 That and Winnowski Wednesdays, I can't wait to start. Did you guys go to New York City last year? Being 6 PM on Monday, May 20th, I'd like to call to order the regular Winnowski City Council meeting. Please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councillor Michael Michael. 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, liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Next up is agenda review. Are there any concerns about order? Any concerns from the audience? All right. Next, we have our public comment. This is a time for any member of the public to speak on any topic that is not included in the agenda already. If you have comments for any of the items on the agenda, please hold those until we get to that item. There's copies of the agenda in the back on the podium and also a sign-in sheet. Any public comment at this time? All right, thank you. We will move next to our consent agenda. On our consent agenda, we have approval of City Council minutes from May 6th, payroll warrant April 21 to May 4th, and warranting May 17, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, PAC appointment, Kevill improvement plan amendment for fire department and Hickok Street water main replacement engineering service agreement, amendment three. Are there any questions or concerns about the consent agenda from Council? Any questions or concerns from the public? So I would entertain a motion to approve the five items of the consent agenda. So moved. Second. Motion by Amy, second by Mike. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Next up is our city update. Thank you. Just a couple of updates tonight. First, I want to thank everyone who came out for the Public Safety Heroes Day yesterday. We had a really beautiful day for that, and I especially want to thank the first responders for everything they give to our community on a 24-7 basis. I also want to thank the city clerk's office for administering the school election on May 7th that those undertakings take a lot of work. So thank you very much. And while we're on the topic, I want to recognize that tomorrow is January 29th anniversary with the city opening. Oh, wonderful. Thank you. This Friday, May 31st, the Vermont Economic Progress Council will be here in the city. They are the state agency that oversees TIF districts. So they do an annual site monitoring visit. So they will be here a week from Friday. We'll talk more about this later on the agenda, but for people who watch the city updates, the airport will be releasing the updated noise exposure map next week. They will be hosting a public meeting at the airport on May 29th from 5 to 7, and then they will be hosting a kind of repeat Winooski-specific meeting the following night, May 30th, here at the O'Brien Community Center from 5 to 7. And that really will be an open house style event. So if people are interested in learning more about the noise exposure map, 5 to 7 May 30th at the O'Brien Community Center. Just a reminder to the council that on June 1st, the Saturday before our next council meeting, we will be having our 2019-2020 policy priorities and strategies retreat between the council and staff's public meeting from 9 to 1 at the OCC. In preparation for that, the staff have been putting together a collection of documents for your review. And our hope is to have that out to you no later than this Wednesday, so you'll have it for a week and a half before the retreat. And then just also a reminder that the Memorial Day Parade is this weekend, Saturday 11 o'clock lineup and 12 o'clock. That's all we have. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is council reports. Can I start with you, Mike? Sure. I had a scheduling conflict for the Public Works Commission with my Little League team. So I was unable to make that meeting. I had reached out to a few people for some minutes to make a report. Just have not. Black communication. So I don't have anything to report on that this week. Downtown Winooski had its first meeting with the new executive director, Meredith Bay-Tayak. And she is here in the room tonight. So mostly what we chatted about was the farmer's market. And that's one of the items on our agenda tonight. So I will let Meredith give that update. But very excited to have her on board. Thank you. Welcome. I have a couple of items. Similar to your scheduling conflict, Hal is going to miss the community services meeting this Wednesday, community services commission meeting. So if any of you are interested in attending in his absence, please let me know. Whenever if you're ever having a scheduling conflict and you're going to miss a meeting, you can just reach out to the rest of the council and we'll try to back each other up on that. I attended the planning commission on the 23rd, where they continued their discussion around our gateway zoning, historic preservation, split zoning, and some smaller details around lot coverage and permit application process for the application process for projects that are exempted from permitting. No decisions were made. They decided they needed more information on all the topics to move forward. And so the next planning commission meeting, they are actually going to work on a work plan to figure out what are the topics that they really want to address with our current zoning and then work through those sequentially to get to a resolution and not get held up, trying to fit three things into one short meeting. That's it for me. The Public Safety Commission was not able to meet, but I was able to continue meeting with the chiefs and discuss emerging issues. That's been helpful to keep that dialogue going. I did attend the Public Safety Heroes Day and with my kids, and it was a very awesome event, well done on getting great weather. I don't know how you did it. It was a really nice time and appreciate all the effort that went into that. And I was able to participate in the first of six sessions kind of building on our Equity Inclusion Summit from April on Winniesheet Equity Dialogue. Was really great people and I came away feeling more energized at the end of a two-hour meeting on an evening than I have in a long time, so I'm really excited for that work to continue here in the city and with those folks. Awesome. Thanks, Jim. Moving on to regular items. Our first item is an approval for an event permit for the Winniesheet Farmers' Market. Welcome, Heather and welcome, Meredith. Good evening. I just want you to know that Meredith's just asked if people say yay, I can also mean actually no. I'm not sure why Meredith just, yes, as we answered. So this is Meredith Bay-Tiak, first and foremost. She's the new executive director of Downtown Winniesheet as Amy was saying. And she brings a lot of experience with communications and public relations and also is a resident of the city. So we were really excited about her enthusiasm and her expertise in doing that outreach that's so important to this position. So we welcome her. And if you have any questions for Meredith, please feel free to ask those before we get into the event permit. Oh, Kelsey, do you want to add anything? I'm sorry, Kelsey is the board chair of Downtown Winniesheet. I brought flowers. I'm kidding me. Because I'm going to be a Farmers' Market vendor. I think they're not a gift. They're just not a bribe. They're not a bribe. Bring the room up. Well, welcome, Meredith. And congratulations on this role. Thank you. I am excited to hear you have someone with your background coming in to help. You know, I attended one of the interview sessions for the hiring. I know a concern of business owners was having somebody who could do outreach and who could really promote businesses and more events and stuff. So I feel like your background is apt for that. And having a local is awesome. I sing on the cake. Yes. Is there anything you want to tell us about yourself? I think that Heather really nailed it, that I'm enthusiastic about the city. And my background is also in public speaking and speaking as a spokesperson. So speaking to people is really my passion. So I feel like this role just combines so many different things. And already just a few things I've been involved with at the city side, which I don't have as much experience in. I've discovered I also like those things. So I think that it's going to be an excellent fit. And I just am already excited. I've only been in the role since May 1. So I'm very, very excited. The board and Kelsey and everyone's been really great on onboarding me. And the farmers market has been a great learning experience in the last couple of days. And I can't wait to just see what else the role and downtown winter ski brings. Awesome, yeah. So shall we transition to the event permit itself? And I have to say Meredith did have to jump right in with the planning of this. So she sent us the event permit application for Muskie Farmers Market to be held on Sunday, starting this coming Sunday, May 26th through October 27th from 10 AM to 2 PM. The downtown organization proposes to hold the event once again this year on the city owned property in front of the Champlain Mill rather than shutting down Muskie Falls way. In addition, there will be closure of nine parking spaces along that first stretch and from Champlain Mill. And the following conditions have been set for permit approval. Downtown Muskie staff will be present to run the market. Set up and breakdown will be completed by downtown staff. And again, like last year, downtown Muskie will communicate with the Downtown Association, which is a different group, to verify use of the bus stop bathrooms is permissible again this year. And we recommend approval for this event. So it sounds very similar to last year. Yeah, it's very similar. Yeah, awesome. Any questions or concerns from the council? I'm just curious about the free meals storage since that's not being provided at the OCC. I just wasn't sure whether that was being ended or if you have another plan for that. We actually were just reached out today. So we haven't figured out if we're even moving forward with that aspect of it. We have to discuss it as whether it's a good fit for the organization and for the market. So that decision hasn't been made yet. So they didn't offer it for the full length of the market. It would only be, I believe mid June to August. So that's something that we need to decide and then we'll figure out, reach out to the appropriate people who might be able to help us out with the storage aspect of that. But yes, that's a big hurdle and we will definitely consider everything before we make a decision. That was also true last year. OCC wasn't available last year. What did they do last year? Did they not have the program the whole year, the whole summer? Someone else. We ran the program from the first market until August and it wasn't super successful in terms of the number of meals given out compared to other sites. It was less than 20 most weekends. So be coordinated with the local business, right? Or someone to help store the meals? Our pop club person would actually store them in her fridge and then they were in a cooler for the day. Any questions or concerns from the public? All right, I would entertain a motion to approve the event permit for Winooski Farmers Market. Second. Motion by Jim, second by Mike. