Name as it appears on the ballot: Brian Fitzsimmons
Age: 37
Party affiliation: Democrat
Campaign website: brianfitznc.com
Occupation & employer: Operations Analyst, AssuredPartners
Years lived in Raleigh: 11
1) Given the direction of Raleigh government, would you say things are on the right course? If not, for what specific changes will you advocate if elected?
I don’t. The majority of the folks on city council have adopted a reactive approach to governing. We have a city that is growing by leaps and bounds, and we don’t have the luxury of sitting back and waiting for things to happen. We need to be proactive about how we address the issues we face. We have an affordable housing crisis, a growing population of folks living outside, a transportation system that doesn't fit a city of our size, and a looming climate crisis. In my first term as councilor, I will work to:
Develop a long-term plan, in conjunction with stakeholders across Raleigh, on how to address our affordable housing crisis.
Allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s) by right.
Be a steward of deliberate and responsible spending at City Hall by focusing on the things that people rely on us the most for (safety, infrastructure, etc.) first.
Have the city be FULLY carbon neutral by 2050, if not sooner.
Set the standard for police and first responder pay.
Streamline the process of doing business with the city, so residents and small businesses alike can make the changes needed to fix their homes and run their businesses.
2) If you are a candidate for a district seat, please identify your priorities for your district. If you are an at-large or mayoral candidate, please identify the three most pressing issues the city faces.
District B is one of the last frontiers of development in the City of Raleigh. We will see a tremendous amount of change over the next 10-15 years, so a proactive approach isn’t just preferred, it’s mandatory. In the next two years, my priorities specific to District B will be to:
Work with local stakeholders to help find homes for those living outside or those who are limited to hotels.
Bring the 23L and 24L GoRaleigh service just a few blocks north to the Triangle Town Center Park and Ride, thereby giving commuter access to North Hills, Crabtree, and surrounding areas without having to connect at Moore Square.
Proactively engage with citizens on the Capital Blvd. North Study.
Be a relentless advocate for targeted, mixed-use development along the Capital Blvd. corridor, the most frequently used transit corridor in the City of Raleigh.
Find short term ways to help alleviate the dangers of crossing Capital Blvd. and Louisburg Road.
Advocate for greater bus service emanating from Triangle Town Center, thereby limiting growing traffic congestion on Capital Blvd. and Louisburg Road.
3) What in your record as a public official or other experience demonstrates your ability to be effective as a member of the city council and as an advocate for the issues that you believe are important?
I have spent my life working on advocating for issues important to me and my family. I’ve worked to make substantive change in Raleigh and across North Carolina by working with all sides towards mutual understanding. In 2014, I came before the City Council and advocated for changing our city’s non-discrimination oridinance (NDO). It had been decades since it had been updated, and we were one of a few larger cities that hadn’t done so recently. The council at that time had a much different makeup, and include a number of folks who might normally be less likely to embrace social change. I met with each of those folks privately and had direct and open conversations about how important this was. The updated NDO passed unanimously.
I also spent two years as Chair of the Wake County Democratic Party, where our team worked tirelessly to hit a mark that has never before been hit: 75% voter turnout. One of the biggest issues facing the City of Raleigh is the general apathy across the electorate. It has been difficult to get people engaged in city issues, and our municipal election turnout has suffered accordingly. We need to do what we can to get as many people engaged as possible, regardless of where they fall on certain issues.
4) Most people agree that Raleigh faces a housing affordability crisis. Do you believe the council made a wise decision not to place a bond on this year’s ballot? Why or why not?
Yes. Bond referendums are complex and require clear and deliberate plans. Those plans inevitably take time, which we didn’t have this year. Moving it to 2020 was the right call.
5) Assuming the council places a bond referendum on the 2020 ballot, how much money to do you believe the city should ask for? What do you believe it should fund? Outside of a bond, what steps should the city be taking to promote housing affordability in Raleigh?
I don’t think it’s right to put a dollar amount on it right now, at least in a pre-election questionnaire. We need to commit to doing the most we can within our means. This issue is far too important. In addition to a bond, or in conjunction with it, we should look into providing tax relief for low-income, long-time homeowners so they can remain in their homes. We can also develop a grant program that would help those homeowners with upkeep (roof, heating and air, etc.).
6) Discussions surrounding housing often turn on questions of protecting neighborhoods’ characters or promoting density in the city’s core—i.e., what kinds of new housing the city should add, and where? At the crossroads of this conversation is the rapid gentrification of Southeast Raleigh. What role should the city play in ensuring that the longtime residents of those neighborhoods can continue to afford to live there?
We need to embrace all kinds of housing types, and not limit ourselves to isolated single family, townhouse, and apartment neighborhoods. We have a development in District B called 5401 North that is a perfect example of that. You can stand on one corner and see SFH’s, TH’s and apartments, all of which are within walking distance of upcoming commercial development, an elementary school, a middle school, and a much needed park. The less dependent we can be on vehicles, the less traffic we will have and the closer we will come to adequately addressing our climate crisis.
