workers, you know, that no blue collar workers had their input be a part of this process. This was not interviews with the workers who are working constant call duty, who are working constant mandatory overtime, who are getting held up at gunpoint in the middle of the night, who are gonna be most affected by our grievance process being rolled back through the new EPUP system. So, you know, through which we can be put on probation, you can't grieve it and then you can be fired and you can't grieve it. That's no grievance process. So those are some of the things to speak about. Hope y'all are taking into consideration. Thank you, Ms. Maykowicz. Dante Strabino, welcome. You have three minutes. Please give us your name and address. Dante Strabino, 2400 Yorkdale Court with the Durham City Workers Union. Again, we do appreciate the working with us and giving the extra month to hear from more employees. I know the last month was really helpful to hear from them and hopefully in the future, these kind of processes will be more inclusive of the frontline blue collar staff because there are a lot of classification issues that a lot of folks have spoke to and a lot of things that we've written you all about we hope to continue to work beyond today. We hope that this gets passed, but we also hope that moving forward, we will have a seat at the table working with on-field administration to hear from frontline employees more systematically because a lot of the lunch and learns and a lot of the meetings that you come down, there's not a lot of follow-up with the employees and having a system of meeting confer with elected union officers will allow for a more firm system of follow-up on a lot of these work issues, including as we have mentioned, the additional job requirements that are now being expected to hire into some of these positions, requirements for CDLAs, the requirements for two years associate degrees. This is gonna continue to make it difficult to fill these positions that need to be filled and particularly in water and sewer where there's the upper eight managers are all white and you're out adding more discretion in there and it alarms us with the ongoing concerns. You all just lost a very dedicated employee, Marcus Cates, who had been here many years, an African-American employee who had been passed over many times. His equivalency for his job degree was not considered. And these are the type of things that happen repeatedly that are pushing out qualified skilled black employees and are getting overlooked for promotions. And on top of this, in order to advance through this new compensation system, one has to meet an effective in their evaluation. We have no problems with the concept of that. However, if you're at the same time, you're also putting in place a whole new evaluation system, EPEP. The timing of that is not a coincidence. And in EPEP, we have a lot of concerns where if employees are then found less than effective, they're put on a six month probationary period at which point they can be terminated if they don't make effective at the three month or six month benchmark. They can be terminated with no right to agree, with no right to access the grievance procedure. We think that that was really, really problematic. We had a majority of the workers in the water department and public work sign a petition along with many workers in general services in solid waste and parks and rec, hoping to move forward with the city to discuss and have a future conversation about a genuine fair grievance process, the city manager cannot overturn decisions made by panel in a process where frontline workers have representatives of their coworkers at all steps of the way and also where they can grieve all matters, including evaluations and written warnings. Thanks a lot. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mrs. Trevino. All right, we'll ask Ms. Youngblood if you wouldn't mind coming back to the microphone and I'm gonna now open this up by any questions or comments that members of the council might have. Council colleagues, anybody? Mr. Mayor, I have a question. Council Member Middleton. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Regina. The, could you tell us a little bit about the breakdown of participants in the feedback for lack, I forget the nomenclature, the feedback sessions, that breakdown of execs relative to frontline workers or blue collar workers, I think the term was used? Right, well I don't have a specific breakdown of that but what I do wanna talk about is the purpose of those occupational panels and I wanna clear up something that is, seems to be a misunderstanding. Every single employee had feedback into this process through their position, description, questionnaires. That was the mode by which we asked every employee to tell us what they did, how they did it, what certifications were required, what equipment was required, what education was required. Every single employee had an opportunity to provide that feedback. We are, we received about 1,432 PDQs. Some of those PDQs represented multiple employees so every employee had feedback into this process. The purpose of the occupational panels was to get feedback from selected groups of individuals who did specific types of work across the organization. So I think what Ms. Bukovic is concerned about is the fact that there were frontline workers in that group but they feel that since there are more frontline workers being impacted by this recommendation there should have been more frontline workers. The idea was to get a sampling of individuals who do all different types of work so there was not a need to have an overabundance of representation of frontline workers in the occupational panel for operations. We also had occupational panels for individuals in finance. We had occupational panels for the executive series which is why the city manager sat on that with the deputy city managers because those were the employees that are being affected by the recommendations related to that particular structure. And so there was representation of all the different employees and all the different work and all the different levels in the organization. What I can tell you about the demographics of those panel members, they were totally representative of the organization and more representative or additional sampling of females compared to males so that it's about 50, 50 male female and then the representation of the demographics mirrors the representation of the organization. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you. I did remember one question I wanted to ask you all. There was a concern brought up at the work session about the step plan being evaluated every two years and the range being evaluated every one. And at the time it was suggested that we move to evaluate both every two. Is that a change that's been implemented? That's not something that I think that we should do because I think that the step plan being evaluated every two years is appropriate for sustainability and affordability for the organization. Evaluating the open ranges every year doesn't put the employees necessarily in those open ranges at more of an advantage because when you move the ranges, the only people that get brought up are the people that fall below the new minimum. More than likely you're not gonna have anybody being brought up. We're just extending the earning potential for those individuals at the maximums. So if we also talked about in the concern that was brought up was the overlap between the high B grades and the low C grades allowing us to move the open ranges on an annual basis instead of every two years helps us to spread that out. If we put them all on every two years we continue to exacerbate the overlap. Okay, when the step plan gets moved up every two years does everybody get moved up? Yes. