 O'clock on Monday, August the 21st, we'll call to order the Winooski City Council meeting and ask that everyone please stand and join us for the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Deputy Mayor Brian Corgan. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, first up tonight we have Agenda Review. This is an opportunity for us to move any items that are on tonight's agenda. We did have a late agenda item to add to the package, and the name of the agenda item is naming of a municipal project manager for Winooski TAP, TA 172 grant, in reference to Mr. Ryan Lambert. So we'll add that on to tonight's regular agenda, and why don't we place it as item B under regular items. Again, proposing to add a City Council agenda item naming a municipal project manager for the Winooski TAP, TA 17 grant as item two. Motion by Eric Second by Mr. Corgan. Any further discussion? Hearing none, I'll listen favorably say aye. Aye. And those opposed? Motion carries. I don't want to be added to tonight's agenda. Any other items in regards to the agenda tonight? It's a pretty quick one, folks. We might actually be in a reasonable time. All right. And so with that we'll move on to the public comment period. I would like to invite the public to address the council about anything that's not on tonight's agenda. There are a list. You can find a complete agenda in the back if you're curious if something is or is not on the agenda. This is an opportunity for the public to address the council about anything that's not on tonight's agenda. Okay. So seeing hearing none, I'm going to take a moment under public comment to just make a quick comment and open up. Other councils would like to address the issue, but I know we've had a lot of outreach from folks in our community in regards to recent national events. And specifically as it relates to what I would call the travesty that took place in Charlottesville. We're really proud of the work that's been done in this community, not just by our government in a formal way, but by the people who live here who have set a really welcoming tone. We are a formal welcoming city, but it's a city that really celebrates the fact that we're diverse and celebrates the fact that we look at our neighbors as the people living next door and don't really go a lot deeper than that. We judge each other based off of what it is we do for the community and the way we interact on a neighborly basis. And that's been a really consistent theme in Winooski, and one I think this government's stood for a number of times. The other thing I'm very proud of is the fact that we have proactively done things towards those ends, not just in reaction and the negative towards the opposite feelings. It's okay to oppose hate, and that's a great thing to do. It's another thing to spread the seeds of love, acceptance, and being a welcoming community. I want to commend this group for doing that and mostly commend our residents and citizens for providing that as the tone that we have to work with as a city council. Open up the opportunity to for any other counselors, and as I mentioned, some others may want to say something. Yeah, thanks for bringing it up. I think, like you said, we do take a lot of proactive steps to make sure we are a welcoming community. And we generally try to be uber political as well, which is good. Personally, I feel like not to jump on the bandwagon of everyone else kind of thing, but I think it's important in this kind of trying time to just keep reinforcing that message. We've taken that very positive, proactive messaging, which I think is good, which is part of our lifeblood here. But I think maybe a little bit of reaction to kind of the negativity out there, too, could be positive overall, too. So I think personally, I'd love for us to have some sort of formal resolution, just kind of reinforcing all the good, proactive work we're doing, but also kind of doing what others have done as far as calling out some specific stuff in regards to some of the most recent events, and making sure that we are making sure we're calling out some of those hate groups that are not welcome, I guess, as a welcoming community. Yeah, so I would like to personally say, yeah, like from where I sit, I would love for us to have something formal on the books for that, what it feels like, is that we generally touch the national stuff, but this is so who we are. Yeah, well, I think there are two components of that. One is the statement that we're making to our residents and community members that is something that we prioritize as a policy board. And the second is that our municipalities play a really important role in elevating voice nationally of our community members. So I do think we are kind of beholden to that responsibility in some ways and providing some level of leadership for our residents and contributing to that national voice and speaking out against hate. And then I think, too, I think that you said it really well, Seth, and what's really important to me is that where the rubber hits the road, statements are incredibly important, but so is the actual policy that we're passing, making sure that the policy we're passing is equitable to all residents. Those values have to reflect down to the basis of how we are structuring policy in Wyniewski. And then it's just an important reminder, too, that we all come from our individual backgrounds and it's important to be open to community members who might come to us with experiences based on their backgrounds that we don't understand due to the privilege that we have and being sure that we're open and accessible and available to community members and responsive if we are approached by community members with concerns based on their experiences. Absolutely. Well said. Great. So I think we'll work on something. I'll take it from there, I think, and work on something, being communication. Thanks. Any other items for public comment? All right. So singing and hearing none, we'll move on to tonight's consent agenda. We have four items on tonight's consent agenda. We have the approval of city council minutes of August 7th, 2017. The mayor will warrant from 730, 2017 to 812, 2017. Counts pay will warrant as of 818, 2017. And then we also have the KUSY Intergovernmental Agreement that we covered in depth and also that all hazard mitigation plans, I'm sure everybody read a second time around. So if you do need to pull that one out and have another discussion about the details, we can certainly do that. Otherwise, I would also entertain a motion on the consent agenda as presented. So, motion by Brian Corgan, seconded by Brian Sweeney. Any further discussion? Seeing and hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. And those opposed, motion carries, consent agenda is approved as presented. City update. So just a few quick updates tonight. West Street Block Party was yesterday, it was a great success. I want to thank John Audie and Chief Hebert for their team's work. It was lovely. Also, Audie apparently is a great photographer. I was going to say who knew he was a photographer. At the resident's request, we've installed speed bumps on West Allen Street by the dog park. So there are four now installed. We'll be painted tomorrow. The signs and the warning signals are now currently in or the warning signs are currently in. We hope that cuts down on people kind of bouncing back and forth across the park in an unsafe way. A couple of public works updates. It's Clean Water Week in Vermont. Very exciting. John Cho is giving a tour with CCV students tomorrow of the Wazeflower Treatment Plant to celebrate. We have cleaned 150 catch basins since July. It's part of our storm water mitigation plan. And are preparing for the slip lining for the water lines that will start right around the beginning of September. So people may see trucks out in the street. We are not anticipating any street closures. We think we can pretty much manage it from catch basin or from what are they called? Manhole to manhole. Thank you. But we are planning to do 4,200 square or 4,200 feet of line in 21 manholes. Just a reminder about some upcoming meetings next Winooski Wednesday or upcoming events next Winooski Wednesday is on the 6th. It will be the Rose Street Collective. We are having our economic development community dinner the following night on September 7th. Dinner at five, meaning starts at 5.30. And then we are doing our joint. We are also having our joint city school meeting on September 13th at 6.30. So that's off schedule. And then finally hiring. We're doing a lot of hiring at the moment. We are still looking for equipment operators for public work. So if anyone has a CDL and wants to come help us plow snow in the winter, check out our website. We had about 23 applications for communications coordinator. 25. 25 in the end. And have interviews started just starting next week. Public works directors, we got not a huge response, but a really quality response. So we have four candidates. We're moving on to interviews again, hopefully starting next week. And the planning and zoning manager position is also out. I've gotten a couple of responses to that. I bring this up to say I think the reputation of Winooski as an exciting place to be is really helping us right now. Right now with our hiring processes, we're getting really great candidates, which is awesome. Despite all the press of the draconian management and... Who wants to come work for that person? Those are my updates. Thank you. Thank you. And I think just to reiterate because we did it a number of times the last go around, that slip lining is done on wastewater at this time and not on... Thank you. Drinking water pipes and placement. So there was a lot of confusion last time and a lot of folks posting data about when it's done for drinking water, although that's not an entirely unsafe practice in and of itself. That's not what we're doing right now. So we'll try to limit maybe some of the feedback from people and concerns there. It's different when it's being done with your wastewater. The curing period is not as long. Okay. And next up we have... Thank you very much, Jesse. Except we have council reports. I have very little to report other than I thought that the West Street barbecue went off beautifully yesterday. It was wonderful to see that whole thing functioning. The kids bouncing around behind the fire truck was a blast to watch. Including my dog laying in a puddle, which was not helpful at all when we got home. Nonetheless, I did want to report out on the fact that we had representation at the Twin State basketball game that happened, I think it was three weeks ago, four weeks ago now. My daughter was representation for the Lewinsky High School girls basketball squad down there. And the girls actually won that championship this year, of course, from the state of Vermont. So it's kind of a cool moment for her. That's great. I guess I'll just go in order. I'm lucky, mostly items that I've been working on are on tonight's agenda. So a lot of them are here. So I think I'll save a lot of comments until we get to those agenda items in the interest of time. Well, no, I'll save it never mind. You sure? Let's go. You can't do it. You know I have no problem. I'm gonna go. Alright, nothing from me. Public Safety Commission, we were unable to get a quorum together, so we didn't meet in August, but there was a September meeting coming up. And in that vein, like we had passed out of council, Jesse and I sat down and met in regards to the Sanctuary City welcoming city policies we had discussed prior. And I think that the two of us are also