We need to be strong supporters of our history, and this our long-time residents. Tax relief, maintenance grants, and development consideration will go a long way towards curbing our gentrification problem. We can also push hard to bring multiple housing types to areas across the city at affordable prices. The more options people have across the city, the less likely it is that our gentrification problem will grow.
7) The city currently has twenty neighborhood conservation overlay districts, which can restrict new development. Do you believe this tool is being used effectively? How would you change the city’s approach to NCODs, if at all?
I’m hesitant to say never, but at this point, it would be difficult for me to support any new NCOD, at least with how they are currently being used. NCOD’s were originally a tool used to help fight gentrification. Now they are used to defend larger lot sizes, setbacks, and other forms of “neighborhood character”, increasingly in less diverse areas. We even have situations where people are proposing NCOD’s as a replacement of their HOA management company so that the City of Raleigh will enforce their covenants. At the rate that we’re growing, we need to be willing to consider the idea of smaller lot sizes, and different housing types on those lots. We will literally run out of room if we don’t. If NCOD’s are going to be a tool used to positively address the issues facing Raleigh, I’m on board. But recent history doesn’t make me so sure that’s the case.
8) If you could change anything about the city’s unified development ordinance, what would it be and why? - I would do two things right away:
Make it easier for different housing types (duplexes, triplexes etc.) to be built across the city.
Consider the number of stories a building will be when considering the height of a building, instead of relying on both height and number of stories.
There are so many other things we can do to help make the document serve us better, but the above two would be a great start. The UDO made many much needed changes to how our city considers growth and development. We needed to consolidate our code into a more centralized, easy to understand form. With any governing document though, it should be assumed that it will change over time, if only because we too will change. As we consider new types of development, housing, and transportation types, the UDO should be along for the ride.
9) Earlier this year, the council required homeowners who wish to build an accessory dwelling unit on their property to petition their neighbors through an overlay district process. So far, no neighborhoods have started the application process. Do you believe this is the right approach to ADUs, or do you believe they should be allowed by right? Please explain.
ADU’s should be allowed by right. Regulations and limitations are understandable, for sure, but this onerous process is as close to banning them as you can get. We should be embracing new ideas and different approaches to housing, not making it more difficult to do so.
10) When considering new downtown development projects—e.g., John Kane’s proposed tower on Peace Street or new developments in the Warehouse District—how much consideration do you believe the council should give to automobile traffic and parking concerns?
It should absolutely be a consideration, but not just in the assumed way. If we build certain types of development along transit corridors, we can truly be advocates for citizens ability to not rely on a car. There are absolutely ways in which development can be a tool used to alleviate traffic, not just the other way around. Obviously, this isn’t an overnight process, so consideration should be made in some part regarding the normal traffic effects, but we can’t ignore the changes that must be made for a long-term culture shift.
11) Developers are eyeing at least three parcels on the outskirts of the downtown business district for twenty-plus-story buildings. Do you believe this area is an appropriate place to add height and density? What conditions should the city attach to such projects, if any?
I am an advocate for gradual change when it comes to height. We will continue to see areas change, and I don’t think we should use a broad stroke and say that X number of stories isn’t allowed. There will obviously be transitional considerations, and we should be cognizant of drastic changes in height. I do not believe in a broad-based approach to height restrictions. That is not to say that I want to build a 20-story building next to someone’s single family home. We just need to be willing to embrace different approaches to development and housing, and do so in a way that advocates for an equitable Raleigh.
12) What are your thoughts on the city’s approach to alternative transportation options downtown? Is the city handling issues such as regulating e-scooter companies and building protected bike lanes the right way? Why or why not?
Nobody likes hearing about the scooter issue, but I feel like it is indicative of another problem. The Council’s approach to regulating scooters is a perfect example of their myopic view of our changing city. Instead of embracing change and finding a way to work with these companies, they instead chose to place onerous regulations on each scooter, making it incredibly difficult to have them operate in the city. To be clear, companies like Bird and Lime should not have come in and put their product in the streets without engaging the city and its citizens. A lot of this could have been alleviated if that didn’t happen. Instead of trying to make a bad start work, the City chose to push out the two largest scooter companies in the US. The company that we did choose to deploy scooters has yet to do so, while cities like Durham and Charlotte have competition working to earn rider’s business. We need to be willing to embrace different types of transportation options that will eat at the “last mile” between a bus rider’s home and their closest stop.
As far as bike lanes, we’re not addressing the need fast enough. Where we can, we need to use every road resurfacing project as an opportunity to study the implementation of dedicated bike lanes. We do not do enough to encourage transit/walkable-focused development, so in turn people simply don't see using their bikes as viable. As leaders, we need to be the main champions of the effort to encourage more sustainable forms of transportation. We cannot rely on others to do it for us.
13) Earlier this year, the city passed an ordinance banning whole-house rentals and regulating other short-term rentals. Are you concerned about claims that this ordinance might conflict with state law? Do you believe the city’s policy is the best way to regulate Airbnb and other short-term rentals? Why or why not?