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Other questions? Anybody else? Okay. There was a question raised by one of the speakers concerning certificates, pay for certificates. Did you hear that comment? I did. Would you comment on that please? So some of the certificates that the speaker mentioned aren't actual incentives that are in place today. The only incentive pays are for the certificates in water management and forensics. And so I think the gentleman was talking about certification pay and general services. Those incentives don't currently exist. We are recommending the folding end of the certification pay for implementation purposes for individuals that currently have certifications in forensics and in water management. We asked Donald Greeley, director of water management to provide us with some additional information about the appropriateness of continuing incentive pay for those certifications. The information to my read that he provided articulated most of all that the certifications need to continue to be in place for those areas for compliance where it is required. Those items being required or certifications being required for certain positions are already a part of the minimum qualifications of the position and therefore individuals are being compensated through the compensation system for having those certifications. He articulated future individuals obtaining certifications where they were not required would be good for their job development would help them in their ability to apply for higher level jobs. I think we heard from some of the speakers at the work session that no one would want to go for a certification if you did not pay them for it. Well, it seems that you would want to get certifications so that you could be more marketable for higher level jobs. And that is exactly what Mr. Greeley articulated. He also explained that there's a need sometimes to have some flexibility when it comes to emergency calls. And so again, we would encourage the department to work with this employees through constant coaching and mentoring to encourage them to get those certificates and they should be rewarded through the EPEP system and not through a certification incentive. In terms of the EPEP system, I know that there was some concern that our current evaluation system is I've heard it criticized by frontline staff because they think that it's harder for them to get the exceeds grade. So could you comment on the new system that is being proposed and talk about how you think that might change in the future? Well, it goes part and parcel with the step plan recommendation that we made for those employees, recognizing that there is a bit of difficulty in differentiating the work of individuals who work in teams. We're recommending a step plan so those individuals who are effective or better in their performance will advance a step each year representing a 4% increase and those individuals who perform above effective, which is highly effective or exemplary in the new system will be eligible for lump sum increases above their 4% increase. How is this new system different? One, it provides for a lot more voice from the employee. Every employee has or has the capability of accessing the system to input information about themselves into the system so that the managers are familiar with the work that is being done. If the manager doesn't see everything that the worker is doing, if the work is completed away from the manager's supervision, employees have the ability to put input and feedback into the system so that managers are aware of what's happening, how they're doing the work. We are requiring managers to have a minimum of one one on one with their employees per month so that they are articulating expectations and level setting before the midterm and before the final evaluation so that they can clarify their expectations. We're asking managers to set goals with employees. We're also making sure that in this system, the supervisory critiques that currently exist that are supposed to be mandatory actually get done so that employees have feedback on their supervisors. Supervisors are also gonna be evaluated on their ability to supervise. There was some confusion and misinformation that was stated by some of the speakers. The corrective action plans that will exist in the EPEP system, they exist today. They're just called performance improvement plans. The current performance evaluation system allows for individuals who fail to meet standards. Right now we have them on behavior and results. They are rated as not meeting expectations on any one standard they're put on a performance improvement plan that could lead to their termination. And now? And this will be the same, but hopefully with the additional feedback loops that we're mandating and requiring through this process, employees should be active participants in their own performance evaluations. I think it'll be really important to monitor that over the next year to see if employees really are participating at the levels at which we hope that they will be. I think that's gonna be very important. Yes, and so the new evaluation system, the kickoff for the annual appraisal is gonna be next, nope, it's actually gonna be April the 22nd. And so we're actually gonna be scheduling road shows out to the operational departments to again suggest to employees to be active participants, to show them again how to use the system and to answer any questions that they have. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, Councilor McPhee. Just on that, just on the road show, I'm just wondering, especially for frontline staff, is there a time set in there for folks to actually interact with you on how to use it? Yes, so we're planning, so we're working with actually the departments to come to their normal staff meetings during their times. And so during those times, just as we've done in previous classes, we know that some of our frontline folks don't necessarily sit in front of computers or none of them do, but many of them have access to smartphones, their own or issued by the job. So we work with them to download the app onto their phone and show them how they can actively participate in their performance evaluation. Thank you, I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Okay, other questions at this point? Mayor Pro Tem? Thank you, and one more thought. So one of the concerns that came up at the work session that we got an email about later regarding a job that y'all determined after going through a review, decided to reclassify to a different range based on some things that weren't fully understood when the employee was filling out the form. Yes. After we approve this, assuming it gets approved, as things like that come up, I'm assuming we can go back and revise things. How would employees, if they feel like there is a mistake or there is an issue ongoing, like ask for that to be reviewed and how is that review