 All right, welcome, everybody. I'm going to call the meeting to order. And just to get things started, I want to just give a big shout out to the snow removal team for the city and DPW. Oh my gosh, you're so grateful. I've heard such great things, such appreciatory things of their work over the last, what, three days, something like that. They've been working to exhaustion, basically. And we're so grateful for their work. So I just want to say that first. First thing is to, other first thing, is to review and approve the agenda. And I don't think we have any changes to the agenda. Am I wrong about that? Does anybody's knowledge think it's as advertised? OK, so we're going to consider the agenda approved without objection. So on to general business and appearances. So this is a time for any member of the public to address the council on some item that is otherwise not on our agenda. And if you have something to say, if you would say your name and where you live and try to keep your comments to two minutes or less. And with Don and not here, I will keep track of time. There really is one on your agenda, right on the mic. Sure. On my con. OK, good. And I'll speak a little louder, Jack, anyway. I'm here to speak to transportation policy, which isn't on the agenda. It hasn't been on the agenda for a while. And basically, I'm not questioning the 40,000 that's embedded in the budgets at all. That is in the budget. What I'd like is I'd like better understanding that Green Mountain Transit is about to release down on, I'm right, you're on the Transportation Committee, the Green Mountain Transit will make public soon their planning that they've been working on for a while. That's correct, but they're also going to be making some reductions. And I know there'll be a public meeting on that sometime in February. What I'm wondering is the process of the city's 40,000 on transportation. Whether this is a no-bid contract to achieve through the Green Mountain Transit or whether this is 40,000 that's going to be allocated for transporting people around our town, and basically, will that go out in the form of an RFP? And the Green Mountain Transit has the most effective way of doing it. Certainly, they will continue with it. But if there are other alternative models, that's the first part of the question. And the second is, how much connection the schools have had with the city council and their transportation planning? Since the schools are planning to allocate $120,000 for the transportation of 150 cities. So if I could just have a couple of minutes on when the city is planning to discuss unified transportation, well, that's a lot in two minutes. Yeah, fair enough. Oh, don't forget to say your name and where you're from. Did he? Oh, I'm so sorry. I totally missed it. I think I was getting my phone. That's what happened. No, that's great. Yeah, no worries. Great question. I think that's something that we could absolutely take up at a future meeting. I think it's probably worth talking about. So I can't tell you exactly when that would be right now, but let's begin to touch about when we might have a more robust conversation about that. Yes? I would just like to make sure you realize that $40,000 doesn't pay for it all. That's a subsidy to state and federal dollars. And I'd like to know where the state is involved in this. So Donna, would you be the point post on council on that issue? Sure. Notice how I delegated on it. That's all I have to say. Thank you so very much. I'll get home on a rainy night. Thank you. My name, Dickerson, monthly resident. This relates to bike path access. I live on Charles Street, I don't know if anybody knows, but it basically flows from the first college area down to Mary. I often find myself walking down to access the bike path like I do that parking lot, where the parking is, and access across the railroad tracks or I go to the co-op. And this sort of stems from me walking down a few days ago after the big snow storm. Obviously, this is a sort of a rare occurrence. And I found a giant mountain of snow walking the path toward the Zire line. And it was called the bike path into the co-op. And I guess I just wanted to suggest or wonder if there's a way that the city might, because there are a lot of people that actually walk down Charles and access the bike path to the co-op without a reward or something. And I'm wondering if there's a way for the city to potentially negotiate with the railroad and maybe the property owner to get a formal pathway, as opposed to the sort of informal dirt track that they currently put there. I think there's enough traffic to warrant it. And I think given that the bike path is going to be extended much further out, I think there might be a much greater desire of people to walk down Charles or come for a ferry and access the bike path to that mean. So I just as a suggestion, it would be nice to have a formal pathway to access the path of the co-op. Thank you. Thank you. That's a great idea. We can certainly talk more about that. Actually, the council will bring up businesses on you, Jenna? Oh, yes. So I had sent an email earlier, but I've been following what the state is doing in terms of federal workers who are out of work and not getting paid. And I don't know what authority the city has or anything like that, but I know that there are, I think there's about 1,500 federal employees that live in Vermont, 1,600 maybe. And I wanna make sure that it's something that's on our radar. Tax bills are coming to any of those things. We have no idea when the federal government is going to reopen and our president just approximately eight minutes ago indicated that grocery stores will just give you credit to buy food sort of whenever you want it. So that's not a practical reality for a lot of folks who are living paycheck to like a few days before next paycheck. And so I want the city to sort of start thinking about ways that we can be a little bit flexible on things that we wouldn't ordinarily be, but I think it's sort of extraordinary circumstances. And I'm certainly interested in that. Do you wanna follow up with thinking about options? So I just, you actually had asked an email about this and I'm sort of starting to get back to you. We've been trying to figure out what the legal options are. You have a light though? You do other things? Nope. You say jump, I say hi. No, so we're trying to find out what our legal choices are. I mean, I think obviously it would be the question of whether we could waive interest in penalties on late taxes, those kind of things. So I don't know what flexibility we have in the law. Thanks for putting it on the radar. Anyone else? Done. There seems to be a strong echo. I don't know if I'm the only one who hears it, there is. Is there anything that can be done about it? Reverb. Are we that lit already? I guess I don't mind it because it tells me that you all can hear. I like knowing, but yeah, all right, there you go. Yeah, fair enough. Whatever works. Okay, anyone else? Okay. All right, so on to the consent agenda is their motion regarding the consent agenda. I move the consent agenda. Second. Further discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, so we have some appointments to make. There are a number of appointments where there was one person applying for one position or two people applying for three positions, you know, something where, something like that. So we could just make all those appointments together at first or we can hear from everybody and then go into executive session and then come back and announce them all. What's your preference? Let's do the second one. Okay, so we'll hear from everybody, go into executive session and then come back and make all the appointments. Okay. Great, so there are appointments to be made to the Social and Economic Justice Committee, Investment Committee, Tree Board and Solid Waste Management Committee. So I'm not, we don't necessarily go in order unless, well, let's go in order. How about that? Structure is good, I'm trying to be more structured here. Okay, so let's start with, if there's anyone here from the Social and Economic Justice or applying to that committee. Come on up and introduce yourself and tell us about your interest in that committee. At first I guess to get to know more about what's happening about failure and to learn more about hate. Any questions? Okay, thank you. And I think Janelle Perry sent us an email saying that she would not be able to be here. The Investment Committee, we had Lou Ciceri apply but he also sent us an email saying that he would not be here. And for the Tree Board appointment, is James Finley-Sheres here? No, okay. And for the Solid Waste Management Committee, I know that there are a number of people who are interested and if you would introduce yourself and tell us about your interest in this committee. Pull that down to your mouth. All right, thank you. I'm Donna Barlow-Casey, service over at 3.8. I have not worked in solid waste in directly in about six years but I originally moved here in 1995 to be the executive director of the Central Vermont Solid Waste Management District. I authored the first zero waste plan east of the Mississippi for sustainable materials management advocated for the state's universal recycling law I'm an avid composter, remain a consultant on a national level to egocycle out of Boulder, Colorado on sustainable materials management. And I find myself at the current executive director for the Natural Resources Board Act 250, which for the first time in my life, I don't have to work night meetings. I'm going day long so I have this opportunity to take and throw my hat in the ring to do something I'm passionate about for the City of Montpelier. I'm no longer a resident but I spent over 20 years living here. I have worked on an interim basis for the City of Montpelier a few years ago. I just love the city as our capital city and would feel very privileged if you would consider my candidacy for the community. Thank you. Thank you. Cheney, I represent Montpelier on the Central Vermont Solid Waste Management District Board. It's an elected position, this body elected me. Beyond that, I am incredibly passionate about garbage as a matter of fact. I know a lot about what happens to garbage and recycling and compost in Central Vermont. I'm a 16-year resident and very committed to making sure that our environment and our community is healthy and that our waste is disposed of properly. Thank you. Hi, I'm Kurt Erikson of Vine Street. I am the general manager of Vermont Compost Company. I also do work with the Food Cycle Coalition which is associated with Vermont Farm to Plate as a member of the Composting Association of Vermont. I'm a formal environmental regulator with the U.S. Coast Guard. I've been here in Montpelier for two years now and just as I'm starting to think about starting a family and buying a house, I just want to ensure that we're managing these materials in the best way possible. Thank you. Thank you. And I'm back up at Cheney Casper, Ken Street. I work in Toxics Action Center. We work side-by-side with community groups that are fighting pollution threats in their neighborhoods and we work with a number of different community groups around New England that are fighting landfills and incinerators in their communities. And so every day I see kind of how our waste system harms those who are facing the brunt of it. And so as part of our work, we're also moving towards zero waste, universal recycling and so I've just been part of a lot of these conversations at the state level and then the healthy community groups at the local level. And so I'm really excited to see if I can help my own community move towards universal recycling and zero waste to move away from our daily waste. Thank you. Okay, so I think that is everyone. Were there any questions for anybody? Okay, so do we have a motion to go into executive session? I would move that we go into executive session pursuant to one VSA section three, one set, three, one, three, four, some three, one blank to discuss the appointments of people to city commissions. Great. For the discussion, all in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, we will be right back. Is it Rosy going to the bathroom? Okay. Is it Rosy going to the bathroom? Rosy going to the bathroom. Oh, they lost Rosy. Oh, okay, well, I guess we should move over. Okay, do we have a motion to come out of executive session? So moved. Further discussion? All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Oh, did anybody second that? I tried to. Oh, okay, well, we'll, I'm sorry. Second. Thank you. I know I almost missed you. Now I have a motion. I move that we appoint James Timley-Sheriff to the keyboard. And Lee Chicherry to the investment committee. Dana Casper and Janelle Perry to the social justice committee. And Ellen Timley to the solid waste management committee. Further discussion? Second. Further discussion? All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, I just want to make a note about the solid waste committee. I am very likely to be the one that's going to be convening that group. And I, to all of you who have applied, I want you all there. It is a public meeting. And we appointed one person because this is joint we held with Barry and they appointed one person. So we felt there needed to be some equity there. But I want your brains there. So I have your email address and I'll let you all know when that happens. Okay, great. Thank you. So there is a proposal