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries, thank you. So we will have Heather stay on board for event permit for Winooski Wednesdays and welcome Alicia from our... So Alicia Finley, the Park and Rec Manager is joining me. The Winooski Department of Parks and Recreation Parks has submitted an application to Winooski Wednesdays free concert series in Rotary Park for the third year this year. The proposed event will be held on the first Wednesday of every month from June through October, 2019. And as in past years, the following requirements will be met. Monkey House will be providing the catering that is pending the liquor control board meeting later if that is approved. The event leaves the same barrier layout as last year for cordoning off the alcohol service area. And Alicia will again do outreach to businesses to encourage cross-promotional take-out dine-in specials for the event days. In addition to that, when the event review team met, we talked about having volunteer crossing guards available for the beginning of the event and at the end of the event. So they haven't been necessary throughout but in terms of liability just to be safe during that rush hour traffic in particular will have people available. All right, and again, I think this sounds very similar to years past. Yeah, it's gonna be very similar to the past two years. Little different bands though. Yes, great, some variety there. Any questions or concerns from council? This is the third year, is it grown? We've been trying to get people to come and table. We get some people but not big commitments, I'd say. We are gonna have like our friends of the New Scheme Memorial Library. They're gonna be there sometimes so of course we're gonna be there and educating people on our 10 minute walk grant as well as programs coming on the city and just any questions people may have, city updates and stuff. I'm working on getting some other people there. I really would love to see our businesses, downtown businesses and restaurants be able to bring something that, you know, they're into there. I think it'd be easier, it doesn't seem that there's a whole lot of takeout brought in so I'm hoping to figure out something different with that upcoming but, yeah, we're trying to grow. No, I've heard nothing but positive things about this and I'm actually looking forward to this year. Good. But that's from people that don't even live in the city of New Ski, I've heard great things about what you're doing and it's a good use of the space so I can do on that effort. Let's keep growing, yeah, you guys have any ideas that's what I'm here for. Any questions or concerns from the public? I have a question. Is this intended to be mostly a family event or? It's open to everybody, family event, yeah, most of the bands that we choose are family oriented bands. So we have a country band I think that's newer this year, I still have someone waiting to hear back for confirmation. I have a younger band that we didn't have before. We're really trying to get more kiddos there than we've been seeing or just our younger youth. We have a whole bunch of kids that hang out at the O'Brien Center so I'm hoping I can stop over there and say why don't you come here instead, it's gonna be a lot better. But yeah, I don't know, we'll be doing the free meals as well, thank you. And it's free to the public, right? Yeah, yeah. And what about the vendors, are we gonna, are you gonna try to implement like samples to get people there to show up, that have the vendors give free samples of their menus? Or? So what we're working on for this year is at each restaurant, I wanna have like a little tiny blurb of like Winooski Wednesdays and then the participating restaurants and the specials that they're doing. That sounds great. Yeah, it was Lance McKee's ideas. He's always thinking. Yeah, you gotta think about it. All right, I would entertain a motion to approve the event permit for Winooski Wednesdays. So moved. Second. Motion by Amy, second by Mike, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries, thank you. Thank you. So next up, we can warn our public hearing on the chapter 29 tree ordinance. Do we have a special language here? You don't have a special language, you're really just opening a public hearing just by way of brief introduction I'll jump if you want to pride. Would you like to give a brief overview for our members of the public? Sure, I can do that. So the tree ordinance that's being considered tonight is a model ordinance that's been developed by Vermont Irving Community Forestry and that's gone through a round of reviews here in the city through the Public Works Commission, staff and city council. And the basic goal of the tree ordinance is to provide some well tested and common mechanisms to make sure that we're doing what we can to protect and maintain urban forest in our city. And it lays out clear expectations for how this urban forest will be maintained into the future and cared for. As we look at rising summer temperatures, the effects of having to have more air conditioning, higher heat related deaths, the ability of our trees to provide this service to us is huge, but it takes 30 years. So starting this now is a way to prepare and lay the foundation for a healthier urban forest here in the city. This ordinance provides provisions for dealing with tree removal, with construction near public trees, with a placement of trees that have to be removed for whatever reason and preparing for things like emerald ash borer and other impacts to the city's forests and just provides some best practices and guidelines for city staff and for the commissions and for the public. Thank you. So we as a council already approved this ordinance. This is a chance to have a public hearing and an offer for anyone who is here attending to share questions or concerns or support thoughts. Anything? I'm assuming no one came here specifically for this item today. What kinds of trees are selected for replacements usually, right? How is that decision made about what kinds of trees? It's a great question. So Vermont Urban and Community Forestry is part of the Vermont Department of Forest Parks and Recreation and they maintain a list of recommended trees and they'll actually provide information about whether it's invasive, if it has known susceptibility to salt, those types of things. So those are pretty well curated lists of urban trees that are appropriate. And then there's a requirement to use arborists or companies with arborists on staff which provides another layer of advising for the city to know which trees would do well and which sites which trees to avoid such as ash trees. There any other items for discussion that you all have? We do have the option of approving this at the end of this public hearing. Sorry, go ahead. I was just gonna say I don't have any because I feel like we've talked about it in previous meetings. I got one question that just popped in my head is if the public person called and asked for a tree arborist to come look at a tree in their own property, privately owned tree, would the city have obliged them? If it's a disease tree, something's eating it. So I'm gonna have John come up as he's coming up. I think the answer would be it depends. It depends on if it's a tree. So our primary focus is the public right of way and the health and safety of the public. So if it were a tree that had obvious, had dangers of falling into the street or onto a sidewalk or onto another property, I think absolutely yes. If it was a tree solely on their property. I can go back. Well, I'm just wondering if the public can reach out and say, you know, I see these bugs eating my tree or woodpeckers eating my tree. Can you just come take a look and give me some advice? Would the city be able to get advice? So I think what we do in that case, since it's not really our regulatory issue because our ordinance speaks more to the right of way, we probably reach out to probably some folks who we know in the tree committee that have some experience to help out basically. We don't really have anyone on staff that has that knowledge, but there's a lot of folks in Manuski that have those skills that are interesting in helping out. So that'd probably be our, you know, what we'd end up doing for those folks. It's good to know, because I have a woodpecker eating my tree. I was gonna say something. It sounds. It sounds. So we're gonna call it. All right, thank you. Seeing and hearing no further public comment, I would like to close this public hearing and entertain a motion to approve the tree ordinance as written. So moved. Second. Motion by Jim, second by Mike. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Tree ordinance adopted. Thank you. We will move on now to our next set of regular items, starting with a discussion item. Jesse is going to brief us on some history of Manuski and the Burlington International Airport. So as we have a number of kind of emerging issues around the airport and the National Guard, I want to provide just a very quick history of our involvement with the airport and the National Guard and give you some documents for some historic context. So in your packet, you have a two page memo from me. You have the history of resolutions that the prior councils have adopted since 2013. You have a press release we recently issued about the upcoming release of the noise exposure map as well as a series of frequently asked questions that were provided to us by the airport and by the Air National Guard. So I'm going to talk for maybe like four or five minutes and then we can open up to questions. So just as a reminder, the Burlington International Airport is a municipally owned airport, is owned wholly by the city of Burlington, located wholly in the city of South Burlington. It's a pretty unusual governance structure but not unique in the country. There are certainly other examples of it. The Vermont Air National Guard is a tenant of the Burlington International Airport. So the decision makers at the airport are the mayor of Burlington and the city council of Burlington. So from a governance perspective, that's how the organization works. So since 2013, past councils have adopted five different resolutions about the governance structure of the airport, about specifically the location of the F-35s at the airport, as well as regional governance, a regional governance discussion. While several of the resolutions resulted in communication and conversation with Burlington and our state and federal delegation, none actually resulted in any change to a decision that had been made previous to those resolutions. On town meeting day 2015, the voters of Winooski were asked, there was a referendum question on the town meeting day ballot to join a lawsuit seeking to prevent the F-35s from being located at the Burlington International Airport. The voters did approve that non-binding resolution and between 2015 and 2016, we spent about $12,000 in legal, in dollars to defend that lawsuit. In August 2016, that lawsuit was dismissed, which officially cleared the way for the F-35s to be located at the airport. So as a result of that, the two main things we've been working on for the last several years are participating in the airport's, what's called the noise compatibility program, which is the effort to mitigate the sound impact from all of the air traffic at the airport on local neighborhoods. So the airport submits grant applications on a regular basis to the FAA that then award mitigation dollars back to the region. Under the current noise exposure map, there were no properties in Winooski that qualified for that noise compatibility program. You saw a lot of effort during that period around the houses directly adjacent to the airport in South Burlington. During that process in the last 18 months to two years, we really pushed to have the noise exposure map updated with the F-35 data before the next noise compatibility program funding request went in. That update to the noise exposure map, which includes the F-35 data, is what will be released next week. Following that release, we hope to continue to work in partnership with the airport as we have been doing on the FAA noise compatibility grant application that may bring additional funds into the city Winooski. So that's the brief history of our relationship and efforts with the airport in the last five or six years, and happy to answer any questions. Obviously, the airport will be here in the city next week, answering questions from us and the public. I have not seen the new noise exposure map, so there's a lot of details we do not know, but in terms of the city's work with the airport, happy to answer any questions about that. So I will just say that this initial item is a precursor to the next one, but let's not get into the next item until we're done with this. I think I appreciate this overview briefing. There's been a lot to catch up on since joining council and understanding the relationship we have with the airport and understanding what