I do think it currently violates state law and puts us into a precarious situation regarding inevitable litigation. To be clear, the reactive nature of Jones Street can be difficult to navigate, and often puts cities and towns in difficult situations. I would much rather have cities and towns be able to govern themselves, without the overreach of the NCGA. That said, in this situation, we brought this on ourselves. There absolutely should be limitations and regulations placed on whole-home rentals. The city commissioned a committee to study the issue of short-term rentals and present council with recommendations. The council, unsurprisingly, decided not to follow those recommendations, and instead we are faced with what we have now. During the debate on short-term rentals, Councilwoman Nicole Stewart put forth a motion suggesting that we dig deeper into whole-home rentals and their effect on housing inventory (among other things). That motion was defeated. This is yet another example of the majority of this council, who often tout their citizen engagement bonafides, choosing instead to stick to their own opinions. It’s clear that the engagement their looking for is with people that agree with them.
We need to do a short-term rental pilot-program that allows all types of STR’s outside of whole-home rentals, and ask staff to further research the effect of whole-home rentals on any number of factors.
14) Do you think Raleigh’s system of Citizens Advisory Councils is the best way of fostering engagement with local government? If not, how do you believe the CAC system should be reformed?
It can be. CAC’s are incredible tools that are crippled by the very same apathy our turnout is. Citizens just aren’t willing to engage unless it’s something that affects them directly, and even then it’s difficult to get people out. We need to invest in our CAC system and all forms of citizen engagement, specifically RTN. We need to seek out different ways to engage with our citizens and make sure we are meeting them where they are. It is an irrefutable fact that right now, that isn’t CAC’s.
15) Four council members have called for the city to join a lawsuit over the RDU Airport Authority’s quarry lease with Wake Stone. Do you support RDU’s quarry lease? Do you believe this case is something the city should involve itself in? Why or why not?
This past March, the RDU Airport Authority entered into a lease agreement with Wake Stone Corporation to develop a quarry on land located next to Umstead State Park known as the Odd Fellows Tract. This was not news. RDUAA made their intentions for this land known via their Vision 2040 plan that was released in 2017. Despite that, this has turned into a much larger issue only recently.
Over these past few months, I have walked Umstead State Park land surrounding the Odd Fellows Tract with Dr. Jean Spooner of the Umstead Coalition, and visited with executives and employees of Wake Stone at their existing quarry site adjacent to the Odd Fellows Tract. In both cases, it's impossible to deny the commitment both have to our city and county. When I met with the folks at Wake Stone, the first thing I said to them was what I still feel today: if someone asked me if I would rather have a hole in the ground or not a hole in the ground, my first instinct would be to take the latter. I think most people would, including literally everyone running for Raleigh City Council now. But we live in a world now where everything has to be binary. You're either for us, or against us. It is rarely, if ever, that easy.
I look forward to hearing from the courts on whether or not 1. The City (along with it's other three partners in the RDUAA) have any say in the matter and 2. If there is validity to any claims made by those who have filed suit (Umstead Coalition and TORC). In the meantime, we can focus instead on protecting other lands surrounding Umstead, and preserving those for future recreational use. Our climate crisis is getting worse and worse by the minute. Let's focus on the things that we CAN affect, while we CAN affect them. We need to double down on Councilwoman Nicole Stewart's proposal to cut the City of Raleigh's greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050. We need to be advocates for concentrated, mixed-use density across Raleigh, giving people the ability to be less reliant on their vehicles. We need to invest in our public transit infrastructure so a single-car household might become more of a possibility. We need to commit to not using neonicotinoids and other pesticides on any land owned by the city. We need to continue our commitment to protecting land surrounding the Falls Lake watershed, protecting our drinking water. Let's take real, proactive action instead of clinging to an entirely reactive narrative.
16) When Mayor McFarlane announced her decision not to seek reelection, she cited increasing incivility among council members. Do you agree with her assessment? If so, what would do to lower the temperature in city government and make the council more productive?
I do agree with Mayor McFarlane. First and foremost, we always need to seek to understand. Our current council’s acceptance of a binary view of municipal politics is the opposite of what we need. We are all going to disagree, that’s a given. Disagreement is not only accepted, but in many cases, it’s healthy. Some of the best policy comes from respectful debate. The council, as it exists today, is far too adversarial and seeks only to validate their own opinions. We need to be open to new ideas, fight the fights with extra vigor where necessary, but more than anything, operate first with the goal of working collaboratively.
17) Do you believe the city needs a community police oversight board? If so, what should the board look like, and what powers should it have? Do you believe the city can or should challenge the state law that blocks access to certain police personnel records?
Yes. Before we do, we must seek to understand. Why is there a public outcry for police oversight? What has led to people feeling less protected, or even in danger, when around police? Any POB must contain several things, including a well-trained and knowledgeable membership. It must contain stakeholders from every corner of Raleigh, representing what makes Raleigh great. Since so much of the struggle between the community and police is based on implicit bias, it’s imperative that any oversight board be willing to combat their own. Each and every member should be required to participate in training re: existing police procedure, and go on periodic ride-alongs with officers around the city. Creating this board should be at the top of our list, before considering whether or not to challenge state law. That said, we shouldn’t be expecting anyone else to be the ones advocating on behalf of our city and it’s citizens on Jones Street.
18) If there are other issues you want to discuss, please do so here.
GO VOTE.