going to sit down with the chief to just talk about the process by which that will go through the Public Safety Commission for public input and consideration as well as some components going through the Community Services Commission as well. So I think that's my only update. I will add just in case because there are lots of people who email at home, email or call me at home. I am going to be kind of unplugged from Tuesday night until next Tuesday and won't be checking a lot of email either. So like once a year you'll get that. So it might be a little tougher than usual. Okay, let's go forward with the rest of tonight's agenda. So first up tonight, we have approval of the Housing Commission appointees with Ms. Heather Carrington as early. Okay, I'm going to call up Bobby Arnell, Christine Latt, and Anna Williams to come with me. You were serious about the no-cart wheels, huh? No, I didn't tell them in advance so they weren't prepared for that. Wrong shoes, right? Okay, at the June 19th meeting of City Council, the Charter for a New Winooski Housing Commission was approved. Four appointees to full-time seats were approved by Council at the August 7th City Council meeting and the remaining slate of recommended appointees to fill the five full-time seats and two alternate seats are being presented for approval, plus one additional alternate. So I recommend that we appoint Bobby Arnell to a full-time seat, one-year term expiring 6th, 2018. Christine Latt to alternate seat number one, a two-year term expiring 6th, 2019. Leslie Black Plumeau to alternate seat number two, and Leslie couldn't be with us this evening. To seat number two, one-year term expiring 6th, 2018, and Anna Wageling to alternate seat number three, one-year term expiring 6th, 2018. And we have here Christine Latt, Bobby Arnell, and Anna Wageling. So if you have questions, please feel free to ask away. So first, I think we'll start by saying we're immensely appreciative of all your willingness to serve on the commission. It's incredibly impactful, very meaningful, something this has been working on for a long time and now we're really excited to see some progress. So no pressure. I really like to see this group in motion, but know it requires sacrifice and we're so incredibly grateful for all of you for taking the time to think about it serving on it. It's a big commitment and one that we know you don't take lightly. And we're also really excited that maybe what we'll ask about now is you all bring some really unique perspectives to the table and some great background and information to the group. So Bobby, you're up first on here. This is like a congressional testimony. Sorry, my under-opera. You've written stuff so you guys can say, you know what, I've put in my application and I did a really long interview. But any comments you want to make on why you decided to participate and what you're excited about in terms of working with the group? I'm just excited to be part of this last segment. So perspective to offer as an authority. I also have a law degree legal background and kind of have some experience in writing these kind of memoranda offering recommendations to a board. So, you know, I'm here to help in whatever capacity I can. So I'm looking forward to getting started. Awesome. Any questions for Bobby? This sounds like he's going to lawyer the group up. Wait, we've been here once before, right, for the Housing Authority board. So we probably drilled you. We were up here for something. I think I escaped. Yeah, I drilled him. No, we're appreciative of the work that's done there, though, too. Absolutely. Let me see who's next in order. I think Ana is. Ana or Ana? Ana. Ana. I'll go by either, but it's Ana. Same question? Yeah, what are you thinking about working on? Well, I'm the housing case manager at Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program. So although I did not come here as a refugee, I've been working with that population for around three years. So I know what their struggles are in general with housing, and I've been learning a lot with Wendewski-specific issues. So I'm very excited and honored to be on the board. Awesome. There's only one left. I'm by process of elimination, Christine Lott. I am looking forward to joining the commission just to help support my community and bring what skills I can contribute in product management and data analysis to supporting the environment that we all live and work in that my neighbors and my family are involved in. Thank you. I know it is interviews, except for Bobby's, and really impressive group. So not only excited that we have enthused participants, but people who are really bringing some great skill sets to the table. And big thanks to Heather for recruitment and follow-up and all the coordination too. So one thing that we have done just to know a little differently in this body, and one thing I think we're going to have a conversation about maybe just general is with groups a lot of times with alternates, there's a little confusion about who steps into a voting role and what order when there's members in the body not present. So you can sometimes end up with the awkward situation where there's two alternate members there and only one regular member missing. And you have a confusion of, okay, who's going to actually step into the voting role. So Heather very suitly acknowledged that and addressed that with the way these appointments are being done too, so that there's a natural order. And that's something we'll probably have a conversation about, I think generally like to down the road with some other commissions too. Any questions, concerns? Thank you so much for being with us. Thank you very much. I'll just solve all the problems, we'll be good. Thank you guys. Any questions regarding the process or the commission from the public? Okay, so seeing and hearing none. I would entertain that we take a motion on the approval of the housing commission appointments as presented. So motion by Brian Corgan seconded by Eric. Any further discussion? Hearing seeing none, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. And those opposed, motion carries. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Well, thank you very much. And Heather, thank you for pulling together such a nice scale group. I'm excited to have a slate. It's a great sign when you have to add another alternate. Usually it's like, can we get by with one less person now? It's like, we have too much awesomeness not to include them all. Yeah, great problem. So we'll now move on to what was the additional item added tonight. So Jenna item B, which is the Ryan Lambert Municipal Project Manager for the TAP TA-17 grant consideration. So I'm hopeful that this will be quick. So the transportation alternatives grants provided through VTrans require either a municipal project manager named person or the city to hire a consultant to play that role, to manage the funds, the engineering, the construction of the work. We have a new city engineer, project manager, Brian Lambert. He's stellar. His background has been vetted by VTrans and they are willing to accept him as a municipal project manager. He would be the grant manager on the project anyway. The advantage to us in naming our internal staff to this role is that we don't have to expend grant funds to pay another consultant to do this management work so we can spend more of the grant funds on actual infrastructure improvements. So VTrans requires the council to sign off on naming him to this role. That's great. And thanks, I mean, from the resume, it looks very well qualified for it. So that's tremendous. Great that we have that as a resource on staff. Any questions from council for Jesse? I had some questions about the triaxial compression of foul rail ballasts, but I guess we'll save that for Ryan for another time. Sounds like a coffee chat you could set up on Saturday. All by the years. Wow. No, it looks good. And you said VTrans signed off already and said that... Pending your approval. They've reviewed his resume. They've accepted him as qualified for the role. Okay. Great. Any questions or concerns from council for that? No. Any questions or concerns for the public on this item? Okay. So seeing and hearing none, I would entertain a motion for the appointment of Ryan Lamber as the municipal project manager for the Munozki TAP TA-17 grant. So moved. Second. Motion by Brian Sweeney. Second by Brian Corgan. Any further discussion? Hearing and seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. And those opposed, motion carries. Okay. Next on tonight's agenda is item B, airport resolution in regards to regional governance. I guess that's me. Dude. Yeah. So we passed a resolution, we'll say three meetings ago now I think. So we've worked for a number of years, decades, on obtaining what we would call real and substantial input into both operations and strategic decisions that are being made at the Berlitz International Airport. That's a terrific time to remind everybody that the airport is governed by a single municipality and owned by a single municipality at this time with only one other community being South Burlington, even having representation on the airport commission. We have advocated for commission seats in accordance with the strategic plan. We've advocated for a number of different formal opportunities to engage on airport governance. And they have been either rebuffed, denied or gone unanswered. At this point in time, following the most recent efforts since we passed a resolution asking for a number of things in November, a number of steps to be taken that also went unaddressed. The city of Winooski has worked with South Burlington on a joint resolution. The original joint resolution, the city of Winooski passed. South Burlington did not. It came back with the revised resolution, but I think really captures the same outcome of the initial resolution. Some of the, whereas as we're lost, the detailed maybe some of the history and the reasoning behind the, therefore, but the meaning of it is still intact. And at the risk of, again, going through the entire resolution and encourage folks to go back three meetings and watch that if you want to see a thorough discussion about it. But what we're really resolving is that number one, the city of Burlington considered forming a commission that reviews the structure of the airport, the governance structure that would include representation from Burlington as well as other affected communities in the region. And that number two, that the matters considered by the commission would include regional infrastructure, governance and ownership. And number three, that should neither of those actions requested by the first two items be initiated in a reasonable period of time. That the governor and state of Vermont appointed committee made up of representatives from affected communities in the region in the state to develop a plan, of course, for this action. This resolution is also going before three other regional communities, Colchester, Shelburne and Williston this week. We'll have representation at one of those meetings and South Burlington will have representation at two of those meetings. We're also providing a written statement to each of those communities. And at this juncture really advocating that this be a regional effort similar to the way we've rallied around other transportation issues and similar to the way we've most recently rallied around the issue of dispatch and public safety. So again, I won't go agnazian because we spent a good hour on the resolution the first go around and I think really the spirit