efforts have been made in the past and where we're at with that now, with this noise exposure map coming out and trying to focus on addressing that and however that impacts our residents. I think this is a good time for, if you all have questions, if there's anything you're unclear over, want to catch up on about our history working with the airport. I would have liked to see the meetings next week. We're kind of putting the cart before the horse on this topic right now because of the meetings next week schedule. I'd like to have some more information what they're going to speak about next week before we even had this discussion today. To be honest with you, I think it could have been some valued information that we could have learned or found out. Well, we wanted to give you some background before those meetings take place so you have some historical reference going into what we're going to learn from that public meeting. And recognizing that you don't have a crystal ball or the noise exposure maps, what kind of decision points or activities do you see coming for council in the next couple of months after the release, assuming you don't know the content but what are some, what are the things that are on your mind as mayor or as a city manager as you think about what happens after May 30th? So this map is probably going to tell us that properties in Winnieski are impacted. And we will then be in a position where we need to work with Burlington and the airport to advocate when they're applying for that money from the FAA to advocate to get funding for properties here for their mitigation efforts. I think in the information that they've already put out every impacted property is unlikely to receive funding immediately. So there's going to be a prioritization. They've said they're going to start with properties closest to the airport first. And so that's something that we're going to have to work through with residents who are impacted and looking for help there. I don't know if they're more technical. No, I think that's the number one kind of decision point for the council moving forward. Technically the mayor of Burlington submits the application to the FAA. So there's no formal role for the Winnieski City Council to provide or for the Winnieski public to provide feedback. I would strongly suggest that we provide it regardless of whether it's required or not and that that guidance is around what kinds of compatibility programs we want to see. So for example, you likely saw the story I think it was in seven days about this doesn't mean that any homes will be torn down. That statement is a policy decision looking to not tear down homes. I think we probably agree with that statement and don't want to see good affordable homes torn down. But there is room to advocate for what kind of mitigation we do want to see. Do we want to see sales assistants? Do we want to see insulation and new windows and air conditioning units funded? Do we want to see apartment buildings funded before single family homes funded? Those kind of prioritization things. I think it's, I would recommend that we put forth a statement about that. And then of course the other part is that the noise exposure map will be out for a 30 day comment period. So there will also be the question of whether we want to individually provide individually as a community comment or whether we want to send some kind of if the council wants to send some kind of unified public comment in. But no, but to Mike's point, we're not asking for action on any of those items tonight. This was really just table setting before we have a series of additional conversations. Okay. And I think one kind of questions I keep jumping into one question about that kind of follows from that is in terms of governance and how you split the roles between city manager and the mayor. Is there, I know that we don't have a formal governance position at all but how is that broken out in this council and previous councils for what role the mayor takes on what role the city manager takes on in having these discussions formally and informally with the airport? That's an excellent question. So I think how historically how we've handled it and this is not, there's no policy on this but how the former mayor and I handled this is that the mayor handles the conversations with the mayor like elected official to elected official communicate. And then I handle most of the discussions with the airport staff, the operations folks. I think this will get a little more blurry because there's more of a public comment period that is more policy-based than operations-based. So I see it as my role to really present to you all the information that's coming forward, the opportunities for feedback but then it's up to you what do you want that feedback to be? And I would say I think we mentioned this before like Jesse and I had met with the airport staff to advocate to get that Winooski specific meeting and so efforts like that can continue as well. Thank you both for the effort that you've already put in. Appreciate it. Do we know when the mailers are going out? I know they were at the print shop last week. I would have said they would have gone out on Friday or Saturday. Yeah, I don't know. But I don't know when they're hitting mailboxes. So staff also worked with the airport. They are gonna be mailing out like a flyer about these meetings and with some FAQ information for all residents in the city. And translations about the meetings. And thanks to Paul Sarn got the airport to fund that initiative. That was great. I had a discussion today with Lieutenant Clark from the air yard. And I'm reading some of the past resolutions here. And I don't know where this came from or what point of the testing between the F-16 and F-35 noise level work. But if I understood her right today, the F-16s need their afterburner to take off. And that's where the noise, the most noise comes from. She has stated to me that when the F-35s take off, 95% of their time taken off will not be used in afterburners. So, and she did tell me that they are not as loud as the F-16s during that period. So when they're doing their testing, cause I'm reading this revised environmental impact statement, I'm not sure what part of the test they were testing to have that statement put in this. But according to the air guard today, when I talked to them, they said 95% of the time that those afterburners won't be used. So they are actually quieter than the F-16 when they take off. So that's some information I found out today that I wanted the public to know. And I thought it'd be a good statement to use right now. I have talked to, that may well be true. I mean, it probably is regarding afterburners. I think that's another point of advocacy that we can do is advocating against the use of afterburners. I've spoken with several former mayors in Winieski. And as I understand it, there was a time when the F-16s did not run afterburners as often. And then they suddenly began to, and it really increased the impact on residents because their mission changed. And so they needed to start using them. So that's something that we could see a different, that could change in the future. And that's something that we would want to be in communication on. Yep, I agree. Jesse, just getting back to your point about how there's this period of time where they can go after money. Do we know in that next open enrollment or what the phrase was that you used for that? Great application, good question. So the grant application follows the federal fiscal year timeline. So I believe the grant has to be submitted in August or September for a year end of September 30th. And then the funds are awarded early in the federal fiscal year that starts October 1. The reality is that then the FAA has, I think it's 180 days to review the grant applications and then another period of time to award the dollars. So the earliest dollars will be seen in the region is fall of 2020. And that's my understanding from the airport, that's there's no faster way for them to do it. And then I think the airport's plan then is to submit an application every year moving forward. So that would be a rolling amount of money in theory if it was awarded coming into the community. So of course also Williston and South Burlington who are also affected. In the map location. Determines priority for funding. Should I open to questions, comments from the public? You're Mr. Myers, right? Yes. I think as far as a statement from someone at the air guard that they're not gonna use after orders 95% of the time that's great but I think we have to go with the environmental impact statement for that. And as far as monies for improvements for new windows and insulation, do we know if there's going to be contractors determined by the feds or by the airport that people have to use or you're gonna be able to use your own contractors? That's a great question. I don't know the answer to that. Okay. I think that will be a question for to raise at the hearing that they are doing next week, the airport themselves. Oh, I do have another question about that. If somebody goes to the meeting at the airport, do you know what the parking deal is? Do you have to pay to park in a parking garage? You can get free voucher that night. When you go into the meeting, get a voucher, okay then. Sure. I actually wanted to speak about the resolution that's coming next. Can you hold for that section? I will hold. Thank you. Thank you. Are you as well as Amber? Well, I think I want to wait to say something because I was curious what resolution it was. Yeah. At this point. We will come to that next. I might say something then too, but I'm Fiona Griffin. I live in Muskie, have been here for 10 years or so. And I found myself feeling really emotional just talking about the history coming up on this and thinking about the prospects for our town and looking around here, I see a very specific representation of Muskie and a lot of faces missing here. And I feel a call to advocate for all of the people who can't just move out of Muskie and to really raise this to the level of looking at the equity of where this airport is. Yeah, I knew there was an airport when I moved here. No, I didn't know there was jets. No, I didn't sign anything. And yes, the sound has gotten way worse. And I sort of can move, although we all know it's not affordable to live in this area, but a lot of people can't. And it would be nice to not get woken up every night by planes and maybe insulation and that those would do that. But it's also nice to be outside and not to have air conditioners running and everybody kind of hold up in their houses. So I don't know, to me there's only so far that the remediation goes. And I just really worry about the impact that noise will have on this community and I agree with sort of trusting the environmental impact statement. We haven't heard these planes and I think there's a really good reason why they haven't flown over here. I just feel really, yeah, if they're not loud then why don't they just buy them over and show us how not loud they have heard. Thank you. I'm Marguerite Edelman. I'm a Muskie resident but also the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. And I think I have two concerns and two questions related to this. Everything I've read about the FAA and noise mitigation said it's not effective. Okay, not effective. So you're gonna get money from noise mitigation but you're still going to get money. That concerns me. The second is I grew up next door here and I've been partially deaf all my life. And I hope that there's some money in those for the schools because children can't afford to lose time hearing in the classroom. They can't, especially new Americans whose language skills are not going to be great. So I hope there be some way that the city can regroup some money is to make sure at least the school gets some sound grouping even if it's not effective because that's where learning takes place and it's just too important for this next generation. And I do agree that we don't have everyone represented here that we need to have represented but there will be a what effort