gonna work going forward? Right, so what we expect to do is to work through department directors. Again, once we get this all approved, we will do a refresh of the data based on all the feedback that we've received for any kind of discrepancy and accuracy mistake and then we'll ask departments to give that another review. At that time, they'll be able to share all of the information with the employees because it will have been approved. And if there are any mistakes, not misunderstandings or disagreements about classification, if there are any errors or mistakes, we will review them and we will make an adjustment. Thank you. A question was raised about additional requirements and this is something we talked about some in the work session as well, associate degrees and that kind of thing. Can you address that concern? Right, so we did mention during the work session, I think it is also something that we provided a little bit of feedback in our response to you as a part of Attachments 6 to this item. And it is the use of equivalencies that have been in place since about 2015. So these standard equivalencies apply for a high school and a GED plus four years of relevant experience that equals an associate's degree. For a high school or GED plus eight years of relevant experience that equals a bachelor's degree. An associate's degree plus four years of relevant experience equals a bachelor's degree. And so there are opportunities for individuals to qualify for these positions or higher level positions because anybody that's currently in a position is going to be grandfathered in regardless of the minimum requirements that have changed. But if they want to vie for higher level positions, there is a means by which to do that through equivalencies. How is that changing now? It isn't. So those standards that were set in 2015 are the same standards that we'll be continuing to use. That's correct. I wanted to, since our work session, I would say I've received five or 10 emails from individual employees. I'm sure you also have received them. I'll send, I'll forward them to the city manager, but they are mainly things which I don't feel, I definitely did not feel qualified to evaluate their concerns. They were the kinds of things that the mayor pro tem asked about a minute ago. And there were some engineers, but there was also one from a Parks and Rec employee. And again, just so, I assume that you're going to be addressing all of these individual concerns, responding to the individual who is expressing that concern after evaluating their points. More than 90% of them have already received a response. Yeah, okay, good. And so, and you'll be evaluating these new ones that we've received since the work session. That's correct. All right. Any other comments? It's one final, with Simpson. Mm-hmm. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Regina, thank you so much. You've been the competent class plan whisperer for us, and I appreciate your patience and thoroughness. In your professional opinion, if we adopt this plan, is there anything in your opinion in this plan that can be causally linked to exhausting, I should say, frustrating our plans to achieve a diverse workforce? No. Is there anything that could even promote it? Is there any causal linkage to our diversity in this plan of our workforce whatsoever? No, I don't think so. No, I think if we are concerned about diversity in the workforce, then we need to be looking at our recruitment and selection efforts, not our compensation. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I do want to add that at the request of the council, one of the council members, I believe Councilman Freeman in the attachment, there are the statistics for the city's workforce in attachment six, I believe. So thank you for that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I did see that, but I also heard the specter raised. Oh, great. No, I wasn't trying to respond to your question. I'm sorry. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I also wanted to add, I wanted to thank you for pulling that information together. I know it was kind of within the last two weeks. And I want to just press that it's not necessary for tonight's vote, but it would be good to know, not just the race and gender, but also like who's at within departments. There are professionals, there are clerical, there are admin, like just same way we break it out if we could get to that point at some point in the year, that would be great to have that type of information available. Because I think what I recognize is the comments that I'm hearing tonight are more around the systemic process and recognizing that you might have awoken some folks mindset into asking more questions about policies and procedures that are in place that they didn't know. And so I think this is a part of the process and I appreciate everyone's comment tonight. I appreciate everyone bringing, the questions that they're having and the issues that you know, because if you don't, then we don't get to address it. And it just kind of like burles under the sand and bubbles up into what it doesn't need to be. Where I mean, I think we're counsel very informed on how race equity works, gender equity, pay equity. I mean, I think this is a very strong progressive counsel that can meet the challenge in addressing these issues. And I know that it's not gonna happen at one time with the pay and classification, but I think that it did actually highlight some things that we might not have noticed before. So I appreciate your work on this. I can appreciate the work that the community's been making all of the staff has been making and just trying to make sure that we understand where the issues are, so. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'll just make a couple of comments and then if there are any others, happy to take them and then I think we're probably ready to go ahead and take some action. Want to thank everybody that came. Thank you all for being here to, and also for those of you who came to the work session. We appreciate you very much for those people who are not here tonight, but might be watching on TV who had spoken on this previously or written us. We're grateful. We were grateful to hear from our staff and I appreciated that when we did hear from staff that our administration was very responsive and I think that you all made a lot of changes and Regina, I wanna thank you for your responsiveness. I think you all worked hard to make a lot of changes in the system to try to meet the concerns that staff expressed and I think what we're seeing now is very different from what was on the table a month ago and I appreciate your work to improve it. I'll just make a couple of general comments about what I think about this. On the evaluation system, I actually think that the evaluation system it's yet to be seen, but I think we're gonna have a much stronger evaluation system in terms of employees' ability to impact their evaluations and to understand their evaluations and we'll see if that's true. I think we need to be very carefully monitoring this that the staff needs to be monitoring and the participation of employees and making sure that that's really happening and is encouraged, but I think it's a good step forward. I just think that the step plan is also something that our employees, especially our frontline employees have been wanting