Vice-Mayor S. Antanette Mosley, Presiding; Councilman Bo Hess; Councilwoman Kim Roney; Councilwoman Sheneika Smith; Councilwoman Sage Turner; City Manager DK Wesley; City Attorney Brad Branham; and City Clerk Magdalen Burleson
Absent: Mayor Esther E. Manheimer and Councilwoman Maggie Ullman
City Council held an agenda briefing worksession to discuss the upcoming and future agenda items. In addition, City Council reviewed an upcoming City Council committee that will be taking place during the next two weeks.
Discussion occurred on the following other issues and updates: Community Development Block Grant - Disaster Recovery Single Family Home Repair & Reconstruction Program.
At 12:44 p.m., Mayor Manheimer adjourned the agenda briefing worksession.
Mayor Esther E. Manheimer, Presiding; Vice-Mayor S. Antanette Mosley; Councilman Bo Hess; Councilwoman Kim Roney; Councilwoman Sheneika Smith; Councilwoman Sage Turner; Councilwoman Maggie Ullman; City Manager DK Wesley; City Attorney Brad Branham; and City Clerk Magdalen Burleson
Mayor Manheimer led City Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mayor Manheimer read a statement regarding Chamber decorum.
Councilwoman Roney read the proclamation proclaiming May 13, 2026, as "World Facility Management Day " in the City of Asheville. She presented the proclamation to Tony Rathbone and other City facilities workers, who thanked City Council for this recognition.
Councilwoman Ullman read the proclamation proclaiming May 17-23, 2026, as "National Public Works Week " in the City of Asheville. She presented the proclamation to Tiffany McCormick and other City Public Works employees, who thanked City Council for this recognition.
Councilwoman Ullman read the proclamation proclaiming May 15-22, 2026, as "Strive Not To Drive Week " in the City of Asheville. She presented the proclamation to Sandy Broadwell, who briefed City Council on some activities taking place during the week.
Mayor Manheimer read the proclamation proclaiming May 11-17, 2026, as "National Salvation Army Week " in the City of Asheville. She presented the proclamation to Captain Philip Stokes and Sherri Stokes, who briefed City Council on some activities taking place during the week.
Councilman Bo Hess read the proclamation proclaiming May, 2026, as "National Tennis Month" in the City of Asheville. He presented the proclamation to Ron Freeman
Board member of the Asheville Tennis Association, who briefed City Council on some activities taking place during the month.
B. Resolution Number 26-85 - Resolution to amend a contract with Diakin Applied Americas Inc. for building automation at Harrah’s Cherokee Center - Asheville - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 318
C. Ordinance Number 5219 - Budget amendment, in the amount of $1,400,000, to the Harrah’s Cherokee Center - Asheville operating fund to reflect updated Fiscal Year 2025-26 revenue and expenditure projections )- Ordinance Book No. 37 - Page 18
D. Resolution Number 26-86 - Resolution authorizing the City Manager to amend a contract with Creditron for a maintenance agreement for a mail scanner for the Water Resources Department - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 310
F. Resolution Number 26-88 - Resolution adopting Bond Order authorizing the issuance of Water System Revenue Bonds of the City of Asheville, North Carolina, in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $51,000,000 - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 321
Resolution Number 26-89 - Resolution of the City Of Asheville, North Carolina, authorizing the approval, execution and delivery of various documents in connection with the issuance of City of Asheville, North Carolina, Water System Revenue Bonds; providing for the sale of the bonds; setting forth the terms and conditions upon which the bonds are to be issued; and providing for certain other matters in connection with the issuance, sale and delivery of the bonds - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 324
G. Resolution Number 26-90 - Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract amendment to the Plante Moran internal audit services contract.; and granting authority to execute subsequent amendments up to a maximum not-to-exceed amount for supplementary internal audit program services - Resolution Book No. 36 - Page 328
H. Resolution Number 26-91 - Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Utility Relocation Agreement with Duke Energy for utility relocations for the Johnston Boulevard Sidewalk Utility Relocations Project; and to execute any change orders that may arise during the project up to the contingency amount - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 329
One individual urged Council to present the public for options and input for all projects.
I. Resolution Number 26-92 - Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with VHB Engineering NC PC for design and engineering services for Helene Recovery Project - Citywide Road Structures Repairs and Replacements to repair and replace damaged bridges and large culverts; and further authorizing the City Manager to execute any change orders that may arise during the project - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 330
Ordinance Number 5220 - Budget amendment to add federal and state funds to the General Capital Projects Fund for the Helene Recovery Project - Citywide Road Structures Repairs and Replacements Project - Ordinance Book No. 37 - Page 19
Mayor Manheimer said that members of Council have been previously furnished with a copy of the resolutions and ordinances on the Consent Agenda and they would not be read.
Councilwoman Ullman moved for the adoption of the Consent Agenda. This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Roney and carried unanimously.
City Manager Wesley thanked City staff who supported the development of this recommended budget, specifically the Finance and Management Services staff who did much of the heavy lifting. She said this is a balanced and disciplined budget. It makes targeted investments, while recognizing the very real financial pressures facing our residents and our organization. It does not attempt to solve every challenge in a single year, but it does move us forward in deliberate and meaningful ways. Council will see a continued focus on maintaining essential services, strengthening our workforce, and advancing key infrastructure and capital needs. Council will also see a commitment to financial stewardship that protects the City’s long-term stability. She then provided City Council with the budget process timeline, financial environment, process objectives and balancing progress.
Regarding the balancing progress, after the April 14th work session, staff identified an additional $1.6M in budget reductions: eliminating additional vacancies; eliminating funding for initial salary study implementation; further reducing community center security contract; and continuing to suspend contribution to Other Post Employment Benefits Fund.
She reviewed the proposed budget summary; chart of revenues for all funds; and the chart of expenditures of all funds.
She then reviewed the General Fund revenue summary; and the Fiscal Year (FY) 2027 General Fund revenues. General Fund revenues consist of (1) Property taxes; (2) Sales tax held flat: trends show slow growth in revenue; (3) $1.1M in fee increases approved on 3/24, plus additional natural growth; and (4) Minor changes in other revenue sources.
She then reviewed the General Fund expenditures summary; the FY 2027 General Fund by function, along with the FY 2027 General Fund major expenditure drivers. The FY 2027 General Fund budget reductions for personnel and internal services consist of (1) eliminating a 1% 401(k) match previously offered to eligible employees; (2) eliminating a net of 16.5 vacancies; (3) identifying minor adjustments to the City’s health care plans to offset growing costs; and (4) reviewing existing contracts and adjusting the budget to match historical spend rates
FY 2027 General Fund budget reductions in the service reductions include (1) reducing community center hours to pre-COVID levels; (2) pausing the annual contribution to the public art fund (while leaving the existing balance intact); (3) eliminating FY27 purchase of bear-proof trash cans; (4) reducing mowing services around guardrails and medians; and (5) reducing the hours for security services across community centers.