this week Jimmy here to get notices out who we're working together to get notices out to encourage people in the community to go to either the airport hearing or the hearing over here at the O'Brien Community Center and to have their voices heard to go because it should have been a public hearing. It shouldn't just be listed as an open house. There's an opportunity to make a statement to these individuals who've put together this study and to have those statements included in the final report. So we need to make an effort to get as many people out as we possibly can to have their voices heard and to get the information that they need and to ask the questions that they want answered. Well, thank you for your efforts to also help publicize this which we are aiming for, you know, wholeheartedly the more people that voice their opinions, the better. Don't quote me on this, but I feel like there can be some preference for schools in certain types of. So public building, my understanding is public buildings do get preference within a certain contour line. So schools obviously would fit into that. Yeah, so I don't know the details but that is something that we have heard. Well, and I would encourage New City Council to the city administration to work with the school directors to make sure that they are in the loop on this. And they've been left out of the loop or chosen to be out of the loop by numerous things in the past. And they're gonna start undergoing this huge project at the school. So let's make sure the possibility of some money to help with sound insulation there is dealt with before they get too far down the road. Maybe we'll have a little less costly project if we can get some money for this. Any other public comment before we move to our next? Any other questions about background before we move to our next item? All right, so let's move to our next item which is this airport resolution. Again, this is on for discussion or approval. So this resolution is based on, there's a resolution in the state house right now. The legislative session ended, right? No, they're going on. They're continuing on. Okay, last I checked this resolution, it is in the General Housing and Military Affairs Committee. So it made it through the house. I think it's sitting with the Senate now. So it hasn't been approved at that level. The city of South Burlington has it on their agenda today or tomorrow, whenever their council meeting is tonight. It is slightly different the resolution. Yes, and so this resolution came to us from a resident, how our own member of council and Rev is supporting it in the house or has supported in the house already. And the gist of it is that we are opposed to the basing of a nuclear weapons delivery system in the state of Vermont. Is there any other detail you would address me? Nope, it was a resolution that was brought to our attention from a number of concerned residents and through Councilor Colston or State Rep Colston. And so it's before you for your consideration. And I guess I will just point out that the difference, so South Burlington discussed this at their meeting two Mondays ago and it's back on their agenda tonight. And the amendment that they are discussing tonight is changing the language from resolution, so the current title is resolution opposing the basing of any nuclear weapon delivery system in the state to the new language is resolution opposing the banning, or sorry, resolution opposing the basing of any nuclear weapons in the state of Vermont. So this talks about the delivery system, that talks about the actual weapons. So before we dig into the content, I wanna first just like this is the first resolution that we are considering. And so to be clear, a resolution in this instance is a statement of position. There's no real teeth behind it. As Jesse has said in the past, they have opened up conversations, but they have not resulted in any action. I think that's important to keep in mind as we consider the, you know, as these are put forth as things we wanna consider. If we are taking one up, is it, are we using our time in an effective way? Like do we think it's important to make the statement essentially? In addition to the resolutions around the airport which were included in the previous item, we also approved one in the fall that was against nuclear proliferation. Marguerite was here for it. You supported the nuclear treaty ban that was passed in the United Nations and that is working now towards ratification. So you supported sending letters to all of our legislators asking and encouraging the United States to sign that nuclear treaty ban. So thank you. I would add that to just to the context of the history because this also relates to nuclear. There are many direct references here to the F-35. This is not a resolution specifically opposed to the F-35, but it is sort of wrote in there in the nuclear capability. But as you also have seen in the previous packet with the F-35 FAQs that the air guard shared with us, they are saving clearly that the F-35s that we have here are not intended to be nuclear capable and we won't have that essentially the hardware for that. I don't want to say too much more. Is it possible they have the resolution projected for? Absolutely. Excellent suggestion. We'll just try to reject her. You want me to shut this window so it doesn't flop? Or just let me know if it's bothering people? I think in the past when we had taken these up, it's been kind of a discussion, asking questions, although there's no one here to answer those, but also just to kind of share what we're thinking about this. That's where I like to kind of jump in because I'm looking at the resolution here. And this resolution is talking about a whole different fighter, it's not a fighter jet, they're talking about an F-35 bomber. Because from what I gathered from the Air National Guard, that the F-35 that's going to be based here isn't configured to be used as a nuclear weapon bomber. And that's, I think the language from this resolution to what the Air Guard has repeatedly said that there is no way that they're doing that because their mission isn't nuclear. It's their difference. If their mission was nuclear, then those nuclear weapons would be here and we'd have a different facility at the Air Guard, but their mission isn't nuclear. They have a different mission, they're a fighter jet, not a bomber plane. So the language on this resolution, the way I'm reading it, and I don't know if it's just me reading it, they're talking about a different plane all together because the ones coming to Burlington, and again, this is the facts coming from the Air Guard that I talked to Lieutenant Clark today, they're not configured to carry those nuclear bombs, if you let me unlock my phone. They don't have the necessary hardware to make them nuclear capable. And the F-35A will receive an F-35A Block 3F jets. Are the F-35A Block 3F jets nuclear capable? No, they're not. They're a fighter jet. If this is coming from the Air Guard, this is what I got emailed today. The ones in Burlington, the jets will not have hardware necessary for a nuclear mission. And unless their mission changes, then I think maybe this resolution comes into play, but right now their mission's clear, they're a fighter jet. They protect the eastern seaboard. And to me, again, I'm gonna say it one more time, the language in this resolution is talking about a different plane all together from what I got in this email today. I see you shaking your head in the back. Do you have something to add? Let's pause it, we're not to the... Let's do council discussion first. Okay, I'm sorry, Christine, I just... I think, and so I've been reflecting on this too, and I think I hear that point that we're potentially making a resolution about a situation that can't pop, that won't exist as of the end of this year, but I don't think it would change the underlying resolution that this is not an appropriate community to base a nuclear weapons delivery system, whether or not that is an imminent or a tenure down the road situation. I don't see that that context will change for me personally and for the people that we're representing here. So I do think that the intent of the resolution is really clearly around the weapons delivery system. If there's F-35s that are coming here in a couple months, won't have that hardware capability, then this resolution just says that we don't want them to be further modified in the future or the mission to change where they could be added. If, in fact, the F-35s that are coming here would have that capability, this resolution is very timely and appropriate. And either way, I don't think that the text of the actual thing that's being resolved here would be different if we knew that the bombers could be modified to become nuclear bombers or not. So that said, I think the resolution intent is there and I think also the statements that back up that intent are perfectly in line with the resolution passed a little more than a year ago, stating the opposition to the basing of the F-35, the Burlington International Airport for the various reasons that are reiterated in this resolution and other texts. So I think this council has, past members of this council have repeatedly affirmed that statement because of the way that the decision was made and so I also don't feel bad about having F-35 text be in this resolution because I think it just affirms and supports positions already taken in this community and by our voters and by our counselors. Amy, thoughts? I agree with a lot of what Jim said. I think what is concerning for me is the idea that they don't have the hardware now, but that doesn't mean that they couldn't get in the future. And I think that the way this resolution is written would just stop the potential of that in the future. Shall we move to open it up to the public here? You're first up. It's up to you. You're by the microphone, you can join. Okay, great. So I live in Burlington, just over the bridge and I have a ton of friends and family that live in Muskie, so I know they couldn't all come. So I wanted to be sure to be here and support this resolution because I think I understand what you're saying and I really get that and we've done a lot of research and said, yeah, at this point we don't have to worry. There's a lot of other reasons why this jet, the F-35, is gonna be a big problem for us in terms of noise and safety and everything else, but setting that aside and just focusing on the nuclear piece. The thing that keeps coming back again and again around all of the evidence is that enemies don't really care whether this jet that we have here is already nuclear capable or not and whether we have nuclear bombs sitting here yet or not, they see this as the delivery that could become nuclear capable and that makes us a target. So the danger is that if we sort of say, oh, we don't have to worry about it now, let's wait and see and if the jet gets upgraded or they do change the hardware or they start to put in bunkers out here, I don't know how they would possibly make our airport secure, but the point is that in the meantime, we do have a jet that's identified around the world as potentially nuclear capable and so all of a sudden, if there was tragically some sort of nuclear war that got started or some sort of attack happening, Burlington would be on the list of this is where those jets live and we're gonna take them out just like we don't care where the bullets are, we care where the guns are and get rid of the delivery system. So I think it's a current issue right now because we've started really seeing how serious it is and we need to look into the future and think about different scenarios, but at this moment, if you as a body could say, we just don't want to have that possibility in Vermont, I think it does make us a little bit safer. If you folks were able to pass this and South Burlington is able to move it forward tonight or soon, we're continuing to put pressure on the city council that are my representatives in Burlington to say we really want to see this and if the legislature in the next week is able to pass this, it sends a really strong