for a long time and I'm really glad that we've incorporated that and also just wanna say about the pay. I mean, this is a very large pay bump for most of our frontline employees, they're just looking at the statistics and this will be about a $3.5 million increase of which $3.1 million is going to employees in the A and B bands and of the employees in those bands, there are 1,013 employees in those bands and of those 1,013, 1,005 are getting raises and the average raise is $3,156. That is a big number. And it's expensive for the taxpayers, but it is a significant, significant improvement for many of our employees. That doesn't mean everybody's gonna get that number. We know that some of our employees in that band are getting a much larger number, some are getting a smaller number, but the average for those 1,005 workers is 3,156. So I think that all in all, I really have appreciated your work. I know it's been very difficult because first of all, it's incredibly complicated and when we went through this, as we've gone through this at the work session and other briefings that you all have given us, I recognize the complications of it and the difficulties of getting it right, but I think you all have really listened well and I think that we've got, we're gonna have a better system. I am concerned that we keep evaluating how this is really working. When I hear thinking about some of the things that we heard here tonight, some of the things that we heard from some of our engineers, we really need to know if this is impacting our ability to hire those skilled employees who are doing the engineering work and so forth that we need. And so I know you'll keep in close contact with that and I'm sure that the results will be very visible but I just wanna urge us to continue to be in touch with that. So those are my comments and I'll now ask if any other colleagues have any other comments as well. Briefly, Mr. Mayor. Council member Reese. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I appreciate your remarks and the way that my colleagues have asked really difficult questions over the last couple of months and respect the staff's work to improve the outcome and the process as we've gone along the way. As you know, Mr. Mayor, was unable to be at the portion of the work session week and a half ago in which these issues were addressed. I just have to say one quick word of thanks to the Mayor Pro Tem who gamely offered up a host of concerns and questions that I had about that. I was fortunate enough because we have a great technology system to be able to listen to that recording afterwards and just thank you, Mayor Pro Tem, for your patience with me. I guess thanks staff in my stead who had to deal with the questions that I left behind. I do think the hardest part about this particular proposal all along has been the handful of dedicated city employees who have reached out to me, not on their own behalf, not because they are concerned that their own earning potential would be reduced by the reduction of a salary range in the years to come, not because they feel like they deserve more money or a bigger raise. The most difficult part about me is that these folks, many of them we know and have worked with and I truly respect, are concerned not about themselves, but about the folks that either work for them or concerned about their perceived inability to fill specific positions that they have been working on for perhaps multiple years. And that has been the deepest concern that I've had going through this whole process is that these are folks who obviously, obviously have the concern in mind, not for their own wellbeing, but for the good of the city and making sure that we get the work done that we need to do. But I do think that in parallel to this important work, the Audit Services Committee, the Audit Services Department has put forward a set of proposals around vacancies and long-time vacancies that the administration has agreed with and especially the idea of putting together action plans for vacancies greater than a year. You and I had a little bit of conversation about that a week and a half ago. I just wanna again say that I think we really need to try to do more about positions so longer they're open, the more obvious the mismatch between the market and what we're offering in that position is. And we can do all the action plans what you want, but if we're not prepared to address that reality, we're gonna continue to have problems. But I think the proposal has moved far enough that I can support it tonight, but I don't wanna let that turn a blind eye to the very real concerns that have been raised by the folks who've spoken here tonight, which have I think less to do with the company class plan and more to do with some of the other issues that we've continued to deal with since I've been in the council and how we interact, how management interacts with the workers who do the frontline work. And I just wanna say that on those issues, I think this council will continue to work to try to improve those relationships. And I wanna thank you all for being here tonight. Any time that we as members of the council get to hear from city employees is a good opportunities for us to learn how the work of the city actually happens. And so I respect and appreciate you guys being here tonight at nine o'clock on a Monday night when you I'm sure have other things to do. Those are my comments, Mr. Mayor, thank you. Thank you very much, councilman. All right, if I don't hear any more comments, I will accept a motion. I believe what we need is a motion just simply to adopt the general classification and compensation plan. So moved. Second. It's been moved and seconded that we adopt the general classification and compensation plan. Madam Clerk, will you please open the vote? Please close the vote. The motion passes 7-0. Thank you very much. Again, Ms. Youngblood, thank you for your work. Very difficult, I know. Aletheia, thank you, and all of you all who put so much into this. And now we all have to do our best to help you make it work. I wanna thank everybody for being here. I think this is actually in many ways a great step forward, but I want you to know that we heard you and that we appreciate the issues that you raised. Some of them are intimately related to this. Some of them are other worker issues which we appreciate hearing. I do wanna just address one in particular, Ms. Buchelich. I've raised with the city manager prior about the part-time pay. And he urged us, and I think rightly so, to wait till we got through this common-class plan which we now have, and so we'll be able to begin to take that up. On July the 1st, our city livable wage rises to $15.46 an hour, which is a big improvement. So I wanna thank you all for being here and I appreciate you very much. All right, now we're gonna move to item 14, the consolidated annexation of 1309 Junction Road. This is a public hearing item, and we'll hear first from staff. Good evening, I'm Jamie Sanyak with the Planning Department. I would first like to state for the record that all Planning Department hearing items have been advertised and noticed in accordance with the state and local law, and affidavits of all notices are on file in the Planning Department. This is case 1309 Junction Road, requests for utility extension agreement, voluntary annexation, future land use map amendment and zoning