One-time balance strategies for the FY 2027 General Fund budget reductions include (1) continued pause of contribution to the OPEB (Other Post Employment Benefits) Trust Fund; (2) appropriating Transit Service fund balance to cover contract increase; and (3) appropriating Harrah’s fund balance to support operations, replacing the usual General Fund transfer.
She then reviewed the FY 2027 General Fund ongoing investments for Public Health and Safety; Culture and Recreation; Community & Organizational Investments; and Strategic Investments.
Regarding the Homeowner Grant Program, (`) FY 2027 budget includes $75K for the Homeowner Grant Program, established and managed by Buncombe County; (2) the County is proposing to revamp the program and use the funds for Health and Human Services General Assistance; (3) the current program is underutilized. If funding is moved, more grants would be distributed because the requirements would be less restrictive and require less documentation; (4) owners would now be eligible for assistance even if they are utilizing other assistance programs; and (5) also expands potential use of funds beyond homeowners.
Regarding the General Obligation (GO) Bonds, (1) Asheville voters approved $80M in GO Bonds in November 2024 for improvements to Public Safety Facilities, Transportation, Parks, and Affordable Housing; (2) the estimated annual debt service on the bonds is $6.6M, including 1 Affordable Housing Project Manager; (3) the City delayed the tax rate increase in FY2026 due to Helene and the fact that revaluation did not occur; and (4) FY 2027 proposed budget includes 3/4 debt service, the Project Manager, and the tax rate increase ($4.95M).
Regarding the FY 2027 property tax revaluation, (1) FY 2027 is a revaluation year in Buncombe County; (2) as a result, as part of the budget process, the City is required to calculate and publish a revenue neutral tax rate, which shows what the property tax rate would need to be to achieve the same amount of revenue if revaluation had not occurred - The State provides a required methodology for how this calculation must be completed which is based on average annual tax base growth since the last revaluation occurred; (3) the current City property tax rate is 44.19 cents per $100 of assessed value; (4) based on the revaluation numbers provided by the Buncombe County Tax Assessor as of April 22, City staff has calculated the revenue neutral tax rate to be 32.89 cents per $100 of assessed value; (5) to balance the General Fund budget and partially budget the 2024 GO Bonds, the proposed budget includes a FY27 tax rate of 37.84 cents - 4.95 cents above revenue neutral; and (6) this rate could change prior to budget adoption if the County updates assessed valuation numbers before then.
She then reviewed the proposed property tax rate chart below:
Scenarios | Tax Rate Above Revenue Neutral | Homeowner Impact (Annual) | Homeowner Impact (Monthly) |
Partially Budget 2024 GO Bonds & Affordable Housing Position ($4.95M) | 1.77 cents | $85 | $7.05 |
Close the Budget Gap ($8.9M) | 3.18 cents | $152 | $12.69 |
Total | 4.95 cents | $237 | $19.73 |
Assumes residential tax value of $478,500 and every 1-cent tax rate increase generates $2.8M.
Using a chart, she explained the FY 2027 property tax rate of $37.84 cents.
She explained Senate Bill 889 proposed changes as follows: (1) Senate Bill 889 proposes counties that conducted a property reappraisal effective January 1, 2026, would require a temporary adjustment in the values used for tax purposes. For Fiscal Year 2026-27, those counties would be required to use the schedule of values from their previous reappraisal rather than the newly updated values; (2) Bill would create a one-year delay in implementing updated property values in a limited number of counties including Buncombe; and (3) Bill would not limit local governments’ ability to raise property tax rates.
The property tax rate under Senate Bill 889 (1) the current City property tax rate is 44.19 cents per $100 of assessed value; and (2) bBased on the pre-revaluation numbers required under Senate Bill 889, the FY 2027 tax rate needed to balance the General Fund budget and partially budget the 2024 GO Bonds would be 51.13 cents per $100 of assessed value, an increase of 6.94 cents above the current rate.
She reviewed the following scenarios for the State bill 880 proposed property tax rate chart:
Scenarios | Tax Rate Above Revenue Neutral | Homeowner Impact (Annual) | Homeowner Impact (Monthly) |
Partially Budget 2024 GO Bonds & Affordable Housing Position ($4.95M) | 2.48 cents | $87 | $7.22 |
Close the Budget Gap ($8.9M) | 4.46 cents | $156 | $13.02 |
Total | 6.94 cents | $243 | $20.23 |
Assumes residential tax value of $350,000 and every 1-cent tax rate increase generates $2.0M.
She then reviewed the Enterprise Funds highlights (1) Water Fund: $3.3M in new revenue from fee adjustments approved by Council on March 24 (a) increased funding for Water’s capital program; and (b) offset operating inflationary cost increases; (2) Stormwater Fund: $626K in new revenue from fee adjustments approved by Council on March 24.(a) increased funding will be utilized for capital and to offset inflationary cost increases; and (b) plan to also utilize approximately $3M in fund balance for one-time capital costs and fee study; (3) Transit Fund: The fund is facing decreased revenue and increased costs: (a) $800K increase to transit contract; (b) $150K increase to paratransit based on increased use; and (c) increased costs and decreasing revenue has led to a $1.2M budget gap next year, which will be covered with Transit fund balance; (4) Parking Fund - Budget includes the expansion of meters into South Slope and other adjustments. Fee changes will be included as part of budget adoption; (5) Harrah’s Cherokee Center Asheville (HCCA) Fund (a) budget is up due to anticipated increase in event load next fiscal year compared to this year; and (b) HCCA fund balance will be used to cover the transfer from the General Fund (one time); and (6) Street Cut Fund: Continuation of existing programs - Budget is down due to FY 2026 one-time fund balance use that is not repeated in FY 2027.
Regarding the BID fund, (1) the current tax rate for the BID is 8.77 cents. After reval, the BID tax rate will decrease to the revenue neutral rate: 7.63 cents; (2) property tax will be used to fund the BID management contract with Asheville Downtown Improvement District (ADID); and (3) the FY 2027 budget also includes $400K in anticipated sales tax revenue (a) a portion of the sales tax revenue will be used to fund holiday events and the AVL Arts Grant Program ($174K); and (b) staff, in coordination with ADID leadership, will present additional options to Council on how to utilize the remaining sales tax revenue at a later date.
Regarding the FY 2027-3031 CIP, (1) over the next 5 years, the CIP will support some significant capital investments, which will include relying upon external funding partners to support some of the identified project; (2) Helene recovery will occupy a large portion of the City project delivery resources over the next 5 years. A portion of the annual CIP capacity will be reserved as a funding buffer; and (3) staff will continue to focus on long range capital planning in order to ensure strategic capital investment She reviewed the FY 2027-203` General Fund CIP development.