message to our senators, to Leahy and Bernie, to our governor. So I think it's in a way it's symbolic in a way it's just saying we want to tell you we're worried, we're concerned and we want to keep our community as safe as possible. And I'm really glad that we're all going to be working on the noise issues too, but tonight you have an opportunity to do something really, really, I think that's good for this community and for our area. So thanks for taking it up. Thank you. Thank you. Marguerite? I want to piggyback everything you said and just say because you've already passed the resolution, the UN Nuclear Treaty ban, this to me is the next logical step to go ahead and pass this for the future. Maybe it doesn't affect us now, but I think we need to send this message. Nuclear weapons don't make us safer and make us more secure. They scare us all after that. And you know, we need as a community and as a state and as a country to stand up to this, the amount of money we're spending on them and the threat that they bring to the world. So while maybe it doesn't affect us now, it can in the future. From what I understand, we wouldn't even know if they changed the mission. They're not going to tell us that. That's top secret information. So at least by passing this resolution, we're taking a step. We're saying we don't want them here. We're saying that we don't think this makes us safer. Thank you. I wanted to also. Could you please say your name for the next? My name is James Lees. I live in South, South Burlington. And I agree with a counselor that the F-35 is not yet configured to carry the nuclear bombs. In fact, none of them around, none of the F-35s are, not just the ones coming to Vermont. They haven't quite finished upgrading the system. In fact, there's a lot of defects with this system and they're still trying to get it to the point where it's safe to operate. But at some point, all of them will be capable of being upgraded and they will be upgraded. And what the military has said is they won't let us know. So it could happen without notice. And even if the plane was only designed and couldn't ever be upgraded to carry these nuclear bombs, and they are designed to carry two of these specifically designed nuclear bombs which are low yield or variable adjustable yield. So the nuclear explosion can be dialed down or dialed up. That's this new bomb that they've got. And they consider it to be an especially usable bomb. Bomb because they can dial it down to a low yield and maybe it won't provoke an entire worldwide nuclear war. But we know from World War I, which was started by a person with a pistol, that these force can escalate. I think it's very important that Vermont take a stand and that the city governments take a stand in opposition, especially because the basing in a city is illegal under the military's own law. You can't, even if it was just to protect the Eastern Seaboard, even if it was just purely defensive, you shouldn't be basing that, you can't legally be basing that in a city intermingled with civilians because it creates the situation of shielding, human shielding of the weapons. Intermingling violates the principle of distinction. Military is different from criminals because they protect, their job is to avoid harming civilians. Avoid harming civilians. And this puts the civilians right as a target. So no matter what, it shouldn't be based in a city, but to put a first strike stealth nuclear bomber that is eventually gonna be capable of dropping these new bombs that have been designed for this particular delivery system in a city really puts that city at risk. Go to the entire three cities of Burlington, South Burlington, Winooski and the four other towns that are around the airport at risk. And it shouldn't be based in such a location. Military equipment is supposed to be separated from densely populated areas. Thank you. Thank you. My opinion is that we should not, we should not allow the military to manipulate us any more than we would if I think we can move us all to have you pass this resolution. Get ahead of the eight ball. Do it preemptively. It's not gonna harm anything. Let's just get it on the books. That's fine. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wanted to speak for public comment? I just wanna add, I think, somewhere in the resolution it mentions Senator Sanders. And I just think about the narrative that he's spreading worldwide throughout the country, sort of anti-military spending, anti-nuclear armaments. And I feel like this is sort of, again, it's a message of saying, yes, we agree with you, Bernie. That's why we keep electing you to be the senator of this beautiful state. So this is part of the deal. Let's do it at home. Let's not go out on the big stage and say one thing and then fully support something that seems to me completely in contradiction to his message that he's running on. So that's just one more reason I guess that this makes sense to me. Thank you. I'm Bob Ackman, and I also live in Wienersky, and along with Senators up there is something about Senator Leahy. And both of our Vermont Senators are speaking out against the proliferation of nuclear weapons. It seems that this is the right place to start. Smallest, beautiful grassroots movement for us. I think it behooves Wienersky to pass this. Thank you. Anyone else? So I would turn back to the council if you have, for the thoughts you wanna share or reactions to what's been said. I'm on offense here. Then old Senator Leahy endorsed the F-35s, but he doesn't endorse his delivery system. So if we vote for this resolution, we're saying we don't want the delivery system, but the F-35s are coming. We can't stop those from coming, no matter how many town halls we have. But with Leahy and this resolution, I understand that I wouldn't want nuclear weapons in our state either. And I don't think they're saying that here. They're not gonna store nuclear bombs in Burlington International Airport because the facility, the air guard base is not set up or secured enough for that purpose. Now, any plane can be configured to carry a nuclear bomb, F-16s can be. So with that said, any vehicle can become a delivery system, not just a plane. So when I see Leahy's name on this resolution, I understand that we're trying to get the nuclear, I'm not for nuclear arms, don't get me wrong. I think that what we're trying to do with the treaty is a good move towards humanity. But with that said, I think people have forgotten our history a little bit of the air guard. The F-16s turned around a Russian bear bomber in the mid-80s that was coming over our airspace. Without those planes right here, they were the first to respond. We had a terrorist act at 9-11 in New York City. The Green Mountain boys were there in seven minutes. That's wrong, they were there in a few hours. No, they were there in seven minutes. They weren't there in a few hours. Okay, then I'm misquoted then, okay? So can you inform me then on your knowledge of it? If they were scrambled in there within 90 minutes, it was well after the attack, it already occurred. Okay. So if anyone lived through that attack, I know that there were jets flying around. They weren't there within seven minutes. So please don't spread that propaganda because it's not true. No, I read it somewhere. You are. No, I read it somewhere. Where did you read it, sir? Please de-escalate here. We can agree that seven minutes may not be true. They responded in some amount of time. I thought I read it somewhere, so if I'm misquoted. But it's not true. Please. We're saying that they did respond in some amount of time. We don't know how much time, but we know that they responded to that incident. That's what I have to say about the F-35s coming here. I'm not for the delivery system, but I'm for the F-35s being here. Because I think it pumps a lot of money in our economy. They provide a lot of jobs, not just for the air guard, but for contractors as well. So in after tonight's discussion, I came in with my mind made up that I was voting no on this. But now you're making me think about it, and I'm not, I'm gonna be honest with the council. I'm not gonna be ready to vote on this tonight, because I think I need some more time to do some more research and think about it. Because just because of the discussion here tonight. But I don't know if that's even possible, so. Shifting a little bit, Mike, and openness, I appreciate that. And I'm just, I'm curious to know what, what you think would be the negative impact of passing this resolution. For me it feels, again, even if you are pro-35s, like you said, unfortunately, in my opinion, we probably don't have a lot of power to make change. However, it's symbolic, it's saying we don't want to include our weapons. We're concerned about our safety. We want our Congress congressional delegation to really be consistent with what they're saying on the national level, what they're saying here. But what would be the negative outcome that you were concerned about that would be from wanting to pass this step? I think it's just another attack on the F-35s. And I think if this resolution gets passed, it's just one more step that the opponents of the F-35s will have to start. What's the next step? When does it end? The Green Mountain boys are here to protect us. They're not our enemies. They're not here to disrupt our lives. Yeah, it takes two minutes for them to go over the skyline. And it is, you know what, you're right, it is disruptive. But if you were here when I was a little boy and the F-4s came over, I don't think we'd be having this discussion because the F-4s were, oh, outer. And you can actually smell them when they flew over my house. But times have changed. We're going from a plane that was the technologies in 1970 to a 21st century plane, the carbon imprints less. For the environmental people. You know, I think I don't know if passing this resolution, if I endorse this resolution, if I'm putting my name on something that, okay, what's the next level? Let's see how we can chip away at it to make sure that the government hears us. I think they hear us. And I also think that the Green Mountain boys' job is more important to protecting us than some of the litigation that's been going on. So can I ask a question? Because I look at the text of the resolution kind of going here at this point. I mean, the text is really about opposition to the nuclear weapon delivery system. And so if an F-35 did come here and you learned it was nuclear capable, is that okay for our community to have a nuclear capable F-35 three miles away? I think that's what it comes down to me, is that I agree that F-35s are gonna come, but if they come nuclear capable, I think we do owe it to the community to take a stand and say that this is not a position that we wanna see ourselves in having this nuclear strike force in our backyard. And I guess I'm wondering if that distinction, like if you knew that they were nuclear capable, would that change your perspective on the resolution? If it does, and the resolution stands whether or not they are. And I see the concern, and I'm sure that that's part of it, but I don't know that that lets us off the hook for making a stand on this issue around nuclear weapons delivery systems. I respect that. But like I stated earlier, the F-16s can be capable. And I think this would have equally applied, if they were still here, I would pass this resolution in a heartbeat if they were gonna be nuclear weapons because of that bringing that level of war making into our community. And I have to believe the only time that that mission would change for the air base would be if God forbid something around the world happen that was on a serious notion of total nuclear World War III, so to speak, scenario. I think that's the only time that the mission has never changed for the air guard. It's always been a fighter's fighting. And I don't, in my personal opinion, I don't ever see it changing from that. But like I said before, I worry about putting my name on something that could be detrimental to the Green Mountain boys because I have friends that work there. I've had friends that had careers there. I've had