remains the same here. I do want to note that I think that we passed a resolution that had a lot of additional language in there that I'm still fully supportive of, quite frankly. And I don't think that by passing this resolution we're wiping that one away. I think it's important when municipalities do a joint resolution that they pass the same resolution. But I do want to acknowledge that the words in the first resolution including the companion statement still range through and still are passed and upheld by this body too. Any comments, concerns from council? Stand by the prior whereabouts. Any other questions, concerns? Any questions or concerns from the public in regards to airport governance? Okay, so seeing and hearing none, I would entertain a motion for approval of the city council resolution on regional governance of the Burlington International Airport joint resolution. Motion by Eric, second by Brian Sweeney. Any further discussion? Seeing and hearing none, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. And those opposed? Motion carries for a second time. Alright, next up on tonight's agenda we have the approval of the 2017 justice assistance grant or what most people call the JAG grant. Chief is here to talk to you about it. Chief could not make it. Were the barbecue skills on full display? Absolutely. Can we verify? Did anything hit the ground? See I have, we lost two hot dogs, there were a couple casualties, but I have learned I keep the fire department to my left now while I'm cooking so we were good. I hope one of the four legged residents got the... I think somebody did pass that along. So what you have in front of you tonight is the 2017 JAG grant application. For those of you, Eric, this is your first time probably seeing this. This is a federal grant that's passed down to the state level using crime statistics and then based on the level of activity within that state, if you reach a $10,000 threshold using that formula, it's awarded directly pass through to the local jurisdiction. So this year we came in at $10,071. We just made that threshold. So if you look at your application, I've asked for equipment again this year. We're looking to upgrade our out of S carriers. That was a request I made through the budget process last year that didn't make the cut, so I'm trying to take care of that upgrade without having to use local tax dollars. And then one of the top requests from the police union during this last negotiation, I'm sure it would have been there in this next negotiation, was to get ballistic plates that they could put in those carriers that would stop a rifle round. So those are the two pieces of equipment that we'll be issuing to each officer. It's a great use of the client. Thank you. And thanks for finding a stop gap in an area that we couldn't fill in the regular budgeting process. I know that's hard to ask, but we appreciate to use the word for a second time today, scrappiness of everybody here to go after that when it's possible available. Thank you. Sure. That takes extra work. Questions, concerns for chief from council? It's like a minimal investment for us, so. It's good. Yeah, $327. It's a nice matching dollar. Absolutely. Any other questions or concerns? Any questions or concerns from the public? Okay. So seeing and hearing done, motion to approve acceptance of the 2017 justice assistance grant as presented. So moved. Motion by Brian Sweeney, seconded by Brian Corgan. Any further discussion? Seeing and hearing done, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. And those opposed, motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you for the support. We appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So just as Heather's getting set up part as you, I'm sure remember from the housing needs assessment, one of the recommendations of the housing needs assessment was to monitor gentrification data points and trends over time and when you see so, and as we were having our conversations about the creation of a housing commission and the work plan associated with that, we talked about these, these data points again. This is the first such data report that there's done a lot of work to pull together. I'm just waiting for it to come up and it, it does look like it's a long presentation, but it's a lot of one point slides. So we still have an opportunity to get out of here in a reasonable amount of time tonight. So I'm not the one who's ruining that knock on wood. So you're telling me not to unplug this? And this report really is meant to be useful to you all. I think our intent is to provide this quarterly to the council. So if there's information here that as this is the first time you're seeing it that you want presented in a different way or a different kind of statistic, we're absolutely open to that feedback today as well. Yeah, absolutely. This is really just a first attempt at benchmarking where we are and going forward, I'm happy to do it in any way that makes sense to you all. And I think it would be worth noting also that Regina is here and CCRPC who is a wealth of information. So may jump in as well. You used to come to like every meeting. I know. We should remember Arizona again. Okay, so I want to start by going through what the methodology was behind this report. It's been generated using only data from the US census. The one exception is affordable units data, which was derived from BHFA's housing data Vermont website. Gentrification is defined at a census tract level following urban planning standards. The criteria for defining tracks as at risk or eligible for gentrifying were defined prior to data analysis and they were consistently applied based on most cited planning study standards. And the reason for me doing that is so I could keep any sort of bias that I may have out of it. Because the way that you define, the way that you set up the metrics, you can basically make data say whatever you would like it to say. So I set that up in advance to keep that from happening. Indicators of gentrification were drawn from Lomnooski Housing Needs Assessment in addition to an urban planning literature review. And no anecdotal evidence or interviews have been utilized. Yes. I'm sorry. Just for folks at home in case they're jumping in, can we state from your perspective as you started this, what you believe the definition of gentrification is? It's the next slide. Oh, I'm sorry. It's the next slide. We'll go right to it right now. So I do want to acknowledge upfront that gentrification is in and of itself a politically charged term. It's an inconsistently defined term. And depending on who you're talking to and how they're defining it, they may see it as a positive thing or a negative thing. So the term itself within urban planning is kind of seen as having limited use. The reason that I'm using it here is because I've heard it so many times in this community that I feel like we need to have a working definition of what it is. It's pretty regular for people to misconstrue revitalization as gentrification. And there are a wide variety of things from a Starbucks coming in means gentrification to higher income people coming in means gentrification when in fact that's conflating issues. So for the purpose of this report, gentrification is defined as the process by which higher income households display significant numbers of lower income residents of a neighborhood, thus changing the essential character and flavor of the neighborhood. And the origin of the term is really from somebody in London sociologist Ruth Glass observed that one by one, many of the working class quarters have been invaded by the middle class, upper and lower. Once this process of, quote, gentrification starts in a district, it goes on rapidly until all or most of the working class occupiers are displaced and the whole social character of the district is changed. So you'll see that some of the things that I'm bringing up in this Brookings institution definition of gentrification are inherent in the origin of the term in 1964. I also want to speak a little bit to gentrification versus revitalization. It is frequently gentrification accompanies revitalization, but revitalization does not always mean gentrification. And this little chart is taken from the Kerwin Institute for the study of race and ethnicity, kind of defining the differences between the two. Gentrification, I think you'll find if you go through all of those things is more about a narrowing and limiting, whereas revitalization is about an expansion of available resources. Okay, so let's get started. Gentrification is determined generally at a census tract level. So I'm just giving us a sense of what we have in Winooski, which is two census tracts. We have track 24, which is west of Main Street and north of the railroad tracks, and track 25, which is the remainder of the city. In defining gentrification eligibility and risk criteria, I used a model that's based on Lance Freeman of Columbia University's research. He's one of the foremost scholars in gentrification research and is one of the most cited academics in gentrification studies. So census tracts are considered eligible for at-risk for gentrification when one median household income is in the bottom 40th percentile for the surrounding tracts, and two median home values for the tract are in the 40th percentile or below. Eligible census tracts are considered to be gentrifying when one median household income is increasing at a rate in the top third of surrounding tracts, and two median home values for the tract are increasing at a rate in the top third of surrounding tracts. Eligibility risk criteria as of 2000. The median household income of both of our tracts were within the lower 40th percentile of all Chittenden County tracts, and I will say I've done this within the Chittenden County region. So I haven't labeled every individual census tract because they're labeled weird things like 111.40.09, and so that wouldn't really necessarily mean anything for you, but this is all the tracts in Chittenden County. So both tracts in Winooski qualified as at risk for gentrification based on median household income in the year 2000. They also qualified as at risk for gentrification based on median home value in the year 2000. And I've set up a system whereby an X in one of the census tracts means it does not meet criteria, and a check mark means it does meet the criteria. So for rising median income, tract 24 does not meet criteria, and tract 25 does meet the criteria. You'll see here, tract 25 is in the top third of census tracts for increase, the increase in median household income. Tract 24 is nowhere near it. Rising home values, neither tract met the criteria for gentrification. Both of them were well below the top third for increase in median home prices. Sorry, that was, those were, that was the amount of increase. That's the amount of increase between 2000 and 2015. So people don't think though, the average was 90% Oh, gosh, no, no. That's the amount of increase. Yes, thank you. So based on those two factors which are the primary factors that we would look at, City of Winooski does not meet the criteria for gentrification. However, with that being said, there are a whole bunch of things that are considered indicators of gentrification. So some of those are growing disparity between renter and homeowner median income, rapidly rising educational attainment, decreasing poverty rate which has a potential, it's a potential displacement indicator, disproportionate balance favoring luxury apartments over affordable apartments, rising number of residents working in high