The General Fund FY 2027 capital highlights include (1) annual funding to address facility maintenance needs; (2) Fleet replacement, including buses and fire apparatus; (3) supplemental funding for 2024 GO bond projects: pickleball courts, Fire Station 8, Shiloh community center, Smith Mill Creek Greenway; (4) funding to match a N.C. Department of Transportation grant to construct a pedestrian bridge at Craven Street; (5) sustainability Allocation: funding for capital projects to support costs arising from the inclusion of more sustainable and energy efficient design elements; (6) Public Art: usually a pay-go transfer from the General Fund, this was paused in FY27 as a budget balancing strategy; and (7) Tropical Storm Helene Recovery Contingency: set aside for potential funding gaps in recovery projects.
The Enterprise Fund FY 2027 Capital highlights include (1) Water: Waterline replacement at Coxe Ave, funding to relocate water lines impacted by NCDOT projects, and regular maintenance of water lines; (2) Parking: Maintenance at Harrah’s and Biltmore Garages; and (3) Stormwater: Edwin Place, Celia Place, and Canterbury Drive Drainage.
City Manager Wesley concluded by saying that the next critical steps are public hearing on May 26, 2026, and the final budget adoption on June 9, 2026. She looked forward to engaging with Council and the community over the next weeks as we finalize this budget.
Throughout the presentation, City Manager Wesley responded to various questions/comments from Council.
A. Public hearing and adoption of the preliminary resolution authorizing the issuance of 2026 Interim Limited Obligation Bonds
Resolution Number 26-93 - Resolution authorizing the negotiation of an Installment Financing Contract and providing for certain other related matters thereto - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 331
Resolution Number 26-94 - Resolution Requesting the Release of Property from a Deed of Trust related to Limited Obligation Bonds - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 335
Director of Finance and Management Services Tony McDowell said that this is the public hearing to consider adoption of a resolution authorizing the negotiation of an Installment Financing Contract and providing for certain other related matters thereto; and a resolution requesting the release of property from a Deed of Trust related to Limited Obligation Bonds This public hearing was advertised on May 1, 2026.
Mayor Manheimer opened the public hearing at 6:18 p.m., and when no one spoke, she closed the public hearing at 6:18 p.m.
Councilwoman Ullman moved to adopt a resolution authorizing the negotiation of an Installment Financing Contract and providing for certain other related matters thereto. This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Turner and carried unanimously.
Councilwoman Ullman moved to adopt a resolution Requesting the Release of Property from a Deed of Trust related to Limited Obligation Bonds This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Turner and carried unanimously.
Historic Resources Commission - May 14, 2025 - approved certificate of appropriateness for proposed right-of-way closure (as it related to St. Dunstan’s Historic District); and (2) Technical Review Committee - March 16, 2026, recommendation was to approve the closure; The Multimodal Commission is not currently meeting, but they are not legally required to review closure requests. Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution to permanently close a portion of unopened right-of-way on the western edge of Saint Dunstan’s Road, between 159 Saint Dunstan’s Road and 183 Saint Dunstan’s Road.
Mayor Manheimer opened the public hearing at 6:22 p.m., and when no one spoke, she closed the public hearing at 6:22 p.m.
Councilwoman Turner moved to adopt a resolution to permanently close a portion of unopened right-of-way on the western edge of Saint Dunstan’s Road, between 159 Saint Dunstan’s Road and 183 Saint Dunstan’s Road. This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Ullman and carried unanimously.
C. Public hearing to consider a conditional zoning 99999 Caribou Road from RS-4 Residential Single-Family Medium Density to Residential Expansion - Conditional Zone for the purposes of constructing a 100-unit multi-family development
Principal Planner Will Palmquist said that this is the consideration of an ordinance to conditionally zone 99999 Caribou Road from RS-4 Residential Single-Family Medium Density to Residential Expansion - Conditional Zone for the purposes of constructing a 100-unit multi-family development. This public hearing was advertised on May 1 and 8, 2026.
Summary of Petition:
Project Site
Overall Project Proposal
Technical Modifications
Site Layout and Design
Access, Sidewalks and Parking
Landscaping / Open Space / Tree Canopy
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and Other Plans:
Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan (2018)
Compatibility Analysis:
Staff recommends approval of this rezoning request based on the reasons stated above.
Mr. Palmquist reviewed the existing and proposed zoning, the aerial imagery and the future land use map. He then reviewed the site plan, landscape plan and elevation drawings. Regarding project conditions, affordable housing is included in the Project: (1) All units (100%) shall be leased to households earning less than 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Asheville, NC as established by HUD. The minimum affordability period for all units shall be 20 years and shall commence on the date of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the property; and (2) All of the affordable units will also accept, but are not restricted to, HUD (Housing Choice) vouchers. Regarding technical modifications, affordable housing is included in the Project: (1) 6’-wide sidewalk on Caribou Rd and 5’-wide internally instead of the 10’-wide minimum standard; (2) Encroachment of driveways and sidewalks into the landscape buffer of approximately 1,200 linear feet along the western edge of the project site; and (3) Street trees planted on Caribou Road in excess of the 20’ maximum distance from the edge of pavement, not to exceed a 50’ maximum distance. The project received significant public comment in advance of the May 6 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, specifically regarding infrastructure and traffic safety; public safety and pedestrian risks; environmental impacts; neighborhood character; and cumulative development impact. Regarding reviews, the Technical Review Committee, on April 6, 2026, approved with conditions. At the May 6, 2026, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, the motion to approve with conditions failed (Vote 3:3) with the following conditions: 1) That the project provide a pedestrian connection to Ardmore St, 2) that the City work with the applicant and the community to identify opportunities to improve the pedestrian network in the vicinity, 3) That the project explore the reduction of provided parking, in line with NCHFA requirements and their parking waiver request process, and 4) That the linear feet of encroachment into the landscape buffer, as delineated in the project conditions, be verified and reduced as appropriate to accurately reflect what’s depicted on the site plans. Also, the motion to deny failed (Vote 3:3). He then explained how the project was consistent with the Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan. He then outlined areas alignment and not in alignment with the Shiloh Community Plan 2025. He said that staff concurs with the Planning & Zoning Commission and recommends approval of the proposed conditional zoning.
There was considerable discussion regarding the ingress and egress onto Caribou Road.
Mr. Derek Allen, attorney representing the development team, said that this project is designed to be a buffer from the other features in the area. He noted that Ardmore was a connection shown on the site plan; however, the residents asked that connection be removed, so now they have it as a pedestrian connection. The developer would be willing to re-establish that connection if Council desires.