regarding the layout of the farmers market. And some of it. Is there, somebody just talked to us about that? I think they're on their way. Okay, fantastic. Need more chairs? You can close that. Would you mind just going around and introducing yourselves? If it will sound, I'm owner of Capital C. Bob Watson, Capital Grounds. And I'm Dan Grover, Executive Director of Farm Failure Life. Good day. So we're here asking for the council to allow us to move on to State Street and the Green Law for the duration of the outdoor 2019 farmers market. Well, last year we had two calendars and we sort of looked at them as opportunities and we're actually pretty grateful for what happened with the leaders. I was together and here, you can see everybody's at the table. And we're really grateful for that. And I think that through all of our coordination and our discussions that we came up with a layout that's gonna really work for everybody and work for our customers. And yeah, I mean, really. So we step back last year and we worked with the BDA in Montreal Uribe and the city and we came up with a better layout. The objectives of our layout, first and foremost, seems to make sure we have a safe loading and unloading for the farmers. We need an open and flowing layout that really is a customer-centric experience. We need to maximize the vendors that we can have at our farmers market for our financial sustainability. And we also really want to integrate with all of the businesses and all of the organizations that make mob failure of what this can do. We'll put this right out on the table at this point in time. We really have no place to go. We did work with state officials and different organizations to assess the possibility of moving to the state house lawn, which seems to be much more balanced than we thought. So we've got a layout that we feel like is available to everyone. And really, the objective is to make Saturday morning the destination of mob failure for all the community members and the surrounding community. Right open issues are additional trash removal on Saturday mornings. We've worked with the city and most of these are all going to be addressed already. Barriers, last year we needed to purchase some pretty expensive barriers to set down the street and that was a bit of a challenge for us. We'll be using our trucks and that will also provide extra spaces so that nothing like is happening. Other places might happen here. Bathrooms are still an open issue. We've heard pretty clearly from the businesses that it's something we need to address. We have some ideas and we're still working with the city and we're pretty confident that we can solve those, but that is definitely a concern for all of us. Parking, everybody has always been concerned about parking. This first year, we're going to all work together with a lot of advertising and sourcing people to different places that can park in the city. In the future years, we're going to look forward to city council to potentially allow free parking and really park it around, just out of the morning. We would ask that there are no permanent vendors that allow between Main Street and Almond Street during public market times. And we also are still looking for a location for our sale and resolve issues, but there are some ideas that we're working with the city. We've already got some regular media and schedules with Montreal Live and the Downtown Business Association to keep not only this communication to work through an issue, but also to really create reasons for people to walk, for people to come downtown. The 40 year, so, tradition downtown Montreal and it's such a rich agricultural community that was supporting in a rich agricultural state and collected through the support of traditions and to continue to foster that. Well, I'm so thrilled that you all come together and have a plan that you're supporting. It's wonderful. So, if there's any questions from the council, now's the time and anything, keep going, yeah. I just have one clarifying question. I noticed a note on here about the on-street vendors dropping from 30 to 35 from 50. That's not total vendors, right? So, those other vendors will still be there. They're just on the heating lot area, right? So, same size market just broken up into two areas. Yeah, this is the heating lot. It actually, the heating lot, it actually allows us to grow in numbers. This is a time of a drop. I mean, if it drops down on 32 for a number of different reasons, it opens up just low. The vendors running around where the market can stick to. So, overall, we'll be able to grow the market up towards about 75 cents. Okay, so, any other questions? So, I think we need a motion regarding the layout. Or is there any public comments? I'll just say that. That was one of the people who stood up here last spring and took issue with the layout at the time. But this layout seems so mindful of all the concerns that we brought up. I mean, literally, every concern that we brought up seems to be addressed in the new layout. So, I know, I'll speak for myself and a lot of state-street businesses are really looking forward to this collaboration and moving forward in a really positive, exciting way with the market. Donna. I'd like to echo that as well. It seemed like before it was not going anywhere. Give credit to the farmers market for holding out and coming back and working together with the merchants. And I think it's a good situation. We do not want to lose the farmers market. It's part of our identity. And we welcome them to state-street and we definitely want to keep them here in town. Great. Super. Donna. I just wanted to make a motion. Yep. We accept the layout as presented. Do I have to refer to this map? Well, that's presented, I think, where, sir? Second. Farms market, do you need dates? During the normal farmer's market season. Okay. Do we need to specifically mention closing state-street or do anything in our motion about that? I would imagine we'd probably take that up separately along with others. Yeah, we'd have to do street closure. We'll do that. Fisher street closure. We'll do that later. But this was just about the layout, I think, so. Implied that we will approve a street closure. Yeah. Right. Right. Much improved. Keep it in mind. Keep it up, all right? OK, so there was a motion and a second. Any further questions or comments? I just have a comment. I think that this is too small a town to have these two important segments of the community fighting with each other. And so I'm glad you're able to do this. I just want to add on that comment. One thing that got me, I guess, excited in looking forward to this is it's not, I don't think we're looking at putting the farmer's market on State Street. We're looking at doing something different with State Street on Saturdays and incorporating the farmer's market with it. I think it has great potential. And you know, we'll see what happens. We're all very excited for it. Great. It's very exciting. As a Montpelier resident, I'm really excited about it. OK, any further comments, questions? All right. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Great. Thank you for all of your hard work to make this happen. Thank you. OK, and now we have a presentation from the Washington County State's attorney, Roy Tebow, who I think I saw here. I also should disclose I am employed as a deputy state attorney in the Washington County State's Attorney's Office, so I'm not going to ask any questions or anything like that. And I just want everybody who's watching to know that as well. Welcome. Basically, yes. You might have to skip a hand out, Ashley. Oh, I think we had a staff meeting the other day. All right, well, good evening. And thank you very much for taking time to have me here this evening. It's exciting to be in front of the city council. And the work you do here is really important, because all work and government is important these days. So what I really wanted to highlight to you tonight are what you're being handed out is actually a two-year operating plan for my office. It's not something that has been done in the past. And as many of you know, I walked into this job sort of unexpectedly. And the past year has been filling out a different term. So I won election in November. And I have a four-year term ahead. So in any event, it's a great opportunity to have four years ahead to plan. The past year has been a lot of mending fences resolving issues. Ashley, I'm sure it's probably vented to you about that in private. But looking ahead, I think it's incredibly important that we recognize that Washington County, including my failure, has a lot of justices in the criminal challenge. And these justice challenges often overlap with things that are well-versed in economic and security, poverty, addiction. So rather than just sit back and respond and react to things as we often do in the criminal justice system, I thought it was appropriate that my team and I get together and think about what we really want to do and what we want to accomplish and focus on in the next two years. I think it goes without saying that the drug epidemic in Central Vermont, which also touches Montpelier, to a large extent, perhaps maybe not even as much as people recognize, but it is there. It's important to recognize that the drug epidemic is a priority. I can say, unfortunately, within the last 30 days in Washington County, there have been four fatal overdose events. What's also troubling is that in three of those four cases, these are individuals who had already received and had been part of medically assisted treatment. What this means for us, and I'm going to get a little off script here, but I think it's important to note this, we cannot simply silo the public health response from the criminal justice response. Oftentimes, the criminal justice system becomes an opportunity of last resort to save somebody or put them on the right path. Internal in this document, I lay out some of our four prongs, but they really are what our lines of effort are to do a better job of justice and public safety in Central Vermont and specifically Washington County. When we look at addiction, there's two important things to consider in its response. There's an enforcement end, and then there's a recovery end. Those two can work well together. And one of the key things that we would like to do from our standpoint of using the justice system is to reduce the overall demand for drugs in Washington County and Central Vermont. That's really a lot easier said than actually done, as you can imagine. But a part of that is making sure that we strike when the iron is hot, that there's a rapid response when someone is dealing with addiction or crisis. That means robust utilization of the TAMRAC program, which is a pretrial diversion program that includes a contract for seeking substance abuse and some case management. And then when we get to more intense cases, utilizing the Washington County Adult Treatment Court, another effort I'm excited to announce with you. We're working on what the team is extending that into the juvenile division as well so that people who are qualified to be treated youthful offender, that is our 18 to 22-year-old cohort group, can access that service, of course, in that setting, confidential, as opposed to the adult court, which is held in the open session. All this being said, there's a lot of exciting things that we're working on. What I've handed you includes the first slide is some trends. One thing I want to point out is that we had last year 351 more cases filed in adult criminal court than we did the year before. That's out of a little over, somewhere over 1,700 total. Percentage-wise, that's a pretty massive increase. To this point, it has been buffered without any increase in staffing or resources in my office. It's nothing short of a herculean effort of both our partners in law enforcement and the deputies there that I think they've done well. And we've continued to meet the needs and justice system. There are some alarming trends there. We have an increase in domestic violence offenses. We have a significant increase in violations of conditions of release, partially, likely partially attributed to some bail reform where bail is being used less often and we're relying on those conditions for release. I will note, I don't have specific stats from Montpelier, but I would say anecdotally there was an increase in the number of VCRs that officers just had to respond to and file. And Barry City was able to attribute most of their case increase to violations of conditions of release while their felony and violent crime rate actually decreased. So there are some things to consider. We also dealt with as an office the increase of availability of youthful offender, which is a program that I'm proud to say our office is a statewide leader in out of, I think, somewhere in the neighborhood of about 133 total filings in the state, 44 of those youthful offender petitions were in Washington County. Our office is supporting all but 11 of those dockets for treatment as youthful offender that pertains to six individuals. You may ask, why is the state's attorney opposed to some youthful offender cases? Well, these are violent cases that affect people and have real victims. They are attempted murders, they're sexual assaults, some on campuses, some in schools, some in the community, and also one case I'll highlight, which is a Montpelier case, there's a case that we have filed an objection to that involves the sale and