wage versus low wage industries, and an increase in white only non-Hispanic population. For growing income disparity, both tracks meet the indicator criteria. This is the change in renter income as a percentage of homeowner income 2000 to 2010, I'm sorry, to 2015 and also again by Chittenden County Census tracks. You'll see that both track 24 and both track 25 lost percentage points in relation to homeowner, so it was the biggest increase in that difference. In the year 2015, renter income in track 25 was 40% of homeowner income. Track 24 renters earned only 39% of homeowner median income. Track 25 renter income as a percentage of homeowner income dropped 2% more than track 24. So this, go ahead, do you have a? No, I was just curious, this is asking a lot. Yeah. If you look back at that, the top ones, the bottom ones? Yeah, just any context there that would be helpful just from an imaging standpoint from our data? Yeah, I could do that in future ones. I have, I mean, I have all the data. Yeah, sure, sure. And I don't know if I brought any with me. It's not, I mean, I'll assist at that before I was asking. Yeah, absolutely. I can do it that way. It doesn't take away from the meaning. Yeah. So here you see it broke down in terms of the renter versus homeowner median incomes. So you could see what happened between 2000 and 2010 versus what happened between 2010 and 2015. There were very large increases in median income between 2000 and 2010. A 52% increase in homeowner median income and a 35% increase in renter income during that period of time. Since then, those have leveled off while homeowner has leveled off to a moderate 3% increase. But it's concerning to see that renter income has decreased by 11% in the past five years. So that is a growing and concerning gap. And this, I think this just speaks volumes when you look at this graph. Winooski renter median income dropped from 50% of homeowner median income to 39% of homeowner median income over the last 15 years. And it is the only line that is just a straight dive of the surrounding communities. I'm really interested in what happened in Williston in 2010. And it's something that I will look into because they were diving and something happened that turned that around. Or statistical irregularities. It could be. It could be. But I think maybe something that's also interesting to talk about on that slide is between 2000 and 2015 is what type of development took place in each of those communities and the types of properties that came online. Yeah. Well, 2000 to 2010 is our TIF district. So, you know. I have a lot of those luxury condos or whatever. So that's high income homeowner shit. And see that's a bunch of units. That's barely going to touch those though on the 2015 side, right? Because it was you know, that's like, that is 2015. And whether they would even be registered in this they may not even be in that data. Interesting. Sorry. Oh no, that's good. Feel free to interrupt anytime really. Educational attainment neither census tract met the criteria for gentrification. The change in percentage of population with bachelor's degree or higher 2010 to 2015 is shown by census tract in this graph. Track 24 actually lost educational attainment overall during that time. Track 25 increased 3%. Decreasing poverty or displacement. We did not meet that criteria for gentrification. So the percent of the population below the poverty line in 2015 is shown here by census tract. City of Winooski is home to track 24. The census tract with the second highest poverty rate in Chittenden County. In 2010, track 24 represented the ninth highest poverty. This is the change in the percent of population below poverty level 2010 to 2015 again by census tract. And track 24 is the only tract of the 2010 top 10 highest poverty tracks to see an increase in poverty in 2015. It has the single fastest growing poverty rate in Chittenden County. Here I've just broken it out by change. This is something that I've added since you saw the report. The change in poverty rates for surrounding municipalities 2000 to 2015. Winooski's poverty rate grew 72% between 2000 and 2015. So it went from 15.2% in 2000 to 26.1%. So we certainly have a quickly growing poverty rate. And if you compare it with surrounding communities, you see that Williston had a quickly growing poverty rate but went from 1.5% to 4.4%. So not even on the same magnitude. I did this map because there had been a question a couple meetings ago about bringing it down to the block group, well the neighborhood level is what was discussed. So this is Winooski poverty rates for individuals. It's by the number of individuals for whom poverty status was determined and these numbers have changed since the report that I sent you because I saw that there was an anomaly in the way that I was analyzing the data. I was looking at households in what I sent you and the numbers that you're probably all familiar with would be 26.1% poverty in Winooski. That's by individuals. So I changed this to that same standard. Some things that I found interesting about this is I've heard repeatedly and actually pretty much accepted it up until when I was doing this analysis that the most poverty was down in the flats and that money was up in the heights and this is telling me that in the year 2000 that wasn't true. So it's such a consistent report though that it's strange to me. 2015 as you can see we've had a big increase in poverty rates by block group. Concentration of poverty is generally defined as a poverty rate of 40% or more at a census track level. Some researchers place that at 30% and there's a lot of contention around that because the place that you start to see the negative impacts of concentration of poverty is actually at 20% and it increases exponentially up until 40% levels out. So there are researchers who say it should be lower than that. Luxury versus affordable units. This is the section where I wasn't able to use census data. It doesn't mean that the data doesn't exist. It means I couldn't find it. So we did not meet the criteria in either census track. The way that I did it is the Winooski Housing Needs Assessment chose to define luxury units as those that are called luxury units within the city and so I used that data based on that what you see on the left is the rental rate distribution for 2015. Luxury, market rate and affordable subsidized. And then what you see on the right is the same thing with affordable vouchers included. So you'll see that we have, when the vouchers are included, we have 53% affordable subsidized housing in the city. 7% luxury units and 40% market rate. So the left is project-based. Project-based versus hand-based. Project-based. And then I also looked at to see if it was out of whack households with an income of $75,000 or above would spend less than 30% of their income on renting the existing luxury units in Winooski. As of 2015 27% of Winooski households had an income of over $75,000. And when you do that with renters it's 14%. So we have double the renters who could afford luxury units of luxury units. This is just a comparison of our this is just project-based affordable rental units compared across surrounding communities. Winooski provides the highest percentage of project-based subsidized affordable housing units of all the surrounding municipalities. And when you add in the voucher-based affordable units we have 53% of all rental units that are subsidized affordable housing. Again just breaking it out by tract but I think I've covered that. This is the location of luxury versus affordable units. So each block group is broken out with a percentage of rental units that are subsidized. The single largest is block group two and tract 25 has 71% of all rental units that are affordable units. Block group two includes the cemetery those are pretty nice. Another thing that was raised and this is new also that led to me doing this report was that the new units coming in weren't taking the affordable housing bonus in form-based code. So I did an analysis quite by mistake I was looking at something else when I discovered this. So I looked at the units that are currently under construction and they actually come in priced below the affordable housing threshold that we have written into form-based code but they do not have the contingency that they have to remain affordable for 20 years. But currently that concern is it seems to not be something we need to worry about and that will be monitored ongoing. Employment sectors tract 24 meets this gentrification criteria tract 25 does not. So looking at high wage versus low wage jobs and these were identified in the housing needs assessment so I used the same job sectors that they used. Residents remain predominantly employed in jobs that are considered low wage jobs. However, low wage employment is falling while high wage employment is increasing and that's pretty consistent across the board. So this is the percent change in high wage jobs by census tract. We met that criteria the increase in high wage jobs. Only tract 24 had a decrease in low wage industry sector jobs and increase in white non-Hispanic population neither tracked methods criteria. Our percent change to white alone population 2010 to 2015 is we had a decrease in that no increase in that. So this is a basic scorecard of all the things that we've gone over. I would say based on this I would not call this gentrifying. It's usually the top two that would be used to determine whether or not you're gentrifying. I would say we are experiencing revitalization. So terms matter. The things that I'm most concerned about having looked through this is the renter homeowner disparity that's happening in both tracts of increasing poverty and the way that it's located. So my recommendations would be to continue to monitor gentrification indicators and utilize the criteria and format established here as much as possible or if you have recommendations I'm happy to add them. I think continuing to compile and analyze data to drive decision making is crucial. The data in here did not tell me what I have been told in the community but I've heard that story repeated a lot of so I think having the data in the first place to be able to use it to drive decisions is really important. Engaging the community in the master planning process to set the housing targets to identify community needs and to prioritize goals. I think the affordable housing dialogue needs to be discussed at a regional level. What we do in Winooski can be proactive and excellent but if you have a surrounding county that is gentrifying we're going to feel the effects here so we need to be having that ongoing. We need to develop regional strategies for de-concentrating poverty and we need to create programs and policies to mitigate growing income disparity between renters and homeowners. I'm happy to take questions. Questions? That's a lot of data to digest. Thank you so much. Happy to do it. I think that this is super crucial and well even if we're not meeting the criteria of undergoing current gentrification like the areas you pointed out there are areas of concern that we do want to really keep an eye on and do really see the importance of the housing commission's role and a lot of this work as well. I would be curious to think through the anecdotal that we are getting from folks outside of the community what are there indicators there of data points we might not be looking at, I don't know or because if that's something community members are experiencing in one way or the other we can't hold up a data sheet to them and say no! It's not that I don't think