A representative of the developer, Pennrose, provided background information on his company and explained that they have in-house property management and will coordinate with other organizations through their community impact coordinators for supportive services for those living on the property.
In response to Councilwoman Roney, the representative of Pennrose said that there was nothing in the project that would get in the way of potential renewable options.
Council then discussed the make-up of the units, which all 100 will be designated affordable for a minimum of 30 years, noting that there was not an option of them becoming home ownership units as they focus on multi-family workforce rental housing.
Councilwoman Smith loved the project; however, the location didn’t fit the project. She said Shiloh’s vision was that this land be a park. The Shiloh community was very clear of their vision in their 2025 Shiloh Community Plan. She also felt the Shiloh community was given information but felt patronized. She cited pedestrian and vehicular concerns. She felt this project will disrupt their quality of life and the sense of urgency for this action is distasteful.
Mr. Warren Sugg, representing the developer, briefly talked about the site plan and the building elevations.
Mayor Manheimer opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m.
Seventeen out of 19 individuals spoke in opposition to the conditional zoning request, for various reasons, some being, but are not limited to: infrastructure and traffic safety; public safety and pedestrian risks; environmental impacts; neighborhood character; and cumulative development impact.
Mayor Manheimer closed the public hearing at 8:02 p.m.
Mayor Manheimer noted that funding mechanisms have deadlines and Council doesn’t normally move this quickly; however, the applicants have to meet other financial deadlines for affordable housing.
Councilwoman Turner felt that we do need affordable housing everywhere; however, she felt protective of our legacy neighborhoods and gentrification around them.
Vice-Mayor Mosley felt that legacy neighborhoods are not always against affordable housing, but they feel they are always the prime targets. Looking at data points over the last five years, the majority are in adjacent neighborhoods or south Asheville - and Shiloh is both. She felt we should find a way to spread affordable housing around the City.
In response to Vice-Mayor Mosley, City Attorney Branham said that City Council has a wide latitude in revising general use districts in the Unified Development Ordinance.
Councilwoman Smith moved to deny the conditional zoning request for the property located at 99999 Caribou Rd from Residential Single-Family Medium Density (RS-4) to Residential Expansion - Conditional Zone (RES EXP-CZ) and find that the request is not reasonable, is not in the public interest, is not consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan and does not meet the development needs of the community. This motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Mosley and carried unanimously.
D. Public hearing to consider a conditional zoning 1116 Sweeten Creek Road from RM-16 Residential Multi-Family High Density and CI Commercial Industrial District to Residential Expansion - Conditional Zone for the purposes of constructing a 126-unit multi-family development
Ordinance Number 5221 - Ordinance to conditionally rezone 1116 Sweeten Creek Road from RM-16 Residential Multi-Family High Density and CI Commercial Industrial District to Residential Expansion - Conditional Zone for the purposes of constructing a 126-unit multi-family development - Ordinance Book No. 37 - Page 20
Urban Planner Clay Mitchell said that this is the consideration of an ordinance to conditionally zone 1116 Sweeten Creek Road from RM-16 Residential Multi-Family High Density and CI Commercial Industrial District to Residential Expansion - Conditional Zone for the purposes of constructing a 126-unit multi-family development. This public hearing was advertised on May 1 and 8, 2026.
Summary of Petition:
Project Site
Overall Project Proposal
Technical Modifications
Site Layout and Design
Access, Sidewalks and Parking
Landscaping / Open Space / Tree Canopy
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and Other Plans:
Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan (2018)
Compatibility Analysis:
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this rezoning request based on the reasons stated above.
Mr. Michell reviewed the existing and proposed zoning, the aerial imagery and the future land use map. He reviewed the site plan, and elevation drawings. Regarding project conditions, affordable housing is included in the Project: all units (100%) will be designated affordable for a minimum of 20 years; all units (100%) will be designated affordable to those earning 80% or less of Area Median Income (AMI) as established by HUD; and all units will accept, but not be restricted to HUD (Housing Choice) vouchers. The Project includes technical modifications: (1) Sidewalk width of 5’ along Sweeten Creek instead of 10’ standard; and (2) No sidewalk along 30’ of frontage along Rock Hill Rd, where an easement will be provided instead. He said the Technical Review Committee approved the project with conditions. The Planning & Zoning Commission voted unanimously to approve the project. He then explained how the project was consistent with the Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan. He said that staff concurs with the Planning & Zoning Commission and recommends approval of the proposed conditional zoning.
In response to Councilwoman Roney, Mr. Mitchell said that his recommendation to the developer is to always prepare for the future installation of solar options and these roofs face to the south which is optimal for maximum solar gain.
Mayor Manheimer opened the public hearing at 8:36 p.m., and when no one spoke, she closed the public hearing at 8:36 p.m.
Councilwoman Ullman moved to approve the conditional zoning request for the property located at 1116 Sweeten Creek Rd from Commercial Industrial (CI) and Residential Multi-family High Density (RM-16) to Residential Expansion - Conditional Zone (RES EXP-CZ) and find that the request is reasonable, is in the public interest, is consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan and meets the development needs of the community in that the request: 1) Prioritizes greater densities of development overall, throughout the city as appropriate; and 2) Increases the supply of housing, including affordable housing, in proximity to schools, transit and parks. This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Turner and carried unanimously.
A. Resolution Number. 26-96 - Resolution authorizing the award of Community Development Block Grant - Disaster Recovery multi-family housing funds to Mountain Housing Opportunities/South Creek Development (Terrace at River Hills), Commonwealth Development Corporation (District East Commons), and Laurel Street (319B Biltmore).- Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 340
Community Development Block Grant - Disaster Recovery Project Manager Elma King said that this is the consideration of a resolution authorizing the award of Community Development Block Grant - Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) multi-family housing funds to Mountain Housing Opportunities/South Creek Development (Terrace at River Hills), Commonwealth Development Corporation (District East Commons), and Laurel Street (319B Biltmore).
Ms. King provided a brief overview of the substantial amendment to the Single-Family Program; along with recommendations for CDBG-DR Multi-Family Housing awards.