map change have been received from Pam Porter, a TMT for one parcel of land located at 1309 Junction Road, totaling 33.31 acres. The annexation is for a contiguous expansion of the city limits. In addition to the annexation, the applicant has applied for zoning map change from rural residential to plan development residential 2.702 and a future land use map amendment from industrial to low density residential. If approved, the requested annexation petition and associated applications will become effective on June 30th, 2019. Key commitments include limiting the permitted housing type as single family detached, limiting the impervious surface to 70%, adding a turn lane on Farrell Road at the site access and providing additional asphalt for bicycle lane. The public works and water management departments have determined that the existing water mains have the capacity for post-development. The budget and management services department determined that the proposed annexation will become revenue positive immediately following annexation. Additional information can be found in the staff report. The Durham Planning Commission at their February 12th, 2019 meeting recommended approval of the proposed by vote of nine to one. Staff determines that these requests are consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable policies and ordinances. Four motions are required for this application. The first is to adopt an ordinance annexing the property and entering into utility extension agreement. Second is to adopt a resolution amending the future land use map. The third is to adopt a consistency statement and the fourth is for the zoning ordinance. I will be happy to answer any questions that you have. Thank you very much, Ms. Sonia. Council members, you've heard the report from staff. I'm gonna now declare this public hearing open and ask if there are any questions from any members of council or comments or anything, any questions for staff at this time. If not, I'm going to ask if there, I see one speaker for this item, Pamela Porter. Are there any, is there anyone else that would like to be heard on item 14? Anyone else that would like to be heard? Ms. Porter is a proponent of this rezoning. Ms. Porter, Ms. Porter, I'm gonna give you three minutes. If you need more than that, you can let me know. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, Pam Porter with TMT LA Associates, 5011 South Park Drive in Durham. We are the applicant on this. Thank you, Jamie, for the presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Colleagues, questions or comments for Ms. Porter or staff at this time? Ms. Porter, I have a couple of questions. Sure. I noticed that, well, first of all, how many units do you think that you will be developing on this property? Did I miss that? It's a maximum of 90. Maximum of 90? Yes, sir. And can you talk about the units that you're expecting to develop? Price points, so forth. Sure, so 90 units is what we're proposing. It's gonna be single family detached residential. The price range is gonna be an average of $275,000 and the average size of the house will be 2,200 square feet. Thank you. Have you or has your client considered a donation to the Durham, the city of Durham's affordable housing fund? Yes, our client is willing to do $100 per unit for $9,000. Okay, thank you. You're also adding 18 students to Durham public schools. Have you, as you know, many of our developers contribute $500 per new student. Have you all considered that as well? Our client's willing to do the same. Yes, $500 student. All right, for the 18 students. Yes, sir. Do you consider that an acceptable proffer in terms of, do you need any language? Staff will accept the proffers and we will work with the applicant in terms of the standard language that is included on the development plan. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Porter. Any questions for Ms. Porter? Any comments? If not, anybody else need, want to be heard on this item. Ms. Porter, thank you very much. Thank you for your consideration. I'm gonna declare this public hearing closed and the matter is back before the council. This item requires four distinct motions and the first would be to adopt an ordinance annexing the Junction Road subdivision. So moved. Second. The moved and seconded that we adopt the annexation ordinance. Madam Clerk, will you please open the vote? Please close the vote. The motion passes seven zero. Thank you. The second motion will be to adopt the resolution amending the future land use map. So moved. Second. The second is that we adopt the resolution amending the future land use map. Madam Clerk, would you please open the vote? Please close the vote. The motion passes seven zero. Thank you. The third motion will be to adopt the consistency statement. So moved. Second. The moved and seconded that we adopt the consistency statement. Madam Clerk, please open the vote. Please close the vote. Motion passes seven zero. Thank you. And finally, the motion to adopt an ordinance amending the UDO. So moved. Second. Madam Clerk, please open the vote. Please close the vote. The motion passes seven zero. Thank you so much. We'll now move to item 15. Thank you, Ms. Porter. We'll now move to item 15, zoning map changes for King's Daughters in. And we'll hear the report from staff. Good evening. I'm Emily Struthers for the Planning Department. It is my understanding that the applicant's agent, Mr. Joule, intends on requesting a continuance of this case to the June 3rd meeting. Mr. Joule is in attendance if the mayor would like to recognize him. Thank you. Mr. Joule. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. I am Dan Joule. I reside at 1025 Gloria Avenue. My good friends and neighbors, the crossmen's who own the King's Daughters in, who are the applicants. When they found the meeting was tonight, they already had travel plans. They are out of town and they have asked me to respectfully request a continuance or deferral, whatever would be the appropriate request to the next available date as determined by planning. Thank you. Ms. Struthers, do we need to open the public hearing then and continue or what would be your advice? Yes, staff would advise continuance. Opening the public hearing and then continuing it to June the 3rd, 2019. Okay, thank you. I'm gonna declare this public hearing open and then I'm going to, if there are no objections from colleagues, I'm going to hold the public hearing open and we will take this matter up again at our June the 3rd meeting. Mr. Joule, thank you very much. Just briefly, I just want to make sure Mr. Joule knows to tell your clients that that's the public hearing on the budget and so they should bring a pillow or something until we're done. Do we do pillows now? Is that a thing? I just wouldn't continue anything at June 3rd. Do what he's supposed to do. All right, thank you very much. All right, now we will move to item 16, zoning map change for Odyssey Towns and we'll hear our report from staff. Good evening again, I'm Lace Trothers with the Planning Department. This case is Z180019 Odyssey Towns. A request for zoning map change has been received from Jared Edens on behalf of Gary Wallace for three parcels located at 3500 and C55 Highway, 3614 and C55 Highway and 521 Penrith Drive. The site area totals 26.85 acres. The site is presently zoned commercial center CC without a development plan. Mr. Edens