that's legitimate or useful information and interviews are part of the economic development strategy that we're developing right now really in doing this particular report I wanted to keep bias and slant out of it and that includes from community members who believe that it's happening without having a full without having a common definition of what it is. I'm totally waiting here as well it's just interesting to think through what are the drivers behind that experience that people are having Yeah, absolutely So one of the findings and two of the housing assessment was to develop a gentrification monitoring tool which I think this really serves as That was the purpose of this If you update this consistently it's going to be a methodology of tracking it because I think you know part of the and it is all organized really well the concern is always what's happening now, perception versus reality and there's so much going on between 2015 and 2017 even that people are going to be so quick to point out Yeah, yeah, but and then add this, this and this and I know you're doing counts against that which is great and meaningful but I think that monitoring aspect of it's going to be key and I would love to see us really commit to doing that on a regular basis The next of the 2016 American Community Survey is due to come out December 7th so I should be able to report on that new data in January and obviously I'll continue to monitor everything that's coming online and what that pricing range is Because that's the argument around this issue a lot of times is it happens like that and it's sudden and we're again very proud to say thinking about it before it clearly has roots that are you know that can't be reversed and the other thing that I think is really really hard for us is scale and the number of subsidized and deeply subsidized units that we have we start with this baseline that's unlike any other community and state and is actually I think fairly unique in the country in terms of the percentage of our housing stock that is subsidized or deeply subsidized and that's always going to make a really interesting conversation for how we look at the data after that you can't just cut it out and set it aside but at the same time it kind of is what it is and then there's everything else that happens after that and you have to really make a decision of what things are going to look like going forward so I think that's going to be a really interesting conversation to see play out from the the housing commission side and the planning commission side in terms of okay this is where we're at what do we benchmark going forward and do you set those aside and say we're just going to say that we want this to be the percentage of affordable units or this range of units that are created in new development it's going to be an exciting conversation and there's a question of succession with that as well in terms of when are affordable units no longer required to be affordable and which ones so I think there's a lot more data to gather yeah there's a lot of there's a lot of that going on right now a lot of this housing was built and that any affordable housing that was built here that's not another as the Woosky Housing Authority is aging and the loans that require them to be to be at that level are expiring deal with it every day that's half of our life right now because of expiring properties and trying to figure out how do we keep these affordable because from a COG standpoint it makes sense for those people just from the market rate units especially if they're worried about continued voucher funding so we're such a small community that again it goes back to every piece of land being so valuable in terms of the way it looks because it's going to affect networks for such a long period of time and then I think too is looking at those regional conversations and how we can play productive role on that because that's a really good point and to show it on the other counties is a really I think beneficial way of looking at it really happy you went that way versus just comparing Woosky now to Woosky then to Woosky when it might look like in the future because we live in a housing ecosystem that's larger than just our square mile you know our markets are so driven and impacted by the other 153,000 people that live around us in Chippin County that's exactly right great great great work if I can just add one thing to that I think it's also important as we go into the housing commission work and the master planning work and think about these community values and benchmarks and what we want to aim at in the next five or ten years what we want to aim at in other sectors will impact our housing values so if we want you know making this up if we really want to focus on job creation for example and providing more opportunity for people to live and work in Woosky I'm not sure yet if that's going to be one of our values but if it is then we need to think about workforce housing across the spectrum so these conversations can't have to be informed by other conversations we're having around energy planning and community services and employment and transportation and what not they're all mutually informed correct next question from the transform council for Heather I think this isn't one that I mean you saw honestly I skipped the first few slides I have to go back and read the nice card with that it's pretty straightforward it's a huge amount of work thank you very much what I think is really exciting about it too is it tells the housing commissioners when they go again that there's not some predetermined set of outcomes that we're expecting or even a boogeyman that has to be addressed look at the information and data in front of you we want this done with urgency but we don't want it done in a frantic pace of misperceptions so that's great questions, concerns, comments from public yes thank you it turns out it's not real information so I think it's great information for someone like me to have who talks to people in this community a lot and from the data is this your experience and it's so can you tell me how this experience came to pass for whatever but having this information is extremely useful to me and I think it's extremely useful to a community of art as well to dispel events of things like it's the opposite it's so interesting and that is certainly an error in my mind so having information like this and data to be able to point to is extraordinarily helpful thank you you're welcome other questions concerns from the public are there for council on this issue it is right now yes and I will say maybe a better format would be nice yeah we need to pull it down and put it in its own document just because I know the PDF will show it sideways there are a couple of affordable housing units was taken from Vermont housing finance agency from their website the luxury units were defined only by units that define themselves as luxury so that's in keeping with the windows gate housing needs assessment other questions concerns okay housingdata.org awesome site thank you so much thanks for all of your work I'm glad to do it and I'm happy to analyze data anytime I'm going to continue to sit here weirdly and change this over to a different laptop so we'll move on to next item which is approval of the capital improvement plan policy so we talked about this proposed policy a little bit at your last meeting I chose not to put this on the consent agenda because there had been a discussion about what these look like so I want to give you examples of what these may look like see I thought you just got confused about where you were working so the only one I could quickly select off as its own PDF for those of you who have not seen in the package just use the city of Montpelio this is a very good CSE so I just want to give you those examples so you can see kind of the thought process both the Colchester, Shelburne and Montpelio versions how we are going to talk about capital planning across fund and capital planning across years and capital planning across infrastructure and equipment so if you have any questions I want to give you that opportunity but the policy is no different than you saw at your last meeting you know I think it does a good job of that I think once we get here in the budgeting season again going back to exactly explicitly what the charter says because I know when we did the charter rewrite or update I should say we really spent time on trying to put language in that was reasonable and functional and updated a number of items around the capital budget the last time we updated the charter and there's some of those rules spelled out here some of them it's not it's using all those standards balding to one and what is good accounting and financial practice is something we're choosing to do versus what the charter says I think would be a nice crash course as we go into it because I think that's been a question in the past is what are we mandated to do versus what are we choosing to do and so the logic between how we're arriving at some of the balances and how we're displaying it to me that's where those numbers got challenged the most especially for folks looking at the first time it's going to be actually exciting to have another person coming into the budget process for the first time again because it's an opportunity to test it again I'm saying all that in the context of just looking for and beyond the policy of us but I have no issue with the policy itself it's well done I too was a little confused by the city about paper but only momentary and I realize what you were doing on the cover she talks about you know the hard part about this is always getting it to the point where people like us can understand it to some extent that's never going to be possible without some kind of explanation or key but I think this helps a lot it clarifies what you're walking into and what some of again those applicable standards look like questions, concerns, thoughts on the policy piece policy with good the view of the example was good too I mean it's similar setup to what we're used to seeing but we're just more defined of all the different buckets of money which I think would be helpful as we go through just a general list right one thing that was kind of I'll say interesting is that similar to where I think we've stumbled in the past is budget pictures like where the expected balance is going to be I'll speak a little bit for Nicole because she's not here and I know that's something where she had expressed some real difficulty in the past of wanting to understand when something just has a number to it going off into infinity where's it going to end and what's that number going to look like I know right exactly but it's almost like hovering over the box if there are a number that appear that said and this is what the effective balance is projecting to those leaders that was what I took away from some of the difficulty that's been had in interpreting it from year to year well I think one of the conversations we're going to need to have over the next couple of years is and informed by building out the asset management system is that there is a certain to do a good preventive maintenance plan on your infrastructure there is a certain amount of funding that should be allocated every year to continue that preventive maintenance and what is that kind of steady state of infrastructure funding look like we're not there so how do we ramp up to getting there or if we're not going to get there what are we what are we committing not to do and I think that if we can frame it in that lens