friends that their lives were deeply impacted because of the skills and the training. They would have been nowhere in life if it wasn't for the air guard. And I believe that I support my military because that's who I am. And I understand the concerns. But for tonight, I think I need more time to, I mean, it's, I'm on the fence because of the discussions I hear the people, they're saying, but I need to know because the language in this resolution to me isn't stated, right? Compared to what the air guard is stating. So there's two. Mike, I think like what I'm hearing here is, and what I read as well, this resolution to me is not, it doesn't directly oppose the basing of the F-35s and it doesn't directly oppose the guard. I think you're right that in the grand scheme of things, this is a piece, this is an effort to oppose the F-35 basings, but that's not actually what we're saying here. This language is actually just directed at facing nuclear weapons systems in Vermont. And having that piece of information from the air guard, where they're saying the F-35s currently will not be equipped for that. Like that is true right now. So for me, this resolution is actually, in the content of the resolution, it's two separate issues. I support your feelings about what does this mean politically and whether or not you want to be aligned with that, that absolutely makes sense. But I think the language here is not, because this is not an opposition directly to the F-35, I don't see a disconnect there. Could I? Can we? Sure. I just want to say the two individuals who pointed out that as long as we're on a list of nuclear capable sites, we're on a target list. And a lot of us in the room remember the Cold War and how many targets there were throughout the country. I grew up in Denver, Colorado and was doing the duck and cover drills. And I remember those days. And making the connection between, it's as if we're saying we're open to hiding our nuclear capability in a populated area. It makes me feel as bad as when I hear of someone saying, oh, we're going to base our troops in a hospital. Well, we are basing these weapons in the hospital because of the radius of the harm of weaponry nowadays. So by saying we don't want nuclear weapons here, that's what we're saying. We don't, I don't care if two years from now, another big company comes up with a perfect delivery system that's a missile and they want to have a missile silo in Burlington Airport. I don't care what it is, it's just, we don't want nuclear weapons. That's what this proposal is about. And I would just quickly add that last year, the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom bought two Habakasha here from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And Habakasha are atomic bomb survivors who spoke at four high schools, UBM and St. Michael's College. And that is available on CCTV under the Habakasha stories. You just need to listen to those stories. We forgot the destruction that's caused by nuclear weapons. Shigeiko, the woman who came from Hiroshima is a Hiroshima maiden who underwent, I don't know how many surgeries to correct her face and everything. So the repercussions of nuclear war and nuclear devastation are not just dropping the bomb and it's over, we ended the war or whatever the case may be. They have repercussions go on forever for generations. I don't think passing a resolution that really talking about nuclear weapons and not specifically, you know, the F-35 Navy column nuclear capable, but this is really to me a resolution that is saying we're not going to support this in humanity happening again in our world. I just wanna say, Mike too, because I really respect what you're saying about their jobs and their technical training because I think that's all really, really valid. And I personally am glad they're here and feel like it's important for us to show our respect for the guard and their hard work. I don't think this, to me, this doesn't put any kind of a bad name on the guard at all. I think the timeliness of this and being able to join HAL and so many other legislators, our senators in the state and hopefully South Burlington this evening to say together we're all looking in a very focused way about how to keep the state safer and the guard also does that for us in their own way with their jobs and what they're doing and we want them to stay and have jobs and be safe along with us. So to me, it goes together but the resolution in terms of being able to vote and pass it tonight, I think it would, it raises your voices around that specific issue separate from the other things you're talking about that are really important. And now is the moment, I think it really is an important moment to say let's take a stand here, let's have our voices heard about this and join so many others who are saying the same thing. So I just wanted to say I appreciate what you're telling us also. Thank you. I think I heard where your positions are. I feel like we are ready to move to a vote on this. Thank you. I would entertain a motion to approve the airport resolution. So moved. Okay. Motion by Jim, second by Amy. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Nay. Motion carries. Did you vote? I thought I only had two for tiebreaker. So it has to be three votes. Like I said before, I wasn't ready to move on. It was okay to have a not, what's the word I want? unanimous. Unanimous, thank you. To have a not unanimous vote. I just want to say thank you to everyone who came out to weigh in on this. It's really great to see public opinion on resolutions and any other issues. So thank you for coming to the meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, it's good conversation because I had my mind made up coming in here and this is what the process is about, right? Conversation, if we can't talk and litigate stuff like this, then what's the point, right? So I appreciate you guys coming in and I appreciate hearing what you said too. Thank you. All right, let's move to our next item, discussion of the Chittenden Solid Waste District budget. Certainly, we can hold on that move to our next item for now. Jesse, should we move to the appointments? We'll hold on that. You can move to the appointments. Bryn is here. Oh, if you'd like. I think you got a haircut or something. You look different. Okay, so because our guest is not here from CSWD, we will hold on that. We will move to item F, approval, appointment of Bryn Oakleaf as the Winooski representative to the Chittenden Solid Waste District and Candice Holbrook as the alternate. Just to, sorry, Bryn. I did receive communication from Candice today. She is actually speaking at the Burlington City Council meeting tonight, so it has a conflict, but both Bryn and Candice have served us very well in these roles over the past couple of years. So I think it's, we staff recommend they continue to provide this expert representation for us. Since we have some new members here, do you want to do like a quick three minutes about what it is that you do in this role? Sure. So as a Winooski representative, I, and I think there might have been a job description shared, a role description shared with you all, but in brief, I represent Winooski's interests as it relates to the budget that Sarah will present on tonight, project proposals, access to services, and build out of cap of the infrastructure, the capital that the towns that are part of the district all pay into. So I am looking forward to continuing another year as a representative for Winooski and may also be exploring a potential executive board position if the council here tonight supports me continuing on in that role. I've been the Winooski representative, I took over that in 2017, it was the first year I started, so I've been doing it the last couple of years. My previous professional day job was working for the agency of natural resources in the Solid Waste District, or Solid Waste Management Program. So I have some statewide knowledge and experience as it relates to the universal recycling law and the mandates that are passed down from the state houses, it relates to the landfill bands, things like that. So happy to answer any of the questions. Thank you for your service thus far and for your continued interest. Any questions from council? Can I add one more note of commentary and this is not about Bryn's expert service, but it's a little bit of a selfish plug. So CSWD is what we call in the state of Vermont a municipal union district. Union municipal district, yeah. So in Vermont, in the absence of county government, really we have state government and local government and not strong county government in the middle. There are these union municipal districts where municipalities come together to essentially form a new municipality to provide a certain service delivery. So in other parts of the country, the services provided by CSWD would be provided by a government entity at the county or local level. So Bryn, appointing Bryn to this position is really your governance voice at that table. And I bring this up tonight to say the next conversation about regional dispatch is a very similar governance structure where communities have come together to provide a service at a broader level than just the municipal level. So just a little orientation context. Thank you. Questions or consent from the public? All right. I would entertain a motion to approve the appointment of Bryn O'Cleef as Lewinowski representative to the Chittenden Solid Waste District and Candace Holmrock to serve as the alternate. Solved. Second. Motion by Mike, second by Amy. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. Thanks, Brian. Thank you, Ben. So we can move to our next item, discussion of Chittenden County Public Safety Authority briefing from Jesse. Great. So I am going to ask the chiefs to come up as well. They can get off their phones. They're trying to do work during our meeting. You can shut, Mike, if that, you can shut that if you want. If you want to shut that. No, I'm just asking if it's the noise outside the bar on anybody. Good evening, Mike. Chiefs. Welcome. So just to be clear, there are no votes tonight on this. There's no action that's needed, but this is a conversation that we've been having for a number of years, and the region as a whole has been having for decades. So as we consider actions that we may bring to you in the next several months, we want to give you a briefing on the Chittenden County Public Safety Authority. So I'm going to walk through this. Gentlemen, jump in when I say something wrong. This is a presentation that the three of us have worked on together. So just to start, what is Winooski Dispatch currently? And apologies if you all already know this. So our dispatch team currently sits within our police department supervised by Chief Hebert. It is operational 24-7365. So every moment of every day, we have a dispatcher who is sitting downstairs in the police department, responding to calls for service and dispatching our officers. They handle about 10,000 calls a year and provide about 95% of the administrative support to Rick and his team. They also are that 24-7 open window coverage here at City Hall. So there's always somebody at the police station to greet visitors. One of the very important things I take away from how we currently are staffing this is that there is only ever one, well, not only ever, but vast majority of the time there is one dispatcher on duty. And what that means from a staffing management perspective and a human resources perspective is that individual is carrying the radio into the kitchen with them to get lunch. They're taking the radio into the bathroom. They're not able to do great professional developments, webinars on shift. They don't have a lot of backup and support from other people who they work with on a day-to-day basis. And in treating our staff as humans, I don't think that's the best staffing model. Anything you wanna add to? No, you're so hot. I'll make him say something about you. So this is a very high-level summary. There's a lot of information on a website on the last slide where you can really dig into this. The point of this