distribution of heroin in Montpelier by an 18 to 22 year old. My objection in that matter is premised on the fact that that is distribution that's occurring to youth in this community and youth in Central Vermont. The response from treatment in juvenile division probably isn't appropriate for long-term supervision. So there's some legislative priorities in here mapped out and one area I'm particularly concerned about is issues of violent crime or serious felony crime. At this point, I would not assess that the resources available through the youthful offender program are adequate to meet that. And that is a real public safety challenge for law enforcement and for my office. In some respects, I don't think, not just that case, but in some ways, criminal justice reform is in general an incredibly important principle and a huge priority, not just for my office, but for the attorney general's office and for many leaders statewide. But we always need to be cognizant of how those changes progress and whether the resources and supports we assume that will be there for people in that process are keeping pace is a question that we must focus on. So that is really what I wanted to say by way of introduction. I understand all of you have different priorities and questions probably about your community in particular or some of the things you're doing and I'd definitely like to answer some questions or assist you in understanding what our office is doing. Am I have a question? This crew will know that I have particular love for data. And so is there a place where you all have data about Washington County available or is that the kind of thing that you would that you would even want to publish? So we do have some data available. It's principally things that we are either obligated to report to the executive director's office or are reporting as part of grants. For example, we do maintain data on domestic violence trends. So that's domestic violence offenses, violation of abuse prevention orders and violations of conditions released in those dockets. What I can't remember the number offhand today, what I can tell you is that in 2018 we exceeded our number of filings that we had in 2017 in mid-October and ended probably about 20 to 30 cases above where we were the year before. Now that said, the question always becomes is more cases mean there's more crime and the answer is always more complicated because that can also be an indication of more reporting and more follow through. There are times where law enforcement is called to a household. You'll see reports or what's published in the newspaper responded to a family fight, for example. Sometimes a family fight is a nice way of saying this is a domestic where no one wanted to make a criminal complaint or report. That's not always the case. And also follow through in case it's important. The number of filings is somewhat insignificant when you look at was there a successful outcome one way or the other. Turn to other questions. Forgive my ignorance here. I guess I do have one other question. Is it safe to assume that you are funded through the state? We are state funded. So the state's attorney's office is a very odd duck when it comes to state entities or county entities. So county government doesn't really exist much beyond having a superior court assigned to a county, a sheriff's office, and then a state's attorney's office. So employees of my office are not actually considered state employees. We are considered county or municipal employees and have somewhat different sets of rules that apply, different pay scale. One positive I can report on is we are, you'll note in there there's a lineup of our future staffing. This past legislative session, three additional deputy state's attorney positions were authorized statewide. There have been a request for more and a number of counties also experienced with Washington County to this past year of significant increases in case filings and volume of Franklin County being one in particular. We were lucky to be the third and final office to obtain that help. And so we'll be very happy to greet a gentleman named Malachi Brunn into our office in March of 2019. So that's great news for us in terms of that, but we are a county entity. The final thing I'll say as well, with the absence of county government, a lot of people look for leadership in the county. Montpelier is a very strong city. Berry City is also a very strong city with robust political discourse and a city council that's very active. That's a benefit for a more populated town but as the chief law enforcement officer for the entire county, we have some communities that are really small and really far from law enforcement resources. One of the other areas that I hope to emphasize, and I'm happy that both the Berry Community Justice Center and Montpelier Community Justice Center do serve communities outside of their immediate area. And so we have county-wide coverage of that service. But in the future, in the absence of a county administrator, it's incredibly important that we marshal our collective community resources to help people in need and assist in the justice system. So I applaud you for your work and your cognizance of both social justice and criminal justice. Thank you. Donna. I just had a couple questions. Thank you for the handout. Given that you just got it, the way you have it laid out makes facts jump out at you. So I appreciate that. Do you want to ask about the cows on the front? Yes. Is that to get our attention or do you have cows in the office? Wait, that's way better than a cat or a dog. Well, they're all tagged. I think we're going to have an office vote tomorrow. So I reside in the wonderful town of Cabot and those cows will have up the road for me. They're very friendly cows. They are very photogenic cows. And I thought that it captures our kind of rural aesthetic. And certainly for someone not from here, when you think Vermont, you think Maple Syrup and cows. Well, likewise, you have three words here, fair, transparent and responsive. What are three ways that things could change in your office to make it more fair, more transparent and more responsive? So fairness is an important concept. And we'll see in there, there's a number of values that I've put out actually right after my appointment. I thought it was important to have sort of attorney of the page and a change in perspective of how we approach criminal justice problems. I think fairness implies a lot of things. We're looking ultimately at what's best for the community. It's not necessarily what in every case a victim wants. It's not necessarily always that, an offender probably doesn't want to go to jail or do some of the things we ask them to do. What we're looking at is reducing risk in the community and arriving at outcomes that make sense and are hopefully pro-social and are changing behavior. Usually when we have people in the criminal justice system, they're at rock bottom. Nobody wants to be sitting there on an arraignment day as nobody wants to be coming out of the back and handcuffs because it's something they've done. That's an opportunity though. It's an opportunity for some sort of positive change. We've seen people in the most dire straits of addiction really have an incredible recovery be it through treatment court or through probation or just the fact that this is a wake up call that gets them to go seek help or that gets their family engaged and realize that this isn't just a problem that they can ignore at family dinner or at gatherings. So in that sense, fairness, fairness is a evolving concept and it depends on what you're looking at and who you're dealing with. Fair means assessing facts and making sure that we as prosecutors don't just think about what is popular in the newspaper or what's popular in the community. It's about doing what's right even when that right may be really difficult to do. In terms of transparency, I try in my sense to be very open and communicative with community partners, stakeholders, and with constituents when they call in or are concerned. I actually can attest there are times where people don't like what we're doing one way or the other and we get yelled at or other times people come up to us and are very happy about something in the street. So transparency I think is maintaining open communication and not obscuring what we're doing or why we're doing certain things. For those, we've brought up youthful offender before. I have not been shy about my opinions about where the youthful offender law needs help or where we need more state resources to make some of these things work. So I think in that sense, transparency is just keeping that dialogue alive. Now I will say as a caveat, I know the mayor likes numbers. Numbers can be difficult and I'll be blunt. My office is not equipped to have someone sit there, collect statistics. So when we have a mandate to do it, we do it to be that proactive is difficult because that means I'm taking and Ashley Hill or my DB prosecutor Tracy Leibowitz, I'm taking them off of casework to sit there and collect data. And that's a luxury I have some time, but it's a luxury that no one else really has right now. I can't remember the third word offender. But you sort of answered by the first two. So that's okay. Well, thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Are you getting the support and everything you need from city services? You know, for our police department, Justice Center, me, anybody is, you know, I hear in my appeal, you talked a lot about the county, but we're obviously worried about my appeal is we want to make sure you're getting what you need. It's to put me on the spot with the chiefs. Yeah. I think they can make the room. No, I think that, you know, from a law enforcement perspective, we have a lot to be proud of in Montpelier. You have excellent leadership. You have really dedicated professionals at both the sergeant level who are supervising and at the road level. You know, I think a lot of departments strive to be this responsive community force and, you know, some talk to talk. Montpelier walks the walk. And I think that that's a benefit of being a well resourced department with a really professional staff. And by and large, I have to say we are really truly blessed to have incredibly responsive, fair and transparent law enforcement in Washington County. It's not without hiccups or without issues that come up, but really fortunate. The Montpelier PD in particular really is a professional department. The quality of work is incredibly high. And I know many of you in the city council probably wear off a string of burglaries and took place at the end of last year and some other, you know, more high profile crimes. Those have been investigated well. They are complex crime, very seldom on a complex case do I ever have to call back and ask for more here. And that to me is the world and that means that we get better outcomes and faster outcomes. Well, thank you so much for being here. Thank you very much. Okay. So we are up to all the town meeting day stuff. So the first thing is to set the date for the annual city meeting, town meeting day. Tuesday, March 5th, 2019, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. City Hall Auditorium. Don't think this is controversial. I was going to make that motion, but you just stated everything I needed to say. Do I have to restate it with a second carry? Say second. Move, move. You can move, yes. I'm looking at the order. So you can just say so moved. Okay, so moved. Great. Second. Further discussion? All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Onto the budget. That goes quickly through? Yeah, yeah. You need to open a hearing. Yes, I believe I do. So I'm gonna officially open the second public hearing on budget. And Bill is gonna run through some basics and then we'll talk. Just gonna take a second for everything to fire up. Take that. Quick break if you want. We'll work on dimmers. For next year we'll have dimmers maybe. Do you wanna see actually if it lights up? I think so, it's too much though. Is it like half the lights off? No, we're going to turn these off. I can flicker them. Yeah, every other slide. Okay, this is similar to what you've seen. This is updated from your decisions based on at the last meeting. And obviously this is the second and final public hearing on the city's budget and our budget proposals. After this you'll make a decision about what to place on the ballot. Again, our budget was set up to implement our strategic plan to continue our capital plan and to deliver our responsible services. Going through the strategic plan, our one of our goals was community prosperity. We've funded the Mobility Development Corporation. We've kept our planning staff. With our new zoning and master plan being developed and implementing our new TIF district. For environmental stewardship, we've kept the $5,000 for the energy committee. We've added one new parks and tree position. We have funded our stormwater projects. We've included the GMT circulator bus that was discussed earlier tonight. And considered having funding an energy planning grant to do an energy master plan. For our inclusive, equitable and welcoming community, we've increased funding for our community fund. We've got new arts commission funding. We've kept our feast program at the senior center. We've increased funding for Montpelier alive and kept our funding for our community enhancements. For sustainable infrastructure, we've increased our capital