of what is the baseline amount we always need to maintain our infrastructure that going out for years at a time makes more sense because it's just you know if you're going to replace for example again making this up if you're going to replace 5% of your sidewalk every year so over 20 years you're doing preventive maintenance then every year you're going to spend 5% of what a 20 year allocation to replace all your sidewalk would be yeah or a certain percentage to assist in funding right we're reserving for the garage or replacement in the garage reserve it's never going to reach full replacements correct that's the one that we plug at the end because we could never come up with 116,000 in case the garage needs to be replaced right and even if we did it would probably never fully get us there in terms of replacement of an actual garage but we'd have a nice down payment other questions, concerns this is a big step forward and one that we've been missing so thank you guys and we've done a ton of work too thank you very much for all the work on this questions, concerns from the public wasn't there the last time you looked at the capital improvement plan I don't think you were with us at that point in time we had a lot of conversation around us being able to better explain the buckets that money goes into and what it's allocated towards I know that we talk about for example Street Piping or slip lighting, sorry but we've put money in there before that wasn't, we haven't quite used yet and we put more money in there but we don't really know what that bucket and what part of it is this time that explanation didn't seem vague just didn't make sense to the layman there are at least a couple of networks here at the time so anything we can do to exercise that demon when we go to produce this gigantic document that you're producing would be super helpful and I think it kind of will in and of itself just by the way I just want to remember that conversation I totally completely agree and I think that's really again where the asset management software and the CIP run into each other in theory once we have all of our infrastructure inventoryed in that software and valued so it has a replacement life of X or Y or it's in very good condition fair, poor condition just run a report of what are all the poor condition roads that we're going to concentrate on so that it will get easier to plan for that as opposed to planning more anecdotally that's the the prioritization piece that's set up here although I will say the only possible caveat to me is the first thing on there is the project meets the policy goal of the strategic objective of the city council none of that stuff gets done if the infrastructure on a baseline level doesn't work and function so it's nice to do things on a whim like I'm going to spend $600,000 building an amazing soccer facility as an infrastructure project that's great unless there aren't roads, streets, sidewalks that help people get there so I think don't want that to be lost as we hopefully approve this but that's to me an inherent given in that that we're going to need that to accomplish that I say that from a values perspective when we open this back up in four months, oh my gosh it's the most budget season again it's like we're just finished we did be careful so Jeff you can spice stuff out and it's almost budget season other questions, comments, concerns any questions or comments from the public concerns okay so seeing and hearing none I would entertain a motion for approval of the capital improvement plan policy as presented motion by Eric seconded by Brian Sweeney any further discussion seeing and hearing none all those in favor please say aye aye and those opposed motion carries thank you very much alright our final item of the evening is discussion on the joint survey committee for the union municipal district agreement just a minute since you didn't have to work on this John do you mind clicking this who made the PowerPoint slides primarily Ann Janda from Schiller like the why are we doing this well this may be for not where did she go oh this is why it's still working there we go just have to get nervous enough and then it will start there's a little projector on the bottom next to the the scale bar there we go thank you it should start come back John and then I are your representatives to the joint survey committee so this is talking about our regional dispatch conversation so what we're bringing before you tonight is kind of an update on where we are and why we're bringing it to you now is that the joint survey as you might remember the joint survey committee was tasked with creating a union municipal district which is an actual document that document per state statue has to be reviewed by the attorney general before it's brought to you for approval so the intention of the joint survey committee is to approve the draft union municipal district agreement at our next meeting for approval to send to the AG to review before it comes back to you in the fall for a vote prior to bringing it to the residents as your representative I wanted to kind of brief you on where you are where we are and give you an opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback before it gets to that review point because when it comes back to you for a vote to change it will be very difficult considering we'll have already gone through all this legal review so I'm going to start with it just really more for public information and those who are new to this conversation really quick run through of these slides and then if you have any questions about the actual document just proactively so this where we are now with this recommendation has been vetted by the attorney the joint survey commission hired it's also been reviewed by our municipal attorney looking at it from the Winooski standpoint so it's got a full legal vet so why are we having this conversation so as you currently know we operate on a PSAP system in Vermont so if you dial 911 is directed to a state PSAP center and then transfer it to the local municipality that adds about 71 extra seconds to a call so the idea of for a lot of our communities regionalization becoming that and then county PSAP would save that time would get our services out to the community faster additionally there are many models already in existence of communities running this kind of regional service so for example right now Shelburne is a PSAP and dispatches for 40 communities Montpelier is not a PSAP dispatches for 19 communities there are a lot of people already doing this in the state so just two slides on why we're having this conversation many of our dispatchers in our communities in this consortium have only one dispatcher on at a time which means if there's more than one significant incident they're really overwhelmed and I mean that in no disrespect to them they're doing amazing jobs their phone is just constantly ringing and trying to be in contact with the professionals out on scene as well so there's really no redundancy in the current system there's also very limited for Winooski very limited kind of career ladder training opportunities you always have to have somebody on 24-7 so to do training of professional development is very challenging and for example our dispatchers here they're dispatchers until our one dispatch supervisor leaves there's no other kind of career tract go to the next one I'm not going to read these you guys can read them again there's points on here this potential to be a PSAP and really concentrate that effort and to provide more support to fire and EMS dispatch as well so there are a lot of examples where we already have union municipal districts and already this is not a new concept in our region obviously GMT is a great example of this Champaign-Waay district solid waste we are providing government services through regional districts already so this is your joint survey committee Burlington Colchester Essex Milton Shelburne South Burlington Williston and us are represented here these are all entities that currently staff people to provide dispatch service with the exception of Milton who has who is dispatched by Colchester but has essentially bought into Colchester's infrastructure so are funding it at a much higher level than other communities that are solely contracting for the service so again state statute that oversees the role of a joint survey committee and as I said in the beginning our role over the last six months has really been to create this to make a recommendation around the creation of this union municipal district you know the next one so you can see all the information is linked here so what is so really what I'm asking you for your feedback tonight on is this union municipal district agreement so what is that agreement so it's very similar to a municipal charter it will essentially have the same weight as a charter if approved it's been drafted by the joint survey committee and reviewed by our legal council thus far will eventually be reviewed by the AG's office and legislative council as well so how will the district be formed as I said kind of previewed here this document will go to AG for review it will come back to each of the community legislative bodies for approval before it goes before the voters in 2018 each community's voters have to approve the district before it can be created although it can be created by a subset of those communities if it passes in some communities it doesn't pass with other communities minimum of three so assuming it passes now we're kind of transitioning into what is actually in this document so there'll be a board of directors the document outlines that those will be the chief executive officers from each municipality so specifically the managers we had a long conversation about that the reason we got to this recommendation is that dispatch is currently an executive function it's currently work that the managers oversee it's not policy level work it's administrative level work so to see that authority to a group of people we want to keep it in that chain of command additionally these dispatchers will be working on a minute to minute hour to hour day to day basis with existing municipal employees the link between these new entity dispatchers and our police and fire professionals will be very tight so to ensure that kind of management control stays consistent the board will be made up by the administrative officers and we will hire public safety communications director much like the council hires the manager so beyond that so there will be the board appointed by the committee will appoint a public safety director within that you see the green boxes these are the right now what's conceptualized of is the operations of the regional dispatch center so shift supervisor people in charge of training quality assurance quality control and IT Talcom with the relevant dispatchers we anticipate that there will be strong connections to the existing police and fire chiefs again these are professionals that right now used to working hand and glove and we want to make sure that that cooperation continues and then the tax assessments will be made to the member towns right now we're anticipating that the green boxes the public safety communications director the green boxes will make up between 32 and 38 FTEs so when we think about a member of this new authority that's any committee that currently runs as a dispatch center so those committees listed under the joint survey committee structure and any community where the voters have authorized us to enter so Winooski will not be able to enter the authority if