Housing and Community Development Director Nikki Reid said that regarding the proposed reallocation to Single-Family, (1) The final cost of serving all Asheville applicants to Renew NC is yet unknown, but estimated to be between $30-$40 million; (2) Staff propose pursuing a Substantial Amendment to the CDBG-DR Action Plan to reallocate $19.2 million to the Renew NC Program – comprised of $9.2 million from the Affordable Multi-Family Housing Construction Program, and $10 million from the CDBG-DR Infrastructure Program. The City identified $10M in estimated design costs for the North Fork Project as funds likely be reimbursed first through HMGP, and therefore believe this funding amount can be reallocated to Single Family Home Repair; and (3) The Single-Family Home Repair & Reconstruction Program would be allocated $22.2 million which the State estimates will serve 55-65 Asheville households. Next steps are: (1) Home repair demand and costs exceed expectations; total need estimated at $30–$40M - Proposed CDBG-DR amendment reallocates $19.2M to Renew NC, bringing the program total to $22.2M (Council to vote June 23); (2) 2024 Affordable Housing Bonds will provide additional home repair funding via ARCHER to address unmet needs - A home repair policy and bond allocation will also come before Council on June 23; and (3) Strategy combines multifamily development (for displaced renters) with homeowner repair programs (Renew NC + ARCHR) to stabilize residents, preserve generational wealth, and prevent further displacement.
She then reviewed the deal structuring in affordable housing; CDBG-DR Multi-Family Program priorities; Notice of Funding opportunity (NOFO); evaluation criteria; evaluation and recommendation process; and rationale for recommendations - Recommendations align with the results of the NOFO evaluation process: $10.89 million. (1) The top Ranked Proposal: Terrace at River Hills ($9.5 million), 126 Units (4% LIHTC); (2) The second Ranked Proposal: District East Commons ($1.385 million), 93 Units (9% LIHTC) Terrace at River Hills is the most shovel ready, with no state-CDBG funding contingencies. District East requires a State funding investment, and was the second highest scoring application; and (3) Supplemental Project Recommendation: $7 million - 319 Biltmore ($7 million), 112 Units (4% LIHTC). 319-B Biltmore is shovel ready, with no additional funding contingencies. This award funds the second phase of a project on a City-owned property, with the first phase (109 workforce + affordable units) already fully funded with City support.
The recommendations are (1) To advance Council’s Quality Affordable Housing vision and provide gap funding for the construction of affordable multi-family projects after Tropical Storm Helene, Staff recommend a commitment of $17.89 million to support 3 projects totaling 331 units (1) The City’s NOFO process identified Terrace at River Hills and District East Commons as the top-scoring projects based on the evaluation criteria; and (2) Supplemental Opportunity: 319-B Biltmore applied for tax credits in the Fall 2025 cycle and is positioned to start construction in 2026. Deploying additional CDBG-DR funds and awarding this project is recommended. On May 5, HCD voted 2-1 to recommend the award of $17.89 million in Affordable Multi-Family Housing Construction Program funds to advance three projects totaling 331 units.
Ms. Reid responded to various questions/comments from Council, some being, but are not limited to: how much has the City contributed to 319 Biltmore already; and what other sources of funding are available for these projects and are they applying to those sources, and if not, why.
When Councilwoman Turner wanted to move more money out of multi-family development into single-family home repairs, discussion occurred regarding the need for funds to repair homes, noting that the substantial amendment to reallocate funds to the Single-Family Rehab and Reconstruction Program will be coming back to City Council via a public hearing on June 9.
Councilwoman Roney felt we should expedite home repair/rebuild but pull from planning. We do need more funding, but she was concerned about pulling it from infrastructure. Naming concern about flood mitigation recommendations outstanding from Flood Damage Reduction Task Force after the floods in 2004: (1) auditory alarm systems for evacuation; (2) drawdown schedule for the North Fork Reservoir in response to rainfall predictions and (3) early alert systems.
Several Council members felt that the per unit subsidy on the Terrace at River Hills development was too high.
Vice-Mayor Mosley moved to authorize the award of CDBG-DR Multi-Family Housing Program funds to Commonwealth Development Corporation (District East Commons), and Laurel Street (319B Biltmore). This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Turner.
Mr. Powell Howell felt we should use these funds for repairing and restoring our homes first.
President and CEO of Mountain Housing Opportunities (MHO) Geoffrey Barton understood Council’s concern of high costs per unit. He said if they are not awarded this funding, they will move into the tax credit cycles. He did feel this was an opportunity to get a significant number of affordable housing, noting that multi-family rental is critical. He urged Council to follow the consultant’s guidance and award the $9.5 Million to the Terrace at River Hills.
Mayor Manheimer said that MHO is an amazing affordable housing partner in our community, and wondered if there was a way to reduce the amount awarded and the project still be viable. Mr. Barton replied that the City requested shovel-ready projects and to reduce the award will force them into the tax credit cycle, which deadline is Friday. He couldn’t say whether the project would be viable with a lesser amount.
When Councilwoman Roney asked Vice-Mayor Mosley if she would accept a friendly amendment to her motion to include Apex at Hazel Mill in Emma community, Vice-Mayor Mosley replied that she would.
In response to Vice-Mayor Mosley, Ms. Reid said that Apex at Hazel Mill was 89 units and asked for $4.5M of CDBG-DR funds and $3.5 from the state. She felt that Apex at Hazel Mill can go to the state for their entire amount.
Councilwoman Ullman supported our professional staff’s recommendation of also awarding MHO the $9.5 Million.
After discussion, Councilwoman Roney withdrew her friendly amendment, noting that if we don’t allocate the $9.5 Million to MHO, then those funds can be repurposed to other applications.
The motion made by Vice-Mayor Mosley to authorize the award of CDBG-DR Multi-Family Housing Program funds to Commonwealth Development Corporation (District East Commons), and Laurel Street (319B Biltmore), and seconded by Councilwoman Turner carried unanimously.
Councilwoman Ullman moved to authorize the award of CDBG-DR Multi-Family Housing Program funds to Mountain Housing Opportunities/South Creek Development (Terrace at River Hills). This motion died for a lack of a second.
Mayor Manheimer said that public comment on the consideration of the resolution to declare and reaffirm the protection of civil liberties of all residents and visitors; the Community Project Funding Award, the budget amendment, and the Axon contract would be combined; however, a separate vote will be taken on B.1 and its subparts and B.2.