improvement and equipment plan by $25,000. We followed our water and sewer plan. We've added a facilities and sustainability director to be added in October. And we've kept our complete streets planned with some funding. For our thoughtfully built environment, we've included again the downtown improvement district and funding for downtown projects in our plan. And of course, our big project for the year, presumably would be the parking structure. For more housing, we added $50,000 to our housing trust fund, bringing up to 110,000. And then we've implemented our TIF, which I mentioned earlier, which calls for more housing. Public health and safety, we just discussed this with the state's attorney. We've added a new police officer. We've budgeted for public events that we expect will happen. We've continued flooding, counting, excuse me, funding our flood gauges, which have been very helpful, as particularly over the holidays, we had us flash jam up and it was the gauges that caught it and allowed us to provide early notification to people that we might have some flooding conditions. So they continually prove their worth. They're also available for the public to look at on their own. We continue expanding our paramedic program as we hire new people at our fire and EMS department. And we've continued project safe catch as we share the state's attorney's goal to fight the opioid crisis. So Bill, can I ask a question about the EMT of the paramedic program? Yes, that program, whereby as we hire new staff from the fire department, we're looking to have them be certified at the paramedic level rather than just the EMT level. That's correct. Bob's in the back. You'll correct me if I get the number wrong, but I think we have three now. Is he nodding? Okay. I can't see. Three now, two existing employees in training our long-term goal over a multi-year period is having the whole staff as paramedics, but that's a long way coming. They cost more. There's a lot of training and equipment involved and that kind of thing. On the other hand, you could provide much greater services. You can charge more for the services. So at this point, we're doing it at an incremental basis, but once those two complete, there'll be five out of the fifth, sort of, well, there's 16 counting Bob, but of the 15 that are really on the calls will be a third of our staff. So that's a, considering a couple of years ago, we didn't have any. So we're moving, it's been an issue. You're welcome. For our responsible government, we are continuing our communications efforts, our employee wellness efforts, our service levels are all maintained. We didn't have any reductions in service in the SHIRS budget, which is great. Continuing our bridge article, our new Invisio software is working well. We have the public dashboard for people to see at any time. And we are developing, as you've heard me mention, our program access my pillar, which you will hear more about later this year. And we're hoping to set aside reserve funds for a citizen survey, our strategic planning effort, and the energy planning. So in real specific numbers, the budget changes right now that we council approved at the last meeting, we're increasing the capital funding by 25,000, a new police officer position, a new parks and trees position, a new facilities director position, increasing the housing trust fund, a new arts commission funding, increasing my pillar alive, increasing the community fund, new childcare for meetings, and the one time funding. So otherwise, I mean, everything else was basically held at the same levels given inflation and employee costs, et cetera. Taking a look at our budget, where it comes from, about two thirds of it is from the property taxes, the rest from various other sources. And as we look at how we spend it, this is a chart, this will be in the annual report as well, but just showing by a department where our money goes, no big surprise, our big money goes to police, fire, and public works. Those are our major services and the capital services, capital plan, excuse me. So the money to do the projects and keep the equipment and then the personnel to do the work. As we look at our budget, as you can see, we're over 50% personnel funded. That is how municipal government works. And it provides up this way. We'd look at all the different services and take a look at the average tax bill. This is a chart, it's a little hard to read up here. It will be in the annual report, but it just gives you a snapshot of what you pay on average for an individual service. And again, it's pretty clear, almost half goes to police, fire, and public works. And so our municipal rates, for the municipal budget, the property tax rate is scheduled to go up 3.7 cents or 3.4% for an average tax bill increase of $85. The district key rates were recently approved and are being implemented. The water and sewer is estimated to go up 3.5% as per our capital plan and there would be no change for our sewer benefit or CSO benefit. Taking a look, overall, we just got numbers from the school department. Their budget is scheduled to go up. The residential budget will go up 4.5 cents or about 2.8%, which means overall, at the bottom in the highlight, the overall tax rate will go up 8 cents or about 3% from prior year. And that shows, as you can see, this is 108, that all totals to about $186 for the average homeowner. And this is the breakout of the, so what portion goes for what? It's about 58% for schools, about 38% for the city, 3% for sewer CSO, 1% for the ballot items. So that's a breakout. That's the fast tour through the budget. Happy to answer any questions. Of course, many department heads are here. Today is our final public hearing. Early voting will start in mid-February. The actual voting day, as you just said, was March 5th from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. I had a constituent inquiry today about one of the personnel items, but I think it applies to everything. When we have, when we're showing up, a new position we're creating and there's a dollar value associated to that, is that salary plus? Yes. Fringes and all that and everything? All costs. So at this point, if the council has more clarifying questions, do that. And then I'd like to open it up to the public for public comments, and then we'll continue on with more substantive discussion with the council. So any clarifying questions? Yes. Which I can take from my seat, let's turn this to you. So this is... Oh, did you want me to put the spreadsheet up? Actually, that would be helpful for my question. Sorry. So while you're getting it up, I'll ask it. The additional parks position, not the tree management, but the additional parks position has been discussed as 65,000? We had it in the spreadsheet, it is 55, so I just wanted to clarify which number it is. The number that we worked with in the budget was 55,000. I've lately seen a different number, but the number we had was 55,000. Okay, so 55 is our number, right? Any further clarifying questions? Okay, comments from the public on the budget. If you'd introduce yourself and tell us where you live. Hello, I'm Nancy Chickering, I live right here in Montpelier upon Cor Street, the very top of that Cliff Street hill. So I'm really close to the park and I'm interested in that comment you just made because I'm here also just to get clarification. In terms of parks and trees, I love how we're trying to merge and carry things under bigger umbrellas. My understanding, and I may be wrong, and I'm glad to see Jeff here because he might help clarify this for me. My understanding with the M Lashbore is a lot of good conversation went on about how we can be proactive about not being like some other convenience for their self, not taking, you know, stepping in and dealing with that proactively. My understanding is that parks and tree position is really a tree position and not so much supporting the park and all the expansion that I would like to see them do. So I just thought I would put a plug in to see. I've been next door neighbors to the park for 25 years and I worry about the sustainability with Jeff who I've watched for two plus decades. They work and Alec is right there like Jeff, they work. It's not a 40 hour a week job. They plow at six, they're there seven days a week. They just, they over, over, overdo and it's amazing and it shows in the community. They have volunteers, global volunteers, they have churches putting them up and people volunteering their canoes and their chainsaws and their work parties. And I just think it's amazing what they do with their budget and it's amazing what the city has done to prioritize that and I love that Bill's first two slides had community prosperity and then environmental stewardship and I just think the park and the extension of trails now into North Branch is just so much about what makes Montpelier a absolutely amazing place to live and it's one of the things that lets us see that we're growing the 20 and 30 and 40 year old people that I think we really need to be calling into this community if we want this community to be sustainable that kind of recreation is critical and I'm just blown away with what I've seen that park do for the last 25 years. So that's my plug for the park and hoping that that money is really supporting the park and not just supporting emerald ash borer and tree stuff that I think is also really, really important. So just to clarify, the additional position that was added that you saw listed there really was about trees, specifically we may discuss a little later a separate position potentially that would be more related to parks. So I'll jump in on that too. No, that's fair. So initially there were two positions proposed, one just for trees and one just for parks. And I think as we went through both as a staff to recommend the budget, which we recommended the one position and the council came in with this. Currently we split the parks and trees amongst the existing employees. I hate to have you move back to everybody, but we split the parks and trees with the existing employees and we get that there's maybe a bigger demand but all of our departments have demands and we're trying to balance that. So the feeling is that there's probably, it didn't seem like there would be tree work 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year and that the efforts could be shared and that one person with trees is gonna need help from parks employees anyway. And the thought was let's try this for a year, see how it goes, we're gonna have new leadership there, see what changes and what demands there are and then reconsider the other staffing position after we've had a chance, but it wasn't necessarily this would never be. So from my perspective, and I can't speak for the council, it wasn't as black and white as this is trees only, this is parks only, they really are a blended group. Right now, the two of them do the work, so. That's very good. Dan Dickerson from the Parks Commission. I wanted to come up and also make one final push for the new parks position and I guess I wanted to expand a little bit or at least talk a little bit about what the, this new trees position or parks and trees, however you want to frame it, what it provides, but where it actually could create some limitations and so what it provides, I think it provides the city the ability to sort of think strategically about how to address emerald ash borer in our street trees and our parks and throughout the community, but where when it really comes down to doing the groundwork, so going out and addressing the huge, tree care backlog we have and also dealing with emerald ash borer, you can't do that with one person and so the city can say, well, all right, we'll contract with a firm to do some of this work or take another route, but if we want trees or if we want city staff to be taking care of the trees, you need to have more people doing that and so what happens is we have this tree person that's gonna go out and care for the street trees, we're gonna end up pulling a parks person to help on that or potentially both parks people to help on that and that leaves the parks empty and so and I don't wanna say that, I mean, this tree position is very important, I think it's gonna allow the city to do great things, but I think really in order to address the backlog in trees maintenance and parks maintenance, we really need two positions, so that way we can have at least a two person crew doing tree work and we can always have a two person crew doing park work and it would allow us to get more done both on the trees front and the parks front. I know it's a cost increase and it also makes a tax increase, but given that the parks and trees are currently 2.4% of the city budget and I'm paying $15 a year, I think it's pretty reasonable to request a position and maybe there are some residents that would be increased, but I think given the use that our parks receive and given that on top of the other benefits of having to do the decision, we could also increase staff presence in the park to maybe educate people on A9 care and bikes, so that way it reduces some of the consternation on park work form, there are just a lot of ways the position would benefit the city and so I really strongly encourage the city council to approve the budget and so I've gone too long. Thank you. Thank you. Can we take a picture with you? Pasha Rangio, I am also on the Parks Commission, I'm at North Park Drive and this is the last. Like many of you, my family has