the voters do not approve it so why did we choose this structure again we wanted to stay as close to what's currently working well while maximizing the benefit of a regional approach so currently currently police chiefs staff report to managers for administration and councils have budget oversight and we all work as separate operations in the new model essentially the first two of those stay the same and managers are still involved the chiefs are still involved the legislative bodies still have financial oversight we work as one operation I just want to drive home that one operation you know locally a fire here or take the Burlington fire at UBM there was eight or nine different dispatchers involved in that call separate entities very confusing adds to a lot of the chaos and that's God forbid but that's somebody's going to get hurt some day we've all become so separate although we work very well together the mutual aid system is very strong this is baffling at times to try to deal with separate entities and then even here in Winooski I mean you know the PD dispatches and then we have some go to the firehouse so we got fire dispatch in 1900 and then we got Colchester X-ray and it's baffling a regular accident you know we're dealing with five or six different separate dispatchers and it just adds to the chaos of art you know just trying to process the emergency and it's a good example to think of if you think of that does everyone know what you're talking about the UVM fire the museum building that six different agencies were dispatched to and really saved a lot of the building and collections if you think about in that incident as John said not only were all the departments deployed but six different dispatchers were taken offline and many of three of them at least in solo shops responding and interacting with the scene and had there been another big parallel incident or an accident on the interstate or what not those people would have been bombarded if those people were all sitting in the same room you could say okay that dispatcher is dispatching that event and the rest of the dispatchers on duty are responding to the emergency calls coming in so it's a good example to bring up so budget is always a huge question in these conversations so what we're currently proposing is from a kind of budget structure framework the Jenning County Public Safety Authority will have the same fiscal year as we currently have the board and the staff will draft the budget and bring that to the legislative groups of the members in early November for feedback the board will then adopt a budget by the beginning of December bring that to the legislative boards for approval within 30 days the point of this schedule is that it finalizes the budget prior to the finalization of the municipal budget so you won't be asked to build or we won't be asked to build a municipal budget bring it to your consideration and then have that additional amount tacked on at the end this is a really key point in my opinion as we think about how we weigh services and how we value services and it's different from other how other regional service provision is provided so for example, if you look at how central Vermont Public Safety Authority is structured that will be tacked on at the end so it won't be able to be taken into consideration when you think about your value around the setting of the municipal tax rate so that makes sense it's a 7-1 fiscal year July fiscal year start so there's time should a should a municipality vote it down there's some flexibility there to rearrange things between March and actually fiscal year so the first slide is about how the budget will be created the second slide is about how the cost of the service delivery will be determined so right now the concept is that for the first two years of a municipality joining, the municipality will contribute what they're currently paying for dispatch the idea there is you have to start somewhere you have to start it up, have it function staff it up to understand the true cost that then will be allocated out based on calls or service there is a plan to over time do a what are they calling it a smoothing calculation they would experience more than a 5% increase that would be shifted to other communities and finally the idea here is that the community would vote to adopt the municipal district say we're signing on but the community then couldn't actually start receiving services until the council approved the cost sharing and memorandum of understanding so we could in theory be a member of the district not receive services not pay for services for up to two years and still be voting members while we work out what the actual cost of the community will be having said that so this is just sorry I can't jump the gun here more information about this memorandum of understanding that would be between the union municipal district and each legislative body around cost sharing so right now the analysis shows us that it's going to cost about $3.1 million to operate this this patch center so what you see in that chart below is the community the calls for service the percent and the total funding allocated so we're second smallest next to Milton in actual calls for service so it's going to cost us once we're into the authority $222,000 it's about $21 $21 $21.58 a call $21.50 a call currently if you go to the next slide we're spending $399,000 for these services carrying them in house so it's about $38 almost $39 per call so what this means for Winooski is for the first two years we will continue to pay more than the actual cost of the service delivery but after that two-year drop it will decrease the challenge for us operationally for this and why I'm very hesitant to talk about it as a cost savings even though it is we are the big winners in this analysis quite frankly is that what we will lose as a community going to this approach is 24-7 coverage in person for the city of Winooski so right now the dispatchers are the front face of the police department so if you have an emergency downtown at two in the morning you can walk into the police department and talk to a live human being we won't have that anymore in the city with this regionalization there are plans and approaches of how you deal with that with a call one call box in your city hall where somebody can walk in a call directly connected to the dispatch center but it's not the same as a human-to-human contact additionally there are things that dispatchers do in each of these police departments to administratively support the police department and we are going to have to backfill some of that so when we think about as we get farther in this process it is likely that in the first two years this may actually cost us more because we are going to have to backfill some administrative support that we lose to this regional dispatch that then we will drop off in years 3, 4, 5 as we drop down to the actual cost of this service provision makes sense yeah I would add too that the education around familiarity with territory will be a challenge as well I had to call something to the cemetery and I just said the cemetery and after we hung up I thought about the fact that they didn't ask me any other questions like they knew where I was talking about you know hey where are you what's your name you know there is a different interaction there will probably be a little different for our residents too nothing education can help but that is interesting too yeah and one of the ideas here is our hope and we can't one of the awkward things here is we are also talking about 6 unionized and talking about 6 unionized environments going down probably to one unionized environment our hope is that those humans stay the same so you have experts on each community within the dispatch center so while that person is not going to only answer our Winooski folks are only going to answer Winooski calls there will be an ability to kind of cross train each other on what the major landmarks are what the major issues are and quite frankly nationally many many many dispatch centers run dispatching for much larger geographic populations much larger population areas so there certainly is a standard of excellence that dispatch provides even though they don't know exactly what that street looks like two points I believe you probably called the non-emergency number when New Seas calls right now if you call 9-1 if we were to call it from here it goes to Williston if you call the non-emergency number you're getting direct access to the dispatcher so if you call 9-1 now it goes to Williston they start to figure out what you need police fire ambulance and then there once they're through a piece they may have start medical treatment or whatever and then they're calling the dispatcher by phone and then that's the third person brought into the mix and then police fire locally is dispatched so this will be the call comes into a hub and they're going to be pushing the buttons that third wheel gets taken out of it and that was about the 71 seconds that they're saying adding that's a minute and a minute plus I mean it doesn't seem like a lot but in your time of need that's a lot and being a PSAP center the mapping is incredible what they can get your phone is going to come up your 9-1 address and they'll be able to see what's around you and computer aided dispatching you can see closest units there's a lot that could happen here in Chittenden County it's pretty exciting so just to be really good nuts and bolts about this on the ground in PSAPs or larger centers is that somebody's on the phone with you while you're in cardiac arrest and another dispatcher can see on the scene where's that call going and where's the nearest person and is dispatching that person without losing the voice on the phone so it's two different people co-working on a call that we don't have the capacity to do now so what's happening now is if it gets to us you're calling in cardiac arrest and you're being put on hold or on the phone while the same person is paging some of the out of place so from an expense perspective I understand exactly what you're saying the administrative part is going to carry on after two years because if that's our value it's not going to go away the administrative portion is still going to be there have you sat down to figure out when or the timeline as to when this becomes an actual cost savings perhaps no I have not we haven't gotten to that level of specifics yet you know I think that there's you know I think it would get to again I'm hesitant to talk about it so if you think about if we're going I'm not going to guess on the spot we can absolutely do that no I absolutely did not expect you to guess on the spot I was just curious if we had done that so my central Vermont having been through regionalization with capital west which is Montoya it wasn't cost savings to be very honest it was about improved services to the citizens about officer in first responder safety it's huge regionalization doesn't always equal savings it's about improvements in the system and building building depth in the system on that resilience to the system it sounds like part of the math too would depend on values and judgments that we take here in regards to some of the you know if we didn't want to remain having somebody who was an in-person walk-in face in the prison department that's going to alter that dollar amount as well and those would have to be decisions that this body makes and you know there's also there are a lot of factors that's a great one you know as I said we're going from you know six-ish unionized