B.1 (i) Resolution Number 26-97 - Resolution of the Asheville City Council to declare and reaffirm the protection of civil liberties of all residents and visitors in the collection and use of data obtained through the utilization of public facing cameras, license plate readers, and the operation of a real-time intelligence center
- Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 341
The resolution reads in part that “The City’s use of public safety tools shall be solely for lawful purposes, which are intended to enhance or provide for public safety, and shall not offend any constitutional or other legal right. These public safety tools shall not be used, or permitted to be accessed by any third party, in any manner that fosters discrimination, bias, or unwarranted invasions of privacy. The City shall take all reasonable steps, through policy and action, to prevent unauthorized sharing of data, general surveillance of the public outside of a criminal investigation or other legally authorized activity, or unnecessary storage of data obtained through the use of these tools. The City shall not apply these public safety tools in a manner which utilizes facial recognition, nor to target any individual or group based upon race, skin color, national or ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, mental or physical disability, religious or political opinion or activity, immigration status, whether they are currently experiencing homelessness, or any other unauthorized reason. The City shall further remain accountable and transparent in its actions to the extent permitted by law with respect to the use of these systems, the data collected, and the sharing of information with third parties. The access, and specific accessor, of any public facing camera or license plate reading system shall be documented and maintained to allow for subsequent audit and oversight. The storage of data collected by the City while utilizing these tools shall have a duration no longer than specified by State law, and shall not be kept beyond the expiration of the legal purpose for the data’s original collection. In the absence of state, interstate, or international criminal or national security investigations, the City shall not utilize these public safety tools to participate in enforcement of federal immigration law. This resolution is intended to encourage community trust in the City’s commitment to the utilization of its public safety tools and systems only when reasonably balanced with its duty to protect and preserve the civil liberties of the individuals who make up this community. The City Manager shall take all reasonable and prudent measures to implement these policies and ensure compliance therewith, and a report shall be provided to the City Council, at least annually, on the use of these public safety technologies and any actions taken to ensure alignment with the Council direction outlined in this resolution.”
Ordinance Number 5222 - Budget Amendment in the City’s Special Revenue Fund for the Community Project Funding Award Allocation - Ordinance Book No. 37 - Page 29
Staff Report: Consideration of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for, accept, and sign all of the appropriate application and acceptance documents for the Community Project Funding Award allocated to the City of Asheville as secured through Congressman Chuck Edward’s Office and managed through the Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, Byrne Justice Grants; and adopt a budget amendment in the City’s Special Revenue Fund in the amount of $1,141,255.56.
B.3. Resolution Number 26-99 - Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute on behalf of the City of Asheville a contract with Axon Enterprises, Inc to bundle all existing agreements for Asheville Police Department’s current inventory of Body-Worn Cameras, Tasers, Drones, Lightpost, and Interview Room equipment, warranties, licensing, and cloud storage for all, and add FUSUS software, utilizing the pricing offered through Sourcewell cooperative contract - Resolution Book No. 46 - Page 344
Staff Report: Consideration of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute on behalf of the City of Asheville a contract with Axon Enterprises, Inc to bundle all existing agreements for Asheville Police Department’s current inventory of Body-Worn Cameras, Tasers, Drones, Lightpost and Interview Room equipment, warranties, licensing, and cloud storage for all, and add FUSUS software, utilizing the pricing offered through Sourcewell cooperative contract.
Interim Chief Stepp took a few minutes to talk about the environment we’re operating in today. We are working in a setting of increasing demand and limited capacity. At the same time, we are operating without fully integrated real-time capability, meaning critical information is often fragmented, delayed, or spread across multiple systems and partners. We also continue to face staffing constraints that impact response times, investigative capacity, and proactive policing efforts. Officers and investigators are working harder than ever, often without the benefit of immediate, shared situational awareness. This is the reality of our current operations. And it’s why this discussion matters. This is not about buying technology. This is about improving emergency response, investigative efficiency, transparency, and officer accountability.
Before discussing what this system can do, it’s important to understand what it will not do: No facial recognition; No general monitoring; No unrestricted access to private cameras; Defined retention schedules; and Full audit logs. This system is governed under CALEA-aligned standards through the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies framework. In practical terms, that means it operates in accordance with nationally recognized best practices for law enforcement accountability, oversight, and professionalism. To be clear, we are aligned with the Council’s concerns around privacy, oversight, and preventing overreach. Public safety shouldn’t come at the expense of community values, and they won’t. The two can exist together. They are foundational to how this system is structured, how it is governed, and how it will be used.
She hoped that we’ve demonstrated that through the proposed civil liberties resolution and the name change. However, sorry to report we cannot change the name because it has been signed into law, but once funding is received, my understanding is that there may be an opportunity to do that, and if so, she will follow through to change intelligence to information. With that context in mind, it’s important to step back from the technical discussion. We have spent a lot of time talking about systems, platforms, dashboards, and software, features, integrations, and specifications. But somewhere along the way, we’ve lost sight of what this is actually about. This funding supports accountable technology upgrades for emergency response and transparency. And more importantly, it supports outcomes. So with that in mind, let’s focus on what this is really about - it’s about community and officer safety; it’s about faster emergency response; it’s about accountability and transparency; it’s about stronger investigations; it’s about finding missing persons; it’s about handling evidence efficiently and responsibly; and it’s about governance and safeguards that ensure this is done the right way. This is not about software. It’s about victims.
It’s about the mother waiting for answers after her child is taken. It’s about the officer trying to stop a violent offender before they strike again. It’s about the difference between acting in seconds and showing up minutes too late.
A real-time intelligence center is not a technology project. It is a public safety function. It exists for one reason: to close the gap between what is happening and what we know about it—so we can act faster, smarter, and more effectively.
Because crime does not wait for reports to be written. It does not pause for information to be entered into a system. It unfolds in real time. And when our response is delayed, incomplete, or disconnected, people get hurt. She then gave an example back in 2018 of an incident where a child was shot and no one came forward. Sadly, to this day, his case remains unsolved. Think about that for a moment. Not in terms of technology, but in terms of reality. That is the gap. Not effort. Not commitment. Information. This isn’t about adding another piece of equipment. It’s about making sure that when something like this happens, and unfortunately, it will, we are not standing in the dark, hoping someone speaks up. It’s about ensuring that silence is not the end of the investigation. Because in so many of our cases involving acts of violence, video surveillance provides critical evidence, helps identify offenders, and changes the trajectory of an investigation. And when we talk about modernization, this is what we mean. Not technology for technology’s sake, but the ability to see, to know, and to act when it matters most. Because when we strip everything else away, the technology, the terminology, the process, that is what this comes down to. Time.... Time to identify a suspect. Time to locate a victim. Time to intervene before violence escalates. And in policing, time is often the difference between life and death.
So as she reviewed her presentation, she asked that we keep that perspective. Not what the system looks like. Not how it operates on a screen. But what it enables in the field. Faster decisions. Better coordination. Lives protected.