slide is to say that regional dispatch has been talked about in our enchanting counties since the 60s. All of the communities coming together and staffing to provide essential dispatch location. That moved forward quickly in 2016 when what's called a joint survey committee, which is a committee of professionals from a number of different municipalities coming together to consider the launch of this union municipal district. The joint survey committee came together in 2016. Chief Audie sat on that for a while. Ray Coffee sat on that to consider what it would mean to actually stand up on a union municipal district. The result of that study was to create an agreement for a union municipal district. State statute outlines how that's done. An agreement to create that entity was drafted, was approved by the Attorney General's office. That agreement was passed by the council at the time and then was brought to the voters of Winooski and six other communities on town meeting day in 2018. So this was the request made in 2018 to authorize the city to enter into the agreement to form that union municipal district to provide dispatch services. The real purpose at that time that the joint survey committee identified and the council's proved was the vision of this organization being what we call a PSAP in the state, which is a public safety answering point. Yes, that's good. Thank you. PSAP is where 911 calls are taken. So operationally, what happens right now is if we're sitting here in city hall, we call 911, it goes to one of the six PSAPs that the state operates, likely to Shelburne, who then takes the information, says this is a Winooski call and redirects it to our dispatcher downstairs, who takes the information and then dispatches out the public safety entity. So the thought is with this new structure that organization becomes the PSAP, starts taking 911 calls, and the same humans are both taking the calls and dispatching the calls. There is a belief that that can save some seconds associated with rolling crews in an emergency situation. There's also a belief that a regional dispatch center would greatly improve our ability to provide mutual aid and dispatch during times of crisis. Chief Audie can talk about what happens when there's an accident on the interstate and we have a number of departments responding and the lack of coordination of that response. Obviously, if we had a regional system, there would be more than one dispatcher on at once. So there would be more professional development opportunities, more of a career ladder, more backup, more quality assurance and technical assistance, a better work environment for employees. So the results of that tummying day ballot were Burlington Colchester Milton, South Burlington, Williston and Winooski passed that ballot item. Shelburne did not. So as a result of that passage, the CCPSA was officially stood up as a union municipal district. That charter outlines that the board members, so it's essentially now a new city with a board of directors or a city council. The board of directors per the charter is made up of the town and city managers, which was very intentional because the dispatchers are key to keeping our staff safe and connected. The managers felt like it was really important to continue that operational link with the one exception being if it's a strong mayor form of government, they can designate somebody other than mayor. So in Burlington, Chief Locke, who's the fire chief serves on the board. So since tummying day 2018, this is the work the board has been doing. We convened, we issued an RFP for a consultant to develop an implementation plan. That consultant was awarded to a firm called IXP. That firm has spent the winter and spring in Vermont meeting with staff, collecting data, and putting together a series of presentations for the board and the public about different aspects of the operational plan. So this morning, for example, we received the presentation on staffing and transition. I wanna be sure to call out this note on the bottom, which is two meetings ago, the board passed a resolution agreeing to hire any current dispatcher of one of our entities who's in good standing in the new organization if the new organization has stood up and they are interested in that position. The goal really here is that the dispatchers that are currently employed in all of our communities are the experts at what they do, and we're going to need their minds to stand up an effective organization. It's also quite a significant transition for them, so wanting to give them some certainty that they would continue to be employed. So moving forward, this is what we are anticipating over the next year as a CCPSA board, and I wanna be clear that when I talk about this, I am talking both as a, at times I'm talking as a board member of CCPSA, and at times I'm talking about as the manager of our dispatch unit. So as the board member, this is the schedule we're currently working from. So in July we anticipate getting the finalized report from IXP, September we will be looking at budget development for FY21. In October we anticipate coming out to all of the individual local governments to present that budget and the plans as outlined. If the local governments decide to move forward and I'll talk about that decision making in a minute, then over the winter we would finalize the lease on the space, we would hire an executive director, they would come on in the late winter with building fit up systems development, hiring and training in the spring for service to break in next July 1, July 1, 2020. So from your point of, so this is, it's a little out of order here, but I included this just so you can see a snapshot of the communities and the calls for service. So we are a pretty small part of this aggregate service delivery, so about 9% of the total calls for service are from Winooski that would be provided by the whole new entity. That becomes important to us later in the implementation in terms of our cost split. So the questions that you will be asked in the future, not at this meeting and with a lot more information. So the step you would need to take if we decided to move forward with this is you would need to approve the funding memorandum of agreement. So essentially CCPSA is going to receive this comprehensive report from IXP. It's going to include a budget for a standup and a budget for operations and it's going to include a funding mechanism, how many dollars are coming from what communities. And then that funding mechanism is what comes back to each of the individual city councils and the city councils have to approve that to effectively say, yes, we wanna discontinue providing dispatch services locally, excuse me, and we wanna purchase that service from a new organization. So that is a question that you will need to answer in the fall, early winter. That has other implications for us and all of the communities. Do we want to discontinue the service? What does that mean for our community? For example, the 24-7 front window would be discontinued. What are the other services that would remain in house? The dispatchers do a lot of administrative work and provide other services for us. Some of that would stay with us and how would we staff that appropriately? And if we decide to move forward, how do we make the best use of the space in the police department? CCRPC, the Regional Planning Commission, has hosted, has done a lot of the coordination support. They also host this organization's website. So there is a ton of information at this link. All of our meeting agendas, meeting minutes, the IXP reports are up there, the history is up there. If you want to read it through any of that, it is all there. That is what I want to share. What did I miss, Chiefs? I would just like to publicly state the folks that have taken this iteration of consideration of moving this forward. As you saw, it started in the 60s, these types of conversations. I think all of us would agree this is the furthest it's ever gone and some of the most serious decisions yet to come, but they've made some serious headway. For someone who operates in the emergency services, for Winooski Fire to have to operate on four or five different channels to go to a fire or go to the interstate, and that's a lot. You're not only dealing with a situation, you're trying to get your resources. Our dispatchers, I admire the work they do for sure. It's one person, four on the interstate, again, they're dealing with all the 911 calls being transferred in of all the cars in the interstate calling in that same accident. They're trying to get good information. They're trying to get police, fire, EMS. We're all on different frequencies. We're all on different dispatch centers. That's a lot for that one person, and then they still have 8,000 people here in the city. So it's not unheard of for two or three situations to be going on, so this is positive for the future. It's positive for me as far as moving in this direction. Yeah, I agree. It's a great project. Our dispatchers doing part of the job being a one person dispatch center, but with that being said, there's a lot of pressure and a lot of pinch points that go with that. This would fix a lot of that, and as long as it continues to make sense and we can come to you and feel good about it and that the money makes sense and the project makes sense, then that's what we're going to do. Thank you. I recall voting on this two years ago. It's subsequently since then. Again, like our airport briefing, this is a time for questions to get caught up or learn more details. I got a question. Is this going to be a new facility that the dispatchers will work at? Or is there, I mean, obviously, they're not going to be at one home location, right? They'll be at its own heady, at its own building. Yeah, so currently as proposed, there is vacant space at the South Burlington Public Safety Building, so it's where the South Burlington Police, CJC, and there's also a state Veterans Affairs office there as well. So there's vacant space there that meets the needs for four to six or seven E-91 consoles to be set up. Additionally, that allows for Burlington's dispatch that is larger than any of our individual dispatches to be the backup. So they would likely keep some setup there. Primarily they would be, the CCPSA would be located in South Burlington, but with backup in Burlington. Failsafe. A failsafe, yeah. Or is a catastrophic power outage or something that would switch to Burlington? I think the other thing from the CCPSA's board's perspective about the South Burlington location is that it is relatively centrally located for where our current employees live. So when we started to think about, do we buy land, set up something in Milton, or do we go down to Shelburne, then you're asking people to significantly change commuting patterns. We were trying to stay pretty tight into Chippendon County for those commuting patterns to stay as consistent as possible. Could Wanooski be in a running for any of that? Will all our new development come in? Not by July 1st, 2020. Not by July 1st, 2020, okay. And how many dispatchers is the model hoping to get? Ooh, good question. We just talked about that today. So the model of the consultant presented today anticipates 31 dispatchers, including two shift supervisors. And for what he called telecommunications training, field training officers. The concept being again, creating that ladder. So you'd have dispatchers, kind of more senior dispatchers who specialized in training or quality assurance or a specialty. And then you'd have the actual shift supervisors and then you'd have to have an executive director. So 31 dispatchers and across the six communities that are currently in, it's the same amount of dispatchers that we currently run. So there is the potential of a spot for every dispatcher here, Wanooski. Is that a consideration to, that you're gonna use dispatchers that are available to us now? So that is the hope of the board, that I will be honest and the chief can speak about this more. It is hard to recruit dispatchers. It's a very technical expertise. You have to be able to handle a lot under