chosen to live in Montpelier and chosen where to live in Montpelier because of our parks and I've chosen to give back to our parks. I work in conservation as my profession, I fundraise, I've already been helping the parks, I've addressed some of those needs and I'm glad to do that. And in recent years, we've invested in the expansion of our parks and the expansion of our services, there are new trails in North Branch Park, there are plans to add Confluence Park in the future and the parks are something that draw young families like my own to come live here and stay here and invest in this community. We've invested in expanding our parks and we have not invested in expanding the staff to run our parks and that's a problem and I'm hoping that you guys will consider adding an additional parks person, we've discussed the tree position, that is not a park position, they're separate. If we want to invest in the future of our parks, we need to invest in the staff to keep them the way they are and make them even better. Thank you. John Snell, Tree Board among other things. I appreciate coming back here and talking and clarifying that the person I supported you in bringing on the trees is still an essential person and that shows up in the budget. And that person's already at work, they've already made a difference, they're just gonna continue to make a difference in the math blog as well as in dealing with demo dashboard. I have long thought that we need an additional parks person and when I started to talk with Jeff about what's going on with this retirement it became very clear that when he retires basically we're gonna be down one and a half, not one person and I talked to Jeff about how disorganized he could be sometimes but I also will tell you that there's nobody in this town who can pull in volunteers like that guy. It takes time, it takes time to manage them and yet if we were to run BTW with this many volunteers this parks does we'd be in trouble. So I think that it's pretty clear to me that with Jeff retiring with the expansion not only of the size of the park adding now a new trail along the river what's formerly known as the bike path and also adding new events that have been really well received by the community in the parks. One of which will be next week again that there's just a tremendous demand for the system of parks that we have and they've created immense value. They are a goal for people to come here and live here especially young families. So I'm asking you to put the line back in for another person if you need that person and if that person would be well utilized with our new parks director. Two weeks ago I spoke for itself in terms of what a small, relatively small investment of community resources in that case Housing Trust Fund can do for a city and I used to work as a public funder of affordable housing and I still have a lot of friends in that area and they say repeatedly that the investments that a city like Montpelier makes make all the difference in the world in a very hyper competitive funding environment really gives us a leg up and the money that the Housing Trust Fund invested in the French block leveraged millions of dollars both from private investors like banks but also public funding. So on behalf of the task force we were very pleased with the level of funding that came out of the last hearing and we would urge you to keep it that way and we think that together we can continue to make progress on both affordability and availability of housing for people in Montpelier while economic stride. So thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. So council, what is your interest? Do you like it as it is? Do you want to change anything? Where do you want to go? Go ahead Connor. The risk of being a flip flopper. The support of the parks position before I opposed it. I spent a lot of time the last couple of weeks just talking to constituents and I really do believe there's an appetite for this in the community, you know, the expansion. My hang up initially was when we were talking about the part time position was I thought this would be overwhelming to put on anybody for a part time job and in effect it would create a full time position with a part time person doing the work. So I think I'd like to propose putting a full time position in the budget this time around but maybe starting six months in the Fisville year so that it would start in January I believe and to be honest I haven't done the math on it yet. I'd like to put that on the table and if it's appropriate I'd make a motion to do it. Second. Any further thoughts on that? Let's go Rosie then Ashley. So two concerns. First I feel like we've already done a little bit of a disservice and a little bit of hiding the ball here by playing that same trick with a new facility director position and starting it partway through the year so that the city doesn't see the full budget impact this year but we will be stuck with it next year unless we wanna lay somebody off. So I'm really uncomfortable with playing that game again here and I also wanna say that I am, I appreciated the council last time considered this a thoroughly and decided to make the hard decision to cut that addition. It's not a cut of a position because the position doesn't exist yet but to not add that new position at this time I'm very concerned that our tax rate is growing so much higher than the cost of living increase that many living on a fixed income will receive next year. Our social safety net is really fragile right now. I'm hearing every day from folks who never would have thought that they would have needed assistance and are now finding themselves wondering where they can get assistance and so this is not the year to play that game and this is not the year to increase even as much as 3.4% I'm frankly I'm still not feeling good there and to, I'm sure that if we add this position the budget will pass that's not my concern. I'm not concerned that voters will vote the budget down. I'm concerned about the people who don't have a voice at the table and who are really struggling and on a fixed income and not able to get the assistance that they need. So I'm very much opposed to that. I'm gonna echo a lot of what Rosie said. I was just doing some math over here and I think the minimum wage in Vermont is now like 10, 78 an hour and according to a number of sites the average rent for an apartment here is $950. I'm not sure where the $950 a month apartments are in Montpelier. I have not been able to find them in all of my years here and so I was waiting to see what the school budget numbers would look like and it looks like the overall tax bill as it is with this budget at the 3.42 which is too high for me even. It's $185 extra a year and for the folks who can absorb $185 extra per year that's great and that's fine and that increases is sort of not taking away anything. It's maybe taking away some discretionary income or some savings or something where they're not gonna feel it but doing the math out at 10, 78 an hour that assuming a 40 hour work week that's 17, let's see, 17, 24, 80 a month and then I did a 30% reduction for taxes and whatever else sort of comes off the top which leaves you with $1207.36 and then you subtract $950 which is the average rent rate now which gives you a whopping, I wanna say it is, let's see, $257.36 left if you're working full-time on minimum wage, finding some magical unicorn apartment that I have yet to find in the city. Then when you talk about raising property taxes even $185 a year that translates in significant ways when it comes to rental properties and things like that and I would love to believe that all landlords are altruistic but in all of the years that I've been renting when property taxes go up what typically happens is renters do experience an increase and I just don't see where folks who are working for minimum wage let alone even $15 an hour in our community are gonna be able to absorb a rent increase like that that doesn't even include health insurance and you don't qualify at least at 125% of the federal poverty guideline on a $10.78 an hour wage let alone at a $15 an hour wage and I love a lot about Montpelier, I love our parks, I value so much the work that our employees put in and I know every city employee puts in extra anyone who works in government puts in extra I do it myself all the time but what I cannot do is go home and when my friends and my neighbors are looking at me saying I can't afford to live here I have to start looking elsewhere I can't in good conscience support a budget with even a 3.42% increase I had been thinking like 2.8 to 3.2 somewhere in there but this directly impacts a lot of the people that I love and care about in our community and I appreciate the need that Montpelier has but I also appreciate that in order to keep this a place where every single person who is already here and some of the folks that we want to move here can afford to be here this is not sustainable Donna Well I take all your comments about the budget in general but I'm not going to want to see the parks held hostage for the total objection to the amount of what we're putting in our budget so if you want to go and open all the items fine but the parks really need a full time position and I'd like to see it full time for a full year but at least Connor was offering a compromise that I could go with it's better than nothing but I don't think the parks that is a small, small 2.4% of our budget now should be the one to suffer if you want to go and look at all the other items I'll go there but I'm not going to put it on the parks to be the one not to get what they need I don't know if I'm going to be able to add much I'm also a flip flopper since I supported this added position at the first workshop and then agreed to take it off at the first hearing I continue to be conflicted about this I think that it seems clear to me that we could very happily use more staff in parks the parks commission who are elected to take care of a lot of that have told us that we should at the same time it does make sense to me that from a kind of structural organizational point of view we have one new employee this year working on trees we're going to be hiring a new director that new director could potentially be the best person to be directly involved in hiring another person if we need one next year I would, I think I would love to see us hire another person for fiscal year 21 if we need to and have that conversation then because while I hear a lot of the arguments I'm not sure I quite feel the urgency that we need a new position a new full-time position right now as opposed to next year that said there have been some really strong arguments and many of them over the last couple of weeks in favor of the new parks position and I can't say I'm not swayed by those I really appreciate the conversation I still don't know I thought I would be fixed by now and I'm not I think that's all I have to say at the moment Can you still put some numbers in? I can't get your spreadsheet you sent us to be active it won't accept my numbers That's right, what do you want? Under the half position? Yeah, the parts 27.5 Well so Todd is that, would that be an accurate number for Well that's half of 55 Right, but it's, the benefits might not make it half Well Or maybe it does because if it's starting in January Any thoughts, Todd? Well, let's put it here I don't know what's popping up It's really difficult to predict that because depending on who we hire and whether they're on a family plan or a single plan whether they out of benefits because they have to coverage some relative to the other person whether they stay on their plans until they're 26 years old to be much cheaper so there's a sway of $20,000 in essentially in the benefit package just due to health insurance potentially Can I ask you, well since you're here What if this position was contracted? That would not necessarily obligate us to hire the next year but maybe sort of evaluate whether or not it was really needed but by the following year Contracting is certainly possible but you run the risk of running a family plan State labor laws just because you have to be it has to be truly an independent person that does the work as a business has their own insurance holds a shingle out to operate as such and that we don't have control of their schedule so they would be setting their own hours paying them based on that so it's certainly a possibility just want to be careful that we don't just grab an individual I was trying to read the numbers Is that my last read? You mean down here? That's $92 Yeah, that's $92 $3.71 $3.7 Yeah $3.5 Yeah I asked what the difference is with that number out of the bill It was $3.42 before $7 Oh, it's a $7 difference? Yeah, $7 Rosie, just want to point out again though that you're making you're forcing a future council to make to take the brunt of the decision that you're making It looks like only $7 this year but once we hire that person they're a member of our community and I can't imagine that we would be able to let them go if we decided we didn't actually need their services Even if the council made the decision the public outcry to lay off a particular individual who worked in our parks would be insane I mean, we wouldn't be able to do it So once you're making the decision to put this position in it's until that person decides that they'd like to leave Glen, would you like a two-minute recess? Donna, would you like just a couple-minute recess? I