Interim Chief Stepp then provided Council with the request of funding for software, hardware, and equipment to implement a Real Time Intelligence Center (RTIC). She noted that we applied for this grant to build an existing tool, Fusus, that the City of Asheville has funded since 2022. Additionally, a Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) was approved in March 2025 in the amount of approximately $60,000, to support the development of the RTIC. She then reviewed the funding timeline and said that funding was secured in February, 2026. She then reviewed the funding breakdown, along with the ongoing cost breakdown. She explained the RTIC (physical space) vs. Fusus (software platform. Fusus isn’t about watching people - it’s about helping first responders get to emergencies faster, better informed, solve crimes more efficiently, and keep the community safer with less intrusion, not more. She explained the Fusus definition of registry vs. integration, noting both are voluntary and can be revoked at any time. Axon Fusus neither has access to or retains data from an agency’s Fusus system. Axon Fusus will pull in the video stream, if connected through a FUSUS Core device. Fusus will not pull in the artificial intelligence (AI) technologies layered onto that device. Axon Fusus utilizes AI to rapidly search video provided to the system by users in order to mitigate criminal activity. AL may be utilized to automatically recognize weapons, vehicles of interest, etc. RTIC benefits include faster response; stronger investigations; enhanced safety; strategic focus; force multiplier; oversight and accountability; meeting Jury expectations; support for vulnerable areas; and promoting equity and accuracy. RTIC’s are not a standalone solution but agencies that have implemented them consistently show improved outcomes in response, case clearance, and targeted crime reduction efforts.
She then read a letter from District Attorney Todd Williams dated April 30, 2026, who expressed his “support for receipt of federal funding to create a Real-Time Intelligence Center (RTIC). As our community addresses public safety challenges, we must adopt tools that preserve objective evidence, effectively utilize emerging technologies, and enhance both public safety and ensure civil rights. … By focusing on objective evidence and the preservation of facts, it is my hope that we can reduce cycles of violence and ensure that public safety means safety for all..”
She also read a letter from Russ Ferguson, United States Attorney in the Western District of North Carolina dated May 12, 2026, in that it was his “belief that the City of Asheville and the Asheville Police Department would benefit from the establishment of a Real-Time Intelligence Center (RTIC). … I believe that every community deserves safety, and safety is a shared responsibility that includes law enforcement, clergy, community leaders, public health, non-profit organizations and others. Utilizing RTIC to its fullest capacity is value added to the Asheville Police, strengthens accountability and transparency to the community, and improves our response to victims of crime.”
Interim Chief Stepp then explained the Axon contract consolidation. She said if this funding is not approved, we will continue operating under the current fragmented model.
Today, that model consists of five separate agreements, each with different renewal cycles, amended add-ons, varying service agreements, and misaligned hardware refresh schedules. Maintaining that structure creates ongoing administrative complexity and exposes the department to financial instability. More importantly, it creates a predictable problem - Our current financial modeling shows technology costs rising to approximately $1.24 million annually by Fiscal Year (FY) 2027, followed by a significant coverage gap in FY 2029, when major agreements expire. By combining this year, we save approximately 180k over the next two years. At that point, we will be forced into consolidation—but under less favorable conditions, with fewer options and higher costs. The “do nothing” approach is not neutral. Renewing these systems individually at future market rates is expected to increase costs by 20 to 30 percent due to ongoing sector inflation—without adding new capability, without improving response, and without addressing current operational gaps. In other words, we will pay more to maintain the same capabilities.
She said, by contrast, the approval allows us to move forward with a comprehensive, structured solution: (1) Consolidating five separate agreements into one unified agreement; (2) Transitioning to a 7.5-year Officer Safety Plan; (3) Locking in pricing to protect against future inflation; (4) Eliminating unpredictable capital expenditure spikes for hardware replacement; and (5) And immediately improving operational capability.
This approach is projected to deliver more than $4 million in total contract value savings over time, while providing a stable, sustainable, and modernized foundation for public safety operations.
Moving forward, our focus is on how we implement this, deliberately, transparently, and with clear accountability. As we talk about the Education Campaign, this is what that looks like: (1) Community engagement through town hall-type meetings and listening sessions will occur prior to finalizing policies; (2) Continued transparency through regular neighborhood meetings and RTIC tours; (3) Policy development grounded in privacy, oversight, and best practices; and (4) Ongoing demonstration of effectiveness through measurable outcomes and case-based results. Trust will not be assumed; it will be demonstrated.
Mayor Manheimer read the following letter from Attorney General Jeff Jackson “There is a long tradition of skepticism about government surveillance, and that skepticism has produced important guardrails over the years. The question is which guardrails are in place for this proposal by APD. This technology can be deployed in narrower or broader ways, and several of the most consequential choices are matters of policy rather than capability. Based on what APD has described, the proposal here makes the narrower choice on the following concerns: Use for federal immigration enforcement, which is excluded. Facial recognition software, which is excluded. Footage retention, which is limited to the period set by city policy. Ownership of footage, which remains with the department rather than a private vendor. Winston-Salem, High Point, and the Buncombe County Sheriff's Office have operated facilities of this kind for several years. Their experience has been that, when these centers are run with clear policy limits and public oversight, they help reduce response times and assist in solving crimes without becoming the broader surveillance tool that critics reasonably worry about. Public safety and civil liberties are not opposing values, and the framework APD has put forward is a serious attempt to hold both at once.”
In response to Mayor Manheimer, City Attorney Branham said that all City contracts include clauses that allow City Council to pull funding from the contract, and thus terminate it. We also build in additional terms which empower the City to terminate the contract unilaterally under certain circumstances. His office has been reviewing the terms with the software provider and asking if they were willing to approve additional provisions and they have expressed their willingness to do so. The City will be able to terminate the contract if the system is not used correctly.
In response to Mayor Manheimer, Interim Chief Stepp explained the records retention policy governed by the State. She noted that physical evidence is different from data collection. City Attorney Branham also noted that these programs are software based, and a digital log is automatically generated and retained showing each person has accessed and utilized the program.
Councilman Hess moved (1) to declare and reaffirm the protection of civil liberties of all residents and visitors in the collection and use of data obtained through the utilization of public facing cameras, license plate readers, and the operation of a real-time intelligence center; to authorize the City Manager to apply for, accept, and sign all of the appropriate application and acceptance documents for the Community Project Funding Award allocated to the City of Asheville as secured through Congressman Chuck Edward’s Office and managed through the Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, Byrne Justice Grants; and (3) adopt a budget amendment in the City’s Special Revenue Fund in the amount of $1,141,255.56. This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Ullman.