pressure, know a lot of systems. When we have a vacancy, we're stealing from other communities. We're not training up new dispatchers most of the time. So we believe we need the talent we currently have on staff and that that talent can be better deployed in a more effective manner in a regional center. But our hope is that anyone who wants a job with this new organization will have a job for the new organization. Now that having said that, I think there is a human reality here that we currently have five supervisors that we're gonna go down to two supervisors. So it's not that every person will be slated into exactly the position they're currently in and there will be some winners and losers in that, how that pans out. But in terms of employment, it is our hope that anyone who wants to come and do a good job continues to come and do a good job. As far as the window where folks can walk up 24 seven, can you talk a little bit about what kind of volume you see and if that were to go away at what, if you see a negative impact of that at all? Yeah, this is probably one of the more troubling issues for me because you know, part of the culture when you ski is we have a lot of foot traffic because we're such a small footprint for a city. To put actual numbers on it, I really don't know. I mean, I could tell you just a guesstimate of 50 people a day will walk in just in the day shift alone and sometimes it's just looking for a form, asking a question. They don't know how to get to city hall and other times it's to pick up property if they were detoxed or arrested the night before. It's gonna change the way we do business for sure. The way other communities handle this is they usually have some type of video phone installed in their lobby and then they would actually talk to a dispatcher at the regional center and it would involve an officer having to come back into the building to return property or answer questions. So it's gonna have an effect on the entire department. Also wanna distress, is there gonna be a panic button at the police station in the case someone is? Cause that is a pretty sensually public places with a lot of bars. If someone's in distress, I mean, they don't have their phone, can't find their phone. Yeah. That's the nice thing about the window. Again, these are questions as they come up. We don't know yet at the regional centers. It's gonna lead to another conversation later tonight about camera systems in the police department. But we currently have a video camera that monitors the lobby so that if somebody was in distress, even though they didn't make a phone call, if there was a dispatcher on duty, they could see something was going on in the lobby and dispatch officer. Oh, I see. Will these cameras be hooked to the central dispatch too? We don't know yet. We don't know yet. These are all things that as it gets stood up, we're gonna figure out if, are they just going to answer phone calls and dispatch or are they going to be willing to take on that liability of monitoring cameras? Right now we have a rotary camera, we have parking garage cameras. We can see a lot of things happening in a lot of places throughout the city. I don't know if that entity is going to be willing to take on that liability responsibly. And I would just add to that, each community in this organization has unique needs like that, but those unique needs are unique to those communities. So this is the thing that's very important to us. In Burlington, fire alarm monitoring is very important. In Williston, it's something else. So part of this negotiation with this new organization is, what are you taking and what are we keeping and therefore what's the cost split associated? If we're keeping more than others, is there a cost share? So we staff a different way here or something like that. All questions to be answered. And as Rick said, this is, if we can get comfortable that there's a model that could work for us, we'll bring it forward. And part of that's also, going to the board and advocating for this is what we need. Our voters have said, we wanna go in this direction. We need to advocate for how we do that effectively for residents of When you see. So when you bring up the money, do you have an idea where it's gonna come from? It's gonna be the city budget or is it gonna be from public safety's budget? How do we have a model for that yet? So we don't have a comprehensive model for that yet. What previously was discussed is that the basically each community who decided to go over would send the amount of money the community had previously spent on dispatch for the first two years, which would give the new organization some consistency about what they could expect from a budget perspective. So we spend $400, $450,000 a year from the general fund on dispatch services. This is where this spreadsheet comes in. We spend the highest per call number on dispatch in the region because we have the lowest calls for service and we're fully staffing 24-7. After that two years, the vision is that you would go down to a cost per call or a rolling average cost per call or a rolling average of population cost per call or that's all to be worked out. So while this has never been about cost savings, I think there is potential for us to see cost savings in the future that we may then argue to you all that we should reprogram retroactively to better staff things that we are needing to keep in house. But that's very hypothetical at this point. I mean, one of those things. It sounds like a great plan because if it could save seconds or a minute from someone in distress, you know, that could be a difference between life and death. And I think that's safety first, as far as I'm concerned. Any questions from the public? A general operating question for this entity, would it be voted on by the voters of the member municipalities or would it be voted on by the boards of the city council? That's an excellent question. So it would be much like we currently do for other union municipal districts where the district would come to the city and say, our FY24 budget is this, the council would consider that with the entire city budget and then the budget that was brought to town meeting day would be inclusive of that amount. So you wouldn't vote on it as a line item, it would be part of the city's general fund budget. What happens to Shelburne in this whole thing? You're full of good questions today. So that's a great question and a big unknown. Their community did not vote to move forward. They are currently a PSAP, they are currently a public safety answering point. Very well staffed. Very well staffed. So this is my editorial commentary. I think their community didn't go for it because they essentially are already providing a regional service. They dispatch for a lot of other communities in kind of Southern China County and Aston County. I think what a path that could happen, CCPSA has received pretty strong word from the state that if we stand this up, we will become a PSAP because we will quickly become the largest call end point in the state. We have more 911 calls coming out of these communities than any other PSAP currently has. So the PSAP, and Shelburne's the smallest, the PSAP will likely transfer from Shelburne to CCPSA and then Shelburne could re-vote it and say we want to continue, we want to come in at that point. The way the governance structure is set up, there's an opportunity for towns to join at a later date in the process. But if I were the town manager of Shelburne, I would be thinking about that a lot right now. These folks who work there would likely form their own union, is that- That is a, we assume that that will be the case. Okay, I mean they would have their own union if they choose to be- Exactly, yeah. Any other questions from Council? I just want to say that I appreciate you bringing this issue up now and having a chance to look at this. I did look at the CCRPC website and there is a lot of information in there. So I'm glad that we're starting to talk about this now and I hope that we continue to talk about it regularly as a Council so that we're keeping up with things like closing up the window in the police station and thinking about services that we need to, what kind of unique to our city in terms of how many languages we have and a different makeup here than we have elsewhere. So thank you, cheese, and thank you, Jessica, for bringing this up and talking about it more. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Sarah is now here with us. Yes, let's move back to the item E, the discussion around the Chittendon Solid Waste District budget. Now that our guest is about to go. Good evening and thank you for your patience. Three places tonight so I appreciate your accommodation. Yeah, my name is Sarah Reaves. I'm the Executive Director for the Chittendon Solid Waste District and just to probably let you know, CSWD is a municipality created in 1987. We act 78 to implement Solid Waste Management mandates legislated by the state of Vermont. So we do operate similar to School District, our district as a municipality in that our charge is to design regional solutions to the solid waste challenges faced by our member communities. We do happen to encompass all of Chittendon County that 18 member communities. We serve about 156,000 people over 6,000 businesses. Our mission is to reduce and manage the solid waste generated within Chittendon County in an environmentally sound, efficient, effective and economical manner. We employ about 50 people in five main departments, administration, finance, compliance, origin education and in operations or facilities. We manage several different kinds of facilities. We manage drop off centers, which is our small transfer stations. The environmental depot, which manages household hazardous waste. The rover, which is a mobile, household hazardous waste collection unit. A materials recovery facility for your blue bin recycling and a green mountain compass, which is our organic diversion facility. So one of the things that I like to do is I like to kind of talk about kind of the higher level, upper level dollars that we're looking at for fiscal 20. And then I would welcome any of your questions. Some of the questions that we've been getting this year for some reason, which is really interesting. I'm so happy people are asking the question is, where did you get your money? How are you funded? And that's an important question for our member communities to ask. And so we receive our funding from three main sources, from essentially user fees, which is if someone goes to one of our facilities like a drop off center or the materials recovery facility in Murph or compost, they will pay a fee to use that facility. So if you're going to a drop off center and you're bringing us a bag of trash, you are the user of that drop off center, you pay $2.75 and $4.50 for your trash. That comprises those user fees, comprise 42% of our funding. So the next pieces are roughly the same. About 29% of our funding comes from a tax on trash. That's called the solid waste management fee, but it really is a trash tax. And that is charged at the point of disposal. So at either the Coventry College, where Cassell has come from landfill, or if people take a team of incinerator, wherever trash that is destined for disposal ends up, that truck will go over scale. They'll say where you're from. They'll say Trinidad County. Being $27 per ton is a trash tax that comes back for CSWD. And that is used for general administrative support. And then material sales, meaning compost, meaning local color paint recyclable. So again, aluminum cardboard paper, not so much cardboard paper, we're going to talk about that. Plastic water bottles, laundry jugs, revenue from those sales of those products. Scrap metal comprises about 27%. So those are the three main sources of our funding. Some grant money, a little bit of grant money, a little bit of permit fees. Where we don't receive any funding is directly from our member towns. So we do not charge a per capita assessment or a per capita fee. None of our funding is in your tax base, your tax rate. So that is different from some of