practically, on the practical aspect, I would I will just say there have been times when I have felt very conflicted and I just needed like a minute to collect my thoughts and I just want to make sure that I offer that to you if you want that Thank you, I think I'm slower than you I would need more than that But since we could use a recess anyway let's do it But Jack, before we have a recess do you have a comment? Yeah, I supported this before I think that the idea that we're losing expertise and a lot of overtime and having Jeff retire it was persuasive to me I'll also point out that as all of you know in the last several days we've received a tremendous volume of email from residents supporting this position and I don't truly think that we're here on the council simply to be a mouthpiece for people who, for the people in the community I think that one of the things people should expect from all of us on the council is our judgment on the issues that come before us but it's hard to ignore that there's there's a lot of support for this now I don't know how much 10 emails translates to in terms of overall popular support that's a question that legislators deal with all over the place but it seems like a pretty popular position so I'm not, I supported before I continued to support it so I'll just weigh in and say there was a proposal there was this number being floated around $65,000 and I believe the reason there was this discrepancy was because there was this $10,000 potential for some additional parks help over the summer and that was most interesting to me, I felt like well we could do something temporary, hire some people over the summer and do increase the parks staff that way when it would certainly be useful well, depending on where ever we land I'm not in favor of a full time position but I would entertain the half so anyway, I'll just leave it there for now and let's take a two, five minute well, let's go realistically it's going to be five minutes so let's go with a five minute break I'll be going to your desk sorry, yeah, yeah, no for real can you come and tell me thank you yeah, it's a council evaluation self-evaluation you want to okay, sure okay, thank you because I was too late bill, this $9,000 number is if you don't make any changes do you have a support work for $9,000 not $9,000 yes, that is that was the budget that we started with yes, any changes, we will have to change that remember, that's Todd's keeping track of that sure, we both are right under is there a way to go with that? do I smell like a dog? always oh, you can help me I just want to go first oh, there he is oh, there he is it's just that visual big guy in that voice is that? are we going to drink it? oh, yeah he told me I'll get a drink and I'll be right in okay okay, we are all back so we're going to come back from our recess so just to get things started Bill, you have a comment about the data here just piece of information obviously what you decide to do where you choose to set your priorities is your call but I want to make sure I was dealing with correct information that was comment made about how we had not changed the park staff and I haven't had a chance to go research this but I think I can say fairly accurately from memory, I know when I started here, which was 24 years ago there was one quarter time position eventually got increased to half, three quarters and a full time then we've added the second full time position that was in there when we consolidated with put together some of the community services, some of the admin services looking shelters and publicity brochures have all been picked up by admin folks that used to be done by parks that's not really adding people who are taking responsibilities off so it may well be the time that we need additional folks but it isn't totally accurate to say that we've not increased staffing over period of time as the parks have grown we have done that and as well as adding the part time tree positions and I wanted to just also add a quick conversation reminding me that we do the administration or some of the admin work is done by people community services that does that so we went from one quarter position to now two full plus the admin services got you, okay thank you okay anybody have any further comments yeah go ahead I did want to sort of make an attempt to address some of the concerns that councilman held this position it doesn't need to be a lawyer or somebody with a physics degree it could be somebody that's coming off of substance abuse somebody that's coming out of the criminal justice system that needs a new opportunity this is somebody that would go into the parks and essentially do ground work repairing trails pulling invasive species you know it's a good life experience for anyone and so it does you know yes there would still be people that would have to make ends meet on moving comes but it would create an opportunity for somebody that's maybe making minimum wage now to move up a little bit and have an opportunity to really make a difference for the community and so I you know it doesn't fully address your concerns but it is an opportunity for somebody that maybe is trying to put a little bit thank you go ahead John just one more quick one because I do hear what Bill is saying about that other services have been added on to the park and yet the park has expanded and the missions of the park have expanded tremendously especially in the last five years or so and that's going to happen again with the addition of the new bike path that will be a park responsibility so I think we've added in enough that it's time for another person go ahead Rosie I'm just seeing Bill make a face about the bike path and I'm just wondering if that's actually our plan I thought it was going to be a DPW responsibility the bike I don't want to get in an intramural food fight with our staff we can talk about that tomorrow morning but typically the bike paths are maintained by DPW I know the park does the piece about the piece park out on that one but maybe they've had a discussion have decided the parks are going to do it so I'd be a base of species okay if okay go ahead Glen so I think I did come to something and it may be a little awkward because what I feel like at the moment is going with my instinct which is when somebody asks say yes and yeah Bill's laughing at that and I do think that with with all of the arguments that have been put forward in favor of a new parks position I think that that I'm on board with that and at the same time I really think that Rosie's point about not saddling the future council with a half a position is sensible so I'd actually put in the whole position at 55 right I I feel like I need to say something else about it and I'm not sure what it is but I think your comment about the parks being the target kind of of this budget pressure at this point I think it's kind of just because that's how it came down to the timing but I think that to me the budget number higher than cost of living increase at all once it's higher than cost of living increase it's higher in a way and beyond that a lot of the little adjustments you know an extra few dollars here or there it starts to feel like we're doing a disservice to the whole process and I would say a whole position or not a position and that's that's where I am I would move that we put the full parks position in at 55 grand we've got already on the table so we've got to vote on that okay you could amend it I can all right there we go I'll suggest an amendment that we go from the half a position to full position is there I'll second okay so I will just say that I think do we have to vote on the amendment yes the amendment first and then the other motion so I guess I would just add that I mean we all know that Jeff does a wonderful job and he's also just an X factor right like because what is the new person going to be like right and how is that time wise going to work so my inclination is to is to wait and not not go full time at this point but I that's just what I would advise so any other further comments about this okay all right all in favor please say aye opposed okay I think that it meant it did not pass I think I heard enough no is there it did not pass okay so we're back to the original half time position and there's a motion on the table any further discussion about that okay all in favor please say aye opposed okay so I think that carries so we're at a half half position there but starting sure full time but starting in January 27 is that okay great okay any other changes or are we done team I guess I'm just going to put out there one more time you know we've had this discussion so many times and I've lost every time so let's just go let's do it I was going to propose more cuts but we've had we know where we are fair enough any further comments I think we what do we need to do at this point do we need to vote this budget all together and then close I'll close the public hearing after should probably close the hearing before we close the public hearing though if anyone would like to offer any further comments on the budget okay so I'm going to close the public hearing and is there a motion on the budget as proposed so far with this amendment I move that we adopt the budget as reflected by the changes further further discussion okay just going to say again that it is the responsibility of the council to look out for more than just the people who write us the emails and who have the ability to attend meetings and I'm very concerned that this council doesn't do that and we need to be looking out for the voices that aren't at the table so okay further discussion all in favor please say aye opposed okay so the budget passes and thank you all for your discussion alright so we are going to move on to this charter amendment so this is also a public hearing so I'm going to open up the public hearing on the proposed charter change regarding energy efficiency and I'm going to welcome Richard Faisy back up to the table he was with us last time and I know Rosie weren't here last time to necessarily meet Richard Faisy so I'll let him introduce himself I think last time I had made the comment that I should probably not be both the champion and the expert and try to moderate the meeting all at the same time and so we're grateful to have you here Richard so I'll let you introduce yourself I guess okay great thank you my name is Richard Faisy I live in Starksboro so I'm not a Montpelier resident but I have an energy consulting firm called Energy Futures Group in Heinsberg and have been working on building energy labeling issues for quite a while including a number of stakeholder groups and part of the discussion at the city at the state level for a number of years so I'm basically here as a resource to help answer any questions or and support this initiative moving forward okay any questions about the charter minutes I think today well if I didn't I'll do it now I thought I did but opening the public hearing for the second public hearing on this charter yeah Rosie I didn't get a chance to watch the last meeting I just read the minutes and I can't remember if there was discussion about inserting energy before efficiency standards was that already yes and dealt with and did we do it we did and the language that's attached here also does not have the word energy so let's assume that that is because that's what we approved last time that that should be in here as well but we can make that clear and you should yeah well you can do it and you can also do it when you vote the warning yeah you should definitely vote because it's the language is on oh it doesn't have it on the uh warning that should be on the warning as a whole the word energy is not right so in the morning it wouldn't be the only change though because the budget yeah we know we have to change the number there and yeah but yeah just making a note that to make sure that it's that changes made in at least on well I really both so we'll read minimum energy efficiency standards yes uh Jack at a tiny point I just noticed in the language the way it was distributed to the council there's a space missing between powers and and in the heading oh power sand yeah and I don't know I don't think that's really how it is in the charter so we can just double check that but yes and that is not on the warning so should be any further questions okay um any comments from the public okay okay at least two with me Tim Heaney little state broker my failure in residence chair of a government affairs committee for Mount Realtors for a number of years but I think I've talked with you on conference calls Richard some of those meetings so basically talked with Anne a couple weeks ago about this she called and said like oh I'm thinking of this you know some ordinances and thoughts on energy efficiency well listen I'm here tonight it's the second reading of this charter change like whoa where did this come from so it seems like it's come up quickly my experience at the state level listening to those conversations with efficiency Vermont and the legislatures considered policies for energy efficiency the devil's in the details on this one and there's a lot of details to understand I'm not sure my players in a position in terms of governments to take on another level of governments and enforcement I think we've got our hands full right now in terms of building and planning and what we can really handle so I think you should be very careful about this the overall charter change piece that