environments down to one that means those dollars are going to change so while we have good models of what the costs currently will be there are unknowns built into that just a quick question if you don't mind on the initial two years putting our current costs in why was that a decision instead of going to like it's going to be set up later on more it's based on the number of calls average number of calls it seems like we have a high cost per call right now compared to like Williston and Milton where you know three years in it's actually going to come and all pretty much a lot of right now we're spending almost twice as much per call and Milton's calls look really similar so are we disadvantaged in those first two years so that's a great question were you at the meeting where I brought this up and got it I don't think it was, maybe though so we had this conversation at the joint survey and the point that the other communities made because their experience would be the opposite right so if it were many other communities their costs are going to increase some as a result of joining whereas we're going to drop significantly and if you were required to go in exactly at your spending rate on day one that would be a hard hurdle for a community to overcome why are we initially paying more for this service in right out of the gate whereas in Winooski we are going to pay if we don't go in we're going to keep paying 400,000 so it's not necessarily a loss for us in year one and two we're going to have to pay that regardless and it allows us to staff up to get people trained up to understand what the real costs are as that cost over time is shifted out but you're right in the first two years if this all goes perfectly and all the communities join right away there will be a period of time where we are subsidizing this service delivery model I will also say there have been other financial commitments made by other communities that aren't going to also offset some of this start up cost so for example Colchester a month and a half ago dedicated 150,000 from their fund balance or a one time start up cost that will build infrastructure those kinds of things so can you talk a little bit about where that's at those up front because we have in here that $500,000 number and then the additional $1.2 million number in terms of what they say our minimum start up cap requirements the vision is because the MOU on the funding piece is just kind of but we don't really think that that's a reason to last so we're just going to scramble it in and work it out that's really what the MOU says so where is the start up the real start up capital coming from so if you can just go to the next slide because it kind of starts lying at the timeline so what's currently happening which is not directly outlined on this but you'll see why I moved here in a second what is currently happening outside of this process is that South Burlington and Colchester are working towards co-location this year so South Burlington has space in their facility where they have located their dispatchers and Colchester that dispatches for Colchester and Milton is going to co-locate their dispatchers there too so a lot of the start up costs will be taken care of by building out that center for the two of them now to continue to operate regardless of whatever happens with this process as communities come on and a lot of this will depend on how communities are feeling about this effort how many communities come on when some of that capital will just move you know we have two modern dispatch centers downstairs so some of that is simply a we will take our technology and move it to this center with some expense of moving and setup and software that talks to each other and whatnot but it's not the same as building a new center does that make sense? but a lot of what you're getting at is the I think one of the things you're getting at is the anxiety of how these dominoes are going to fall and quite frankly we're not going to know that prescriptively at a minimum until after town meeting day which is also why you'll see that this doesn't necessarily have to be one of the advantages of each community putting in what they're currently paying for services is it can happen mid-year so we couldn't theory vote on town meeting to go in then the council with the joint survey commission can talk about the MOU and get comfort level with that and then decide to go in January 1 and still have the budget to do that and have that transition period so what else is outlined here is you know a suit right now we're still holding to this town meeting day potential for voting phase one would start in July which would be kind of interim startup and testing which again will be eased with this Goldchester South Burlington Transition it will operate solely as a dispatch center until January 1 and decides to join they are currently a PSAP and they have they've had conversations with the state that if they if their community joins the PSAP will move with them so that act also adds a revenue stream to the authority and then as communities come on they will start paying and they will start dispatching so other concerns other concerns with the of the members the board of directors the operations that are outlined in the municipal district agreement yeah I mean I think the advantages is its stage the disadvantages is we're not standing up an organization that's going to be full functioning but the reality is there's going to be a requirement for it to be functioning because it sounds like there's going to be a couple communities already so to speak fully bought and you know that's a good place for us to be and that's the one the only issue I had within the documents was sort of the fuzziness in the beginning of the funding MOU of so we're not going to do that the 5000 and 1.2 we're just going to kind of hard scramble it together but I understand why that makes that makes sense and it wouldn't be fine I mean you know we couldn't block down an additional $400,000 or $800,000 right now you know fund 2 years ahead of time and that would work so to get why they're doing it feel good about the way it's being supported by other communities in the Mayan that's there so I don't have a number of other questions in regards to the funding piece was key that make you nervous at all in terms of the timing I mean November 1st well it sounds like we'll have a pretty good idea November 1st we're going to get what we should expect to be a pretty close to final budget where projections can start being made off of them before the passage on December 1st and the subsequent approval by January 1st right at the timeline right? yep which fits into our budgeting process okay other questions? not a concern of mine but just from your perspective with the governance model you feel like when you skewed the in a place where we're heard yes and I believe the end result to this will be both organizationally and operationally that everyone will be accounted for I think they're being very they're doing their due diligence having been through another process that will fall in as an executive director operations directors hire the operational pieces will start to come in you see a lot of standardization of of resources what happens to the FIS class that's who if we're transitioning stations over there what happens to them when they get in that building? they're owned by the district what's the cost of those operations just generally I mean I'm sorry to put the on the spot on that but yeah I mean there's thousands in the technology it's like buying a computer skip today and outdated tomorrow but thousands not hundreds of thousands for one unit it less than 10,000 but probably close to 10,000 I'm just asking that question because if things don't go right or well and there's a displeasure with that I know there are other financial things for doing that I mentioned here from the withdrawal but and Winooski has benefited huge from a lot of grants to keep a lot of those capital expenditures down over the years from what I've seen so one other comment about the representation one of the conversations we had at the joint survey committee is how to have both the representation and the cost-sharing work and we've essentially gone one vote one town and calls for service which actually I would argue privilege us if you think that we're only 7% of the total calls for service that this group will respond to yet we're an equal voting member with South Burlington for example that means that our voice is going to still be heard very strongly there it's not based on list or even population or a square mile culture has to pull us all out of the water so I think that that value right now of the entering community stay their own voice at the table is protects our voice I think it's appropriate it's glad to hear that the other municipalities are on board with that as well well we were charming we were charming do you notice how many women were on that I have no doubt that's why we sent you first John I mean just great great job this is awesome and this has been talked about for a really long time and it's taken this combination of people to push it across the finish line because I know even when we whispered about it like five or six years ago everybody just I'm not knowing all the history of it just got this exact spring we've talked about this and it's pointless and it's awesome to see it actually getting pushed across which is a testament to there's tons of work to be done and obviously as this rolls out I mean there's just each municipality's got a lot of work to do thank you for all your work and dedication to that also keeping the wheels around here are there questions, concerns from council questions, concerns, comments from the public so this is your chance by the way I mean I think what Jesse was also indicating people if there are concerns they need to be voiced now I'm just going to say that before it because it sounds like this is a train too that's moving forward it is and I guess if there are concerns about the big picture operations of the district it would be very helpful to know them now before the document goes to the to the attorney questions about timeline and dollars and transition those can all be worked out over time it's much more a matter of how we're defining member, how we're setting up the board of directors what the out clause is those kind of charter issues if you have any significant issues I can be more than happy to hear about them for next Wednesday Lawlman X is going to be a warm winner so we can all go out and knock on doors for this you know I like doing that great municipal district union municipal district agreement right so the way it's currently drafted the community will have two years full participation in the joint survey committee i.e. voting on being a voting member of the board of directors to sign the MOU if you don't sign the MOU within two years then you can remain a member but you lose your voting privileges and the idea is at that point if people are hired and the service is being provided if you're not receiving the services or paying for the services you shouldn't be able to vote the same way but we will have two years to approve that memorandum for our customers any other questions, comments, concerns so seeing and hearing none this is the last item of last time I was on this evening's agenda I had an entertainer motion for adjournment so moved motion by Brian Corgan second by Eric any further discussion I'll also favorably say aye those opposed while she carries the meeting is hereby adjourned thank you all very much