proposes to change this designation to commercial general with a development plan CGD and residential suburban eight with a development plan RS8D. The development plan proposes a maximum of 10,000 square feet of commercial and a maximum of 190 multifamily units. No units are proposed within the RS8D portion of the site. The properties are currently designated commercial, recreational open space and low medium density residential on the future land use map, which is consistent with the proposed zoning change. The Durham Planning Commission at their February 12th, 2019 meeting recommended approval of the proposed CGD and RS8D zoning district by a vote of nine to one. Staff determines that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable policies and ordinances. Two motions are required for this application. The first is to adopt a consistency statement and the second is for the zoning ordinance. I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have. Thank you, Mr. Others. We have now heard the report from staff. I'm gonna declare this public hearing open and first I'm gonna ask if there are any questions from staff or comments from members of the council at this point. Hearing none, it looks like we have one speaker stand up for this item, Mr. Jared Edens. Let me ask, is there anyone else that would like to be heard on item 16? Is there anyone else here tonight who would like to be heard on item 16? All right, if not, Mr. Edens, welcome. Please give us your name and address and I'm gonna give you three minutes unless you think you're gonna need more. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Jared Edens with Edens Land, 2314 South Miami Boulevard in Durham, 27703. I appreciate Emily's summary of our project. I've just got a couple of points I wanna touch on. I believe it's a really good location for density. If you look at the location at 55 in Odyssey, we've got ample water and sewer capacity in this area. Our adjacent roadways are well under capacity. So it's a good opportunity in my opinion to find density where we need it. Emily did mention we are also proffering to install a signal at the intersection of Odyssey and 55 that was not, you normally don't see signal proffers and there's not a traffic study accompanying the project. But in this case, the DOT made us aware of an accident history at this intersection. My client was willing to offer the signal as part of the project to address that. So we are adding that. Also, I would just ask, if we look at that node, you already have a single family housing, you got apartments, the one option, you're sort of missing as townhomes. So I feel like by adding townhomes here at the corner, we're really feeling in the gap for the three different housing options we have right at that location. I have two proffers I would like to add. Staff report mentions 41 additional students to the school system. We'd like to proffer a $20,500 payment to Durham Public Schools prior to the first final plat for the project. I think it's typically how we do it. And our second proffer, we'd like to offer $30,000 for Durham's affordable housing fund also made prior to the first final plat. I'm glad to answer any questions you have. Thank you. Thank you for those proffers, Mr. Edens. Colleagues, any questions or comments for staff or for Mr. Edens at this point? I have a question for staff. Hi, how's it going? Good, how are you? Great. One of the planning commissioners opposed this at the planning commission on the grounds that they thought that the development should have a residential designation on the flum and the residential zoning. But is there any other designation that would accommodate both residential and commercial, which is the proposed development plan here? Right, so good evening, Pat Yellen with Planning Department. During the development of the currently adopted comprehensive plan in 2005, there was a lot of conversation around what would be permissible in different future land use map designations. And one of the areas of agreement at the end of the day was that commercial would be supportive of multifamily residential. So it really is the best, most appropriate designation for a project like this that has horizontal mixed use rather than vertical, but doesn't have quite the density for that. So does that answer your question? And there's really not a more appropriate designation. Very helpful. I think the planning commissioners' concern was that the commercial would never actually happen. But I think we get the same density either way. So I think I should wanna ask that, thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Any other questions or any questions for Mr. Edens? All right, anyone else like to speak on this item? Anyone else like to be heard? If not, I'm going to declare this public hearing closed and the matters back before the council, we'll need two motions. The first will be to adopt a consistency statement. It's been moved. I can't. It's been moved and second that we adopt the consistency statement. Madam Clerk, could you please open the vote? Could you please close the vote? The motion passes five to two with Council Member Alston. I think it's actually... Seven to zero. I think it was a button-pushing issue. You're correct, seven-zero. Yeah, thank you very much. All right, and our second motion, I'm sorry. Yeah, second motion. We do adopt an ordinance of many of the UDO. So moved. Second. It's been moved and second that we adopt the UDO. Madam Clerk, would you please open the vote? And please close the vote. Motion passes seven-zero. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Edens. Mr. Wallace, nice to see you. Thank you, Mr. Others. All righty, we'll now be moving on to item 17, zoning map change for 707 Moorhead Avenue. Welcome, Ms. Sonia. Thank you. City Council approved a zoning map change and development plan for 707 Moorhead Avenue on July 28th, 1986. This was legacy case P86-35. This is a 2.88 acre track of land located in the Moorhead Hill local historic district and it's bounded by Moorhead Avenue, Vickers Avenue, Proctor Street, and Shepherd Street. The legacy case included a development plan that limited the uses to group residents, a group facility, a recreation facility and admin building. The applicant, Robert Schunk from Stewart, has submitted an application to add a text commitment to the legacy case that would allow all residential uses permitted in the residential urban five parentheses two district. No changes are being proposed to the rest of the approved development plan. Per the unified development ordinance, any revision to text commitments are considered a significant change and require a new hearing and recommendation from the Planning Commission prior to the case being considered by City Council. The Durham Planning Commission at their February 12th, 2019 meeting recommended approval of the request by a vote of 10 to zero. The applicant has obtained a certificate of appropriateness as required by the historic Resources Local Review criteria on December 4th, 2018 from the Historic Preservation Commission for the relocation of the primary structure, modifications to the primary structure at 707 Moorhead Avenue in construction of 17 new townhome units. This information is informational only and should not be interpreted as a commitment. Staff determines that these requests are consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable policies and ordinances. Two motions are required for this application. The first is required to adopt a consistency statement and the second is for the zoning ordinance. And I did want to make one point on motion two. There's a typo and it should reference the residential urban five parentheses two zoning district and not the residential urban slash four. And I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have. Thank you. Can you just, Ms. Sunyak? First of all, I'm gonna declare this public hearing open. Thank you. We've heard the report from staff. Sunyak, on that second motion, can you explain to me what you just done? I actually think the ordinance is correct but the agenda under item 17 listed it as a typo. So I'll just read it if you'd like to make it clear. Motion to adopt an ordinance amending the U of I development ordinance by taking a property out of the residential urban dash five parentheses two with a development plan, RU five two D Moorhead Hill Historic District for the subject site. Thank you. All right. Colleagues, you have heard from staff and I'm gonna first ask, are there any questions for staff or any comments from colleagues at this time? If not, I'm gonna move on to the next one. I'm gonna move on to the next one. I'm gonna move on to the next one. Some colleagues at this time. If not, we have I see two speakers to this item and those speakers are Mr. George Stanzial and Mr. Ken Spaulding. Is there anyone else that would like to be heard on item 17? Is there anyone else here who would like to be heard on item 17? If not, Mr. Stanzial and Mr. Spaulding welcome. I'm going to give you all each three minutes if you need it. Okay. If you need more, you can let me know. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor and members of the city council. My name is Ken Spaulding. I represent the applicant in this matter, Morehead Hill Town Homes. As was stated, it's 2.88 acres in the urban tier. And also as you're aware in 1986, this property was rezoned to its current underlying zoning. However, it was limited at that time to be used as a brain rehabilitation center. The brain rehabilitation center has now been closed for approximately three years. The property is now languishing and decaying as the years go by. Our proposal today is only to remove the tax restriction for the vacant brain center and to fall and adhere to the current underlying zoning classification. The property will remain residential with 17 new town homes and the existing structures. One of the existing homes will be moved from one side of the property to the other side of the property, adjacent to a more compatible location near the existing residences. The main structure will be renovated into two units. All of these maintained structures have been submitted to Durham's Historic Preservation Commission and have been rigorously reviewed and approved by the commission. For approximately two years, the developer has met individually with neighbors affected by our proposal, as well as we set up a 600 foot perimeter meeting of all neighbors within this perimeter for review and discussion of our plans. This was not a requirement. This proposal has received unanimous support from the Durham Historic Preservation Commission and unanimous support and praise from the Durham Planning Commission. We feel that a high and sensitive approach to urban infill has been made by this developer and his team and we are proud to offer this proposal to this city council for your consideration and hopefully your approval. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Spaulding. Good evening. George Stanziel with president and director of design at Stewart. It's kind of weird looking at this screen of all these people going like this. Where is that George? I'm not seeing it. The Wilbur hop. I'm gonna turn. All right. As Mr. Spaulding alluded to, this zoning is really quite simple. It sounds complicated, but it's really quite simple. We're not changing our zoning district. We're not adding traffic. We're not adding students over the existing zoning. We're merely adding by text. All the residential use is allowed in the RU five two district. Similar to the Moorhead Hill, our neighbor Moorhead Hill neighborhood art which is our neighboring community to the West beyond the institutional use that currently exists. As I pointed out to all of you in the emails that I sent, we're bringing forward to the city another uniquely designed infill project in the urban tier that is walkable to downtown. We'll create a wonderful streetscape with sidewalks on street parking, street trees, landscape lighting. And most importantly, we'll preserve and enhance two historically significant homes from Durham's past. Land in Durham's becoming extremely scarce, something I could have never imagined when I moved here 34 years ago. With the renaissance of our downtown and significant increases in urban job centers, we're seeing the need for quality infill development of reasonable density that is walkable and accessible to the incredible amenities of our downtown. Section 4.3.2 of the comprehensive plan policies are clear. That infill development is critical to the success of our urban areas and suggests density is a six to 12 units per acre in the urban tier. Our density is 6.9 units per acre. These policies suggest that compatible residential development on vacant or underutilized land should be developed to preserve existing neighborhood character and development patterns. Our project provides an alternative lifestyle at a similar density and land use pattern to the historic Moorhead Hill neighborhood while creating a transition from the office and institutional uses to the east over to the single family detached Moorhead Hill neighborhood to the west. That said, we have been unanimously approved by and received our certificate of appropriateness from the historic commission. This extensive approval is very exhaustive and very highly detailed involved application review process that included very specific illustrative site plans, access, building locations, landscape, lighting, paving materials, open spaces and private courtyards. The approval also includes existing and proposed building elevations where we considered architectural features from homes in the Moorhead Hill neighborhood, materials and lighting. Just one second. Go ahead. This includes the renovation and restoration of the two existing historic homes. In addition, we've been unanimously approved as Mr. Spaulding said by the planning commission with a very positive comments from both commissions. The development of our project will be guided by our certificate of appropriateness and any changes would require approval by the historic commission. So all of the things that were committed to and approved by the historic commission while not part of this development plan are guided by the historic commission and any changes we make to it would have to go to the historic commission. This is actually fairly unusual in a zoning where you have this level of detail. While this project has significant and unique costs related not only to the design and execution quality of the new homes but more significantly the relocation and renovation of one historic home and renovation of the main historic residents. We would like to offer a one-time contribution to the Durham Affordable Housing