Out of 23 individuals, 22 spoke in opposition to the acceptance of the Community
Funding Project Award and contract with Axon Enterprises Inc, for various reasons,
some being, but are not limited to: concern about the potential expansion of surveillance
tech in Asheville and urge you not to sign on with or consider contracts with vendors in
the absence of independent civil-rights and technology review, meaningful public
participation, and a competitive procurement process that preserves Council and
community oversight; if Council approves the Axon contract, the City Manager will
negotiate the binding contract with Axon directly, with no further Council review;
reject any authorization that does not include full transparency, vendor accountability,
and no facial recognition; opposition to any and all mass surveillance systems being
deployed upon our community; the current system in place and the proposed expansion
is an unwarranted violation of our privacy; no one is safe from the abuse of power that
these increasingly unchecked systems bring as we are already seeing across the
country; this proposed center would integrate major surveillance technologies, including
Flock cameras, Axon body camera footage, drone footage, and networks of business
and residential cameras - such integration poses significant risks to civil rights, as these
surveillance tools can be used to track individuals; concern that this proposal diverts
time and resources toward expanding surveillance in our community; Council should
prioritize more pressing issues, such as affordable housing, mental and behavioral
health crisis response teams, job creation for certified community health workers and
violence interrupters, and programs that help young people develop job skills; evidence
indicates that increasing police presence and surveillance does not enhance community
safety; stop the process and gather more information on civil rights protections,
strong oversight measures, strength of protected access to information, public input and
a potential competitive process; Flock cameras are extremely vulnerable to illegal
hacking activity, making all their data they collect on us available to anyone with a
Bluetooth device and a bit of tech understanding; invest money in safety infrastructure,
the public transit system, sidewalks, parks, or affordable housing; there are already too
many third-party cameras constantly recording us, and they haven't made anyone safer.
The motion made by Councilman Hess and seconded by Councilwoman Ullman carried on a 6-1 vote, with Councilwoman Roney voting “no.”.
Councilwoman Roney presented the following presentation. Regarding surveillance tech in Asheville, (1) Residents are more aware of the costs and risks of AI-fueled surveillance tech; (2) Concerns heard include: (a) Costs - facilities, staffing, budget amendments, and post-grant funding; (b) Risks - Constitutional rights, health care access, data protections, and more; and (c) Data Access - Tech companies, stalkers, and overreaching federal agencies. Regarding support from ACLU of North Carolina, (1) As part of her due diligence, she reached out to the state and local chapters of the ACLU; (2) she shared with the ACLU the publicly-available Flock and Axon agreements as well as the staff memo linked to the April 28th agenda materials; (3) Yesterday, she received a position outlined by Nicole Mance-Foster, Assistant to the Executive Director and Board Administrator for the NC Chapter of the ACLU; and (4) she immediately submitted the ACLU position to the full Council, City Manager’s office, and City Attorney’s office. The ACLU of NC’s position is “Real-Time Crime Centers (RTCCs) are designed to combine data from a wide range of technologies, including cameras, license plate readers, body cameras, and other monitoring tools, into centralized platforms for police departments. Rather than keeping information in separate systems, RTCCs allow police to analyze data in one place and claim to help officers make decisions more quickly and solve crimes more efficiently. Supporters often rely on emotionally charged examples, such as stories about missing children being found through RTCCs, to justify their expansion. But these systems raise serious concerns about privacy, mass surveillance, and civil liberties. Companies like Axon Fusus, which has previously described itself as ‘the most widely used & trusted Real-Time Crime Center platform in U.S. Public Safety,’ allows private security cameras, including Ring cameras, to share footage with local RTCC networks, further expanding police surveillance capabilities. Data from Automatic License Plate Readers (ALPRs) is commonly integrated into RTCCs. These surveillance cameras capture, document, and store the license plates of vehicles that pass by, along with the date, time, and location of each scan. The result is a growing database of people’s movements, often shared across regional and national networks. In many cases, this information is retained for years or indefinitely, with few meaningful safeguards to protect privacy rights. Flock Safety is one of the most widely used ALPR companies in the United States. As of November 2025, more than 5,000 law enforcement departments nationwide used the company’s systems. Flock in particular has drawn scrutiny after reports showed its data was used by ICE to support the federal government’s deportation agenda, including enforcement tactics that subvert due process. Communities across the country, including Hillsborough and Durham, are pushing back against ALPRs and RTCCs. These technologies do not just track people suspected of serious crimes. They collect information on everyone who uses public spaces, building massive databases that reveal where people live, work, travel, worship, seek healthcare, and participate in political activity. taken together, ALPRs and RTCCs represent a broader trend toward the automation and expansion of policing, often with little regard for constitutional rights or meaningful public oversight. The growing integration of cameras, data-sharing systems, and real-time analytics dramatically increases the potential for abuse and expands the ability of police to monitor nearly every aspect of daily life.” The ACLU of NC position states awareness that Asheville has titled its Real Time Crime Center a Real Time Intelligence Center, as well as awareness of the Sheriff’s existing RTIC. She also reached out to staff at the Electronic Futures Foundation. Their recommendation focused on our contracts, or lack thereof since we do not have one in advance of the Axon vote tonight: “When a city is asked to buy surveillance technology, elected officials and community members should review both the city contract and the vendor’s terms and conditions. The city contract usually sets out the formal structure of the deal: the parties, the term, the cost, the incorporated exhibits, and the basic rules for amendment, audit, acceptance, renewal, and termination. It is also where to look for whether the city preserved meaningful public-sector control. Vendor’s terms, master service agreement, and attached policies often contain the rules that govern how surveillance will actually work in practice. Those documents may define: What counts as city data; What the vendor may do with the data; How features can change over time; What confidentiality rules apply; How incidents are handled; and What barriers the city will face if it later tries to narrow or end the system. That is why the key question is not just, ‘What are we buying?’ It is also, ‘What permissions, dependencies, and control relationships are we authorizing?’ A contract that incorporates platform terms, service agreements, and implementation materials may do far more than approve a purchase. It may connect the city to a broader data ecosystem, normalize ongoing vendor control over public safety infrastructure, and make future expansion feel administrative. Staff requested this funding instead of other, documented capital needs. We have tremendous demand for additional Helene recovery funding instead. Even with community concerns, common sense requests for regulation & oversight, and promises by electeds to reinstate an advisory committee to provide community oversight, it has become abundantly clear that collection of the data in the first place is the ultimate risk. Why? - (1) For-profit, AI-based surveillance tech companies are very difficult to regulate; (2) The State of NC prevents cities from withholding data; and (3) The federal government has recent practices of violating 4th amendment rights of citizens across the United States. All of these override any policies or practices designed to protect the constitutional rights of the people who live, work, and visit in Asheville.
Councilman Hess moved to authorize the City Manager to execute on behalf of the City of Asheville a contract with Axon Enterprises, Inc to bundle all existing agreements for Asheville Police Department’s current inventory of Body-Worn Cameras, Tasers, Drones, Lightpost and Interview Room equipment, warranties, licensing, and cloud storage for all, and add FUSUS software, utilizing the pricing offered through Sourcewell cooperative contract. This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Ullman and carried on a 6-1 vote, with Councilwoman Roney voting “no.”.
Several individuals spoke to City Council about various matters, some being, but are not limited to: concerned that Council did not let everyone speak; need to pay the City employees a living wage; and certain rights at public meetings.
Mayor Manheimer adjourned the meeting at 11:59 p.m.
_______________________________
Mayor
_______________________________
City Clerk
5-12-26 Page