I read for the first time tonight when I looked at the agenda it's really open and it says I don't even have it in front of me it was like local state and other policies it's a little bit too jello for me I'd like to see it be more specific and I also think it's well motivated but if you're concerned about housing and taking care of people providing good safe environments where they can be comfortable there's some other issues we need to talk about as well that might slide ahead on my chart over this we own a number of properties we work hard at making them efficient it's an inch by inch process sometimes it costs a lot of money and I think a lot of people do keep investing in efficiency like tenants are paying the energy bills and landlords aren't we try to but I think the piece that I'm really concerned about here is how you tie it together and look at issues like I go through a lot of houses a lot of multi-family properties probably as many as anyone in Montpelier there's a lot of issues we should be talking about if you want to talk about making housing safer and better Jack you know it wiring my goodness it's still active we hit it every day in our office generating sales insurance companies won't insure them anymore for new buyers, lenders don't want to touch them they're out there, they're rented people are living in them and there are no incentives to improve those situations I think if you really want to do something right this ordinance is you know the concept is great but I think you're misguided I think you really should have a bring together a group decide what and align those and I think some of those priorities need to be some real safety issues because you really want to wire the place first and get the wiring right and then you add the insulation it's kind of a meat head move to add the insulation and then go back and have to tear it all out and rewire the place for what it's worth it's for cheap by lack of focus but I guess I'm really a little spun up about this surprise there hasn't been more conversation and I hope you want to prove it tonight thanks go ahead Donna do you think if we added some incentive and whether it's a loan process or some financial support if you want to head with this amendment and then consider that that's part of our responsibility is to look for a way to support that happening financially what do you think that happened are you talking because you moved to make the housing better well the efficiency moves here but if we also try to do it in some way that's a partnership I do think it's a great idea I think that's needed because there are a lot of old buildings in my play the bulk of our housing stock is pretty 1978 and there are a lot of issues that go within that kind of housing in addition to energy issues so Tim I just want to add so I hear you about the like there's just a multiplicity of issues that plague our housing stock and I I guess I would say that I don't think these things are mutually exclusive let's talk about all the things that need to happen so I would love to talk further with you about or any subgroup of people interested in housing about how we can be addressing particularly rental safety in Montpelier but I don't hear that necessarily as precluding this so let's talk about how we can be doing all the above and we'll work out the details as they come up just efficiency for Montpelier is a great organization but they have a mission that's pretty focused and I think we need a little bigger picture here that can be part of so I think that's really the same thing future conversation let's do it great thank you further comments I guess so I had a lot of concerns with the first version it's ordinance it's not an ordinance it's a charter change and I appreciate the new language because it doesn't nail us down to a specific ordinance change and it gives us the time to think through the pros and cons of every potential ordinance change after we get permission to do it so I really appreciate Tim that you say there because I think I think you're right there are a lot of this is not this is not a solution but I think the idea is that we can get permission to do this work and then then do the hard work of figuring out what ordinance gets at these goals and what are the implications of that and bring in a lot of stakeholders that in the future that's my hope I would urge this council to not be not rushed too fast into two ordinances under this without thinking things through but I am willing to support this because it doesn't dictate a specific course of action I'll echo much of what Rosie said I have some specific policy ideas and some potential ordinances that I'm interested in raising it's just wanted to focus on all of this stuff for now and sort of see what happens there but I think there are still some very tangible things that as a city that we can do in terms of renters rights and things like that that I have been talking to other municipalities in the area and sort of doing some research on my own just in terms of what redress detentions have and things like that so I agree that this is a good starting point but there's still a lot of other pieces that have to come into place because energy efficiency is awesome but if nobody can afford to be in those places because we've prioritized one thing over another or so Any further comments from the public? Okay, so I'm going to close the public hearing on that and just looking at our notes here do we need to approve this Even though you're going to approve the warning you should approve the charter final charter language if you want to make sure that energy language is in there then specifically put it in Is there a motion? I move that we approve the proposed energy efficiency charter term with the addition of the word energy on the first slide Second Further comments? All in favor please say aye Aye Great, thank you Thank you for being here Okay and on to the warning of the ballot So we should have a new number for the budget for article 5 Excuse me article 5 has increased by the 27,500 for the half part position so the new number is 9,466,000 621 in addition I have just updated the warning to reflect the charter amendment first sentence to read in act ordinance is enforcing the efficiency standards the version that you have in front of you is the same as if you're receiving for signature minus those changes I actually think it's 9,466,121 it's just probably $500 difference Where did he go? He wanted to double check it He didn't believe me Trust and verify This doesn't say that it's a public hearing It is a public hearing so I'll open the public hearing on the warning of the ballot So I would add that a couple things on that the number change and the language change call a couple things to attention an initial draft of the ballot included a potential petitioned article concerning the parking structure Sheila wants to report on that Oh sure so article 12 is going to be struck because we didn't receive enough petition signatures we only received 180 verified signatures by the deadline today Now while we're talking about that I just want to say I sort of half expected that maybe someone would be here from that group and had they been here I had a couple of questions I was hoping to ask them so I'll just say them out loud now and hopefully follow up with them later One was of the list of criteria on the petition that they had been circulating I was curious if the group that's appealing the DRB decision had a list of concerns that are outside of those criteria or if that was the extent of their concerns I was also curious about really what their aim was like what is their goal with the petition with the appeal I was very encouraged to read Andrea's standards remarks in the bridge the other day that she's looking for improvements to the project and I would love to talk about that so to that end I had last time they were here to talk about the petition they had I thought that we might be meeting at some point then they appealed so once lawyers are involved it gets a little trickier but I guess I would say that I want you to know that no one reached out to me from their group to get in touch about resolving those issues but I'm just going to say publicly right now that I'm going to reach out to them and while I'm not in a position to negotiate anything I still would love to hear from them I know they have concerns about the content of the project as well as the process that happened around it and I am open to hearing all of that so if the city can be learning from this process basically from going through this I'm certainly open to that anyway so I just want you all to know that's my plan and I'll talk to them very soon the only other issue that actually Council Member Hill raised unfortunately we don't have John here although maybe Sheila can answer this is the issue of the Central Vermont Public Safety Authority we're electing a position for that even though we don't know what its current status is do you need to get that person spit out? oh there you go Donna would know so right but is it still continuing that's what we weren't sure yes you don't put money we put it on the budget we have our own we could put it on the ballot we chose not to put it on the ballot try to explain that so you're referring to article 4 yeah I was wondering about that too cause it was missing the name so did you get Kim's petition? so this is the warning the official ballot has the candidates names like for example it just says to elect one school district one city council member I believe so we have another week anyway before petitions are due okay I'm sorry but I think maybe I was confused Sheila can you repeat what you said article 12 has been struck it's not article 12 on this they took it off already oh I see the former article 12 okay thank you so any other public comment about the warning okay so I'm going to close the public hearing there and I think we need to vote to approve the ballot as amended is there a motion? I'll make a motion that we approve the ballot as amended second further discussion all in favor oh did you want to I just wanted to confirm that the city manager was absolutely right I'm going to blame the band aid but it is 121 so do we need to clarify that in our motion do you want to clarify that Donna? I didn't list a number so I said as amended I'll state it and then someone can move it so you're voting to approve the warning as presented except that article 5 will include the number 9,466,121 and article 14 will include the word energy between minimum and efficiency Donna that was your intent yes that was my intent great so further discussion all in favor please say aye opposed I want to be clear in my aye vote that is to approve the petition fair it's okay I just people are watching it's a confusing process approving the ballot okay alright so that is the end of our regular business which is great so we're going to move on oh did I close the public hearing? I think I did so moving on to council reports if she's got it down you got it who would like to start go ahead Rosie I just wanted to let folks know that I know federal employees and others impacted by the federal shutdown are really struggling and we do have a number of federal employees who live and work in Montpelier one source of help is the school meal program and anybody at any time throughout the year who has a change in income who has children in the schools is welcome to submit an updated application for free and reduced price meals and you know they can reach out to their school to get that application or find that application on the web and certainly having a zero dollar paycheck is a change in income so that is one form of assistance I know that Capstone and the Vermont food bank and a bunch of other community organizations have been also trying to put together some resources as well and I appreciated Ashley bringing that up earlier and suggesting that we think about what can Montpelier do and certainly recognizing that lots of other folks face financial hardship all the time as well but this is a group of folks who has really been I think we all have a lot of opinions about this shutdown and so I just wanted to put that out there as a resource that's available to anybody who has a change of income at any point in the year and is struggling I also wanted to again make a plug for City Council this was a lovely early meeting tonight so don't take this as your sample meeting that's an endorsement you haven't hit my report yet but as you know I'm not running so I would encourage folks to run for District 1 or to run for NAC a little competition is great for the community and there are other seats available some of our parks commission and we all cemetery so if you are feeling like you need to do something in this time of crazy political upheaval this is a good step to take so that's my plug for running I'm happy to talk to anybody who is interested about what the job entails I would first and foremost like to thank chief in the back there I understand he was at the state house today representing police across the state of Vermont and shared some really great information about what we here in Montpelier are doing in terms of fair and impartial policing and I know that there are a lot of organizations that are really looking to agencies like Montpelier to sort of see what we are doing and where we can all work together to improve what is currently happening and sort of set those goals for where we all want to be so I really