Trust Fund of $20,000 to be paid prior to final plot approval. We greatly appreciate your support and are happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for the proffer. Colleagues, questions or comments for the applicant or for staff? Definitely a comment. I really appreciate whenever a local developer finds it in their space and time to make room for neighbors and conversation around the development that they're working on. I can't say it enough. It is not a requirement, even though it should be. And I appreciate you doing that. And I also want to share that, I mean, it's really like coming from the planning commission and watching projects move in this direction is really like heartfelt and recognizing that I think that our developer community is recognizing that we have to work together to figure out what redevelopment, development, and infill looks like moving forward. And I'm looking forward to the presentation on Thursday that John Colleen will be providing to share more around the trends so that we have the data to make these decisions that will support moving more of us in this direction so that we're collectively working to create the context and the structures and the supports that we need to increase density in a way that's going to include everyone. And so I appreciate what you're doing. I appreciate the proper and keep doing what you're doing. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments or questions by members of council, council member Reese? This is real quick, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to jump on the bandwagon here and say that we often talk about the type of approach we want our developers to take with neighborhood residents and with nearby neighboring homeowners. And so I think it's only fair and right that we call out and praise that behavior when we see it come before us. And I think this developer's done a fantastic job of getting that kind of input and consensus before coming to us. The other thing I wanted to add, Mr. Mayor, is that the original zoning for this, the zoning map change and develop plan was done when I just shortly after I got my learner's permit. So I think it's probably fair to say that a lot has changed since then, including the appropriate use for this particular property. And I'll be supporting the various motions tonight. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you very much. Any other comments or questions? If, is there anyone else that would like to be heard on this matter? Is there anyone else that would like to be heard on this public hearing map? If not, I want to declare this public hearing closed and the matter is back before the council that we'll need two motions. The first would be to adopt a consistency statement. Don't move. Second. Madam Clerk, would you please open the vote? Mr. Mayor, if you will, staff just wants the opportunity to massage the language of the proffer just slightly because we are not aware if they would need a final plat. So we'd like the opportunity to add the contribution prior to the final plat or the first CO whichever is applicable. Thank you very much. Sorry for the interruption. No, I'm glad you interrupt. Thank you. All right, let's try again on the motion to adopt the consistency statement. Clerk, I'm sorry. Second. Been moved by Mark Anthony and seconded by Charlie. The motion passes seven, zero. All right, thank you. And then motion two, and we'll just remember that motion two is will be adopting as corrected by Ms. Sunyak in her initial remarks. So moved. Second. To adopt the ordinance amended to the UDO, Madam Clerk, please open the vote. Please close the vote. The ordinance passes seven, zero. Thank you very much. Thank you all for being here. Good luck with the project. All righty. We're now down to item 18, public hearing on an approval of the draft FY 2019 and 20 annual action plan. This is also a public hearing item. Greetings, Mayor. I'm Mayor Pro Tem, members of City Council. Reginald Johnson, Director, Department of Community Development. The item before you is the draft annual action plan. We're asking that you hold a public hearing on this, on the actual annual action plan and then adopt the annual action plan. I'll introduce to you Ms. Wilma Conyers, federal programs coordinator to read the particulars into the record. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Welcome, Ms. Conyers. Good evening, Mayor Schull and members of council. Purpose of this public hearing is to receive citizen comments on the draft FY 1920 annual action plan. The annual action plan specifies how the city of Durham will address housing and community development needs through use of community development block grant known as CDBG, the home investment partnership program known as HOME, the emergency solutions grant known as ESG and housing opportunities for persons with AIDS known as HAPWA. The draft annual action plan was made available through public review from March 14th through April 15th, 2019. Notice of this meeting was advertised in the Herald Sun and the Caposta newspaper on March 14th and the Carolina Times on March 16th and via a general listserv. As a recipient of CDBG, HOME, ESG and HAPWA funds, the city is required to hold at least two public hearings. The first public hearing was held on November 18th, 2018. For planning purposes, the city used the anticipated allocations contained in the draft FY 1920 annual action plan. On last Friday, April 12th, HUD published the final entitlement allocations and they are as follows. For CDBG, we expect to receive $1,988,113 for the HOME program, $1,882,516. For ESG, $169,200. And for HAPWA, $429,110. The amounts in the final plan will be revised to align with the final allocations and the contingency language that was previously published. A summary of the comments from all public hearings and written comments received from citizens will be incorporated into the final annual action plan. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Conyers. I'm going to, you've heard the report from staff. I'm now gonna declare this public hearing open and I'm gonna first ask if there are any questions or comments for staff from members of the council. I do have one question. Could you, what's the CDBG number that we've been allocated? The final allocation announced last Friday is $1,988,113. Thank you. So they're very close to the summary numbers that you gave us in the memo, right? Correct. Okay. I have not had anyone sign up for this item. Is there anyone who would like to speak on this item? Is there anyone present that would like to speak on this item? If not, council members, any questions or comments for Ms. Conyers? If not, Ms. Conyers, any other comments? If not, I'm gonna declare this public hearing closed and thank you very much. No additional comments. All right, thank you. I believe that that is all the business to come. We need to adopt this. Oh, I'm sorry. What do we need to do? Ms. Conyers, the council needs to take an action to approve this, correct? Yes, we're asking that the city council adopt annual action plan. I'm sorry. Thank you. How about adjourned us? No move, Mr. Mayor. It's been moved and seconded that we adopt the annual action plan. Madam Clerk, please open the vote. Please close the vote. Motion passes 7-0. Thank you very much. Thank you, colleagues. And I'm going to now declare this meeting adjourned at 9.30.