appreciate that chief could be there today to represent Montpelier but to also represent other law enforcement in Vermont I also want to echo part of what Rosie said I know that the Vermont food bank and other agencies here in central Vermont who are really coming together in remarkable ways to make sure that those who did not anticipate being without pay for this long are able to at least maintain some semblance of food security during a really uncertain time I also really want to thank and I know I came in a couple minutes late but DPW has really been out there at it non-stop I have been getting up really early lately and people are out doing the streets doing the sidewalks and that's really that to me is what like that's why we're all here that's why we are civil servants and I really appreciate how much extra our city staff and our council give back to our community and I think we all feel like we should be doing more sometimes but I also think it's important to acknowledge when we see it Donna or Glenn okay I will not be at baguillos tomorrow morning because today is Thursday I was there this morning and I am managing to keep track of that more or less it's really been going great and I continue to invite everyone to join me Thursday mornings talk about this or whatever else I've also been in touch with folks at another way and I may hold future talk and listen sessions there instead of baguillos or in addition to trying to figure that out the other thing I want to mention is I'm really pleased and excited about the new public art commission that we have been working on and I want to let everyone know if you don't already know that the application process is now open you have until February 15th I believe to submit if you would like to be a commissioner on the public art commission and I think it would be great to get a lot of really strong applications I really look forward to that appointment so thank you and see you soon I'm good oh now you're going to feel bad okay well no just the regional planning commission I'm on the tack and we did have three bridges in Montpelier and Tom and Kurt were very helpful to me and we got the three bridges to be number two three and four in the region we didn't get place one northfield bridge is in worse shape and also GMT is going to be reducing services they're having a board meeting on January 29th in Burlington 7.30 in the morning I'm not going to be back yet so if anybody wants to go did you say 7.30 a.m. 7.30 a.m. to 9.30 a.m. in the morning yes and I'm sorry which date January January yeah January 29th I'm sorry that's a public hearing they're having a board meeting yes and we do have a local person any wagoner how do you say your name from the regional regional planning commission director she actually got herself on the board this past year and has been a great conduit for information and she is watching out for central Vermont but it does look like it is more the outreach areas and not Burlington being hit so even though next gen has plans some of those may be impacted and they are GMTA is having more public hearings in February but they didn't have the dates yet posted I also want to mention the park commission has been approached by the fat bikes actually it's the same mamba group for fat bikes in case you don't know it it's bikes I guess big tires but they also have less air to go charging down the hill when there's snow conditions are right so that's another one of those new issues that indeed have some conflicts with walkers and skiers and so there will be some meetings at the park commission that you may hear about and likewise please cars don't ignore the pedestrians all that splashy wet ice you know I got hit many people have complained to me and pedestrians likewise all this water from the rain is stuck in the sidewalks I can't get it out please be careful and people will have to walk on the street until it gets recovered through lots of freezing snow and then work from DPW so the next couple of days are going to be nasty for everybody and just share the roadways and be consider thank you just remember they do have something I was happened to be at the state house this morning for an event at work and I was talking to one of the members of the house government ops committee which has a jurisdiction for our charter changes and he said that there are already many bills introduced in the legislature to ban plastic bags and so we were and he's anticipating a pretty good reception for our charter change and he knew more about that than about the non-citizen voting but I think we're potentially looking good so I did remember I had chatted with Bill about this today I had promised at one point last month or maybe the month before that I would write a draft of a letter to our legislators about public meeting law changes that might be useful to us I have not gotten to that I have been absolutely under water at work and I do not anticipate getting to that so I am putting that out there if somebody else wants to write that you know work with Bill on that or you know if it's not important we can drop it as well but I can't do that at this point thank you just solidifying your reputation as a slacker I know such a slacker oh Anne I forgot the evaluations oh yeah I just wanted that well before we leave this was there anybody else that wants to pick up writing that if not that's fine but what were you writing about the open meeting laws so we wanted to suggest to the legislature that we would benefit from being able to have some kind of public electronic message board where we could have some preliminary discussions in a public setting but online where the public could read them and see them and that might save some time in our meetings and actually be more accessible because people could easily see what we had said rather than having to tune in or watch a video recording or that kind of thing just suggesting to the legislature that that would be a change that we would like to see to public meeting law if somebody is willing to do it with me I I can definitely commit to like a set amount of time with someone I just can't guarantee that I'm going to get it done we can do it we can do it that's something the council is of I'm personally questioning it because I have a very hard time with those kind of things and I have a very hard time with myself and so if I can't choose not to participate in that that's supplementing meetings it's not separate standing it would be in addition to meetings yeah I have trouble with those but go ahead well maybe that's something we can talk about we should talk about as an item at some point sure so I guess one option is to direct city staff to do something like that if we're going to do that maybe we make it discuss what we're telling them to do and see what we think to all together as a council and go from there okay does that sound reasonable Don? yeah it makes me think of google drive some of the committees try to use that but it's really not open to public access and well we'd have to I mean so I'm not advocating for or against it we'd have to deal with the tech you know it would have to be open but I think it probably does make more sense on the agenda if it's for the council to determine that it's a legislative priority to hear from the public pro and con I think it's a really interesting topic I would love to talk more about particularly google drive actually I think it's also another way for people to engage in a different format because sometimes sitting down and watching is challenging catching snippets is challenging and you know for some people it's a really just convenient way like you're at work oh there it is it's at least saved you can go back and look at it it's just a different market different audience mm-hmm okay for some future discussion was there any oh you want I just I wanted to get this out there because I'm going to be gone for the next couple weeks and whether or not we do it but put it I know you had a deadline on bills which I did very begrudgingly with a little bit of time I had left but I wanted this out there and if you want to amend it or other people I didn't get any comments except from Ann and I incorporated yours and so it use it or modify it but if you'd like us to do our own self-evaluation around the same time then there it is you sent this around via email is that right well I did this revision today right before the meeting so if you send me the digital version of this in your mailbox very good I'll re-circulate it I guess send it to everybody so you can say yes let's just use it and see if it works and if it doesn't great and maybe have the same deadline trying to get it done by the 31st that sound reasonable to others that's a fair bit of time okay great do you want to set it deep yeah that was actually going to be mine unless any other council members I mean I don't mean to steal it I'm sure you're probably going to say it too I wanted to remind people to make sure to fill out the evaluation Jamie is going to compile all those results and we need a date to talk about them together with Bill so I figured now would be a good time to find a date to do that one hypothesis is that we could pick you know Wednesday that we're not meeting for example February 6th I don't know if that works for people but no no but the 20th what the 20th of February well so it's a long ways off but it's not necessarily bad to hold that for us as well because this is also contract negotiation year and so I mean one possibility is that we can do both the evaluation and the contract stuff together in one night another possibility is that it might just be easier to separate them but can you clarify not the city managers contract the additional contracts are all the city managers contract the same night as the evaluation we could do the city managers evaluation and contract together on the same night or we can try to separate them Bill I'm curious for your thoughts on this my inclination is to actually separate them we've done it both ways in the past but if you all have opinions on that I'm inclined to separate them too I'm free on the 20th you're free on the 20th so let's at least book ourselves for the 20th on 6 30 do we want to pick a different day you said the 6 doesn't work for you I just before you go the only other constraint that I think we need to have is that we should be doing this before town meeting day both of those are tentative trial dates and sometimes who knows what happens so I will put it on my calendar outlook relatively good I'll be there but if I have to say if we bump it later because it's less stuff I mean I don't know I've ended up waiting until 11 30 at the courthouse for a jury to come back so it you just can't tell sometimes it's super quick so is it 6 30 then is the one we're going to have and then you'll let us know whether it's still I'll have my phone usually as long as the jury is charged by not the 6th so far anybody well we can try for another is there any date before the 20th but just in case we need something after before town meeting day so you're referring to two I thought that's what Glenn and Ian said they wanted two meetings no I know but we'll have one day so far I'm saying I'd rather have another one before the 20th so we're not waiting too late so I'm just gone the 5th through the 7th other than that I'm pretty open okay I mean the 4th I could do the 4th I'm not back yet 6th back to 6th and she's back to 7th are you back during the day the 7th like could you do an evening meeting on the 7th I think so yeah is that everybody is shaking their heads yeah 7th okay well let's 6 30 okay so let's tentatively plan on the 7th at 6 30 and I would like to be potentially depending on how the time goes potentially starting to talk about contract stuff then but let's reserve the 20th we don't get to it perfect thank you yes okay that's it for me just real quick if any council members didn't get to sign these liquor license apps the liquor board gets a little finicky if everybody doesn't sign I don't have anything particularly exciting although we'll know you know we talked about the federal shutdown and just say that has hampered our trying to process through our loans and grants for the wastewater water resource recovery facility and some of those are through federal agencies and so that has stalled so there are effects beyond I mean obviously the out of work well actually they're not even out of work the workers who are having to work and not be paid so they can't seek another job but there are our secondary impacts to trying to get things moving so that's happening we received today an act 250 resouces order which gave us the it was the follow-up from last week's act 250 hearing outlining everything that needs to be done that is faster than we expected it so that's great that the due date for everything to come in is February 25 which is about the time we'd asked to recess the meeting to anyway to get everything in order so that's great keeps us right on track and then a response date of March 12 so that was good news we also as we know received the jurisdictional opinion yesterday about whether the full thing should be in act 250 or just pieces so that's good news and we are trying to work out some details about TIF so a lot of things happening on a lot of fronts but I'm glad we have the budget done and the ballot set and on to whatever comes next so I think that's everything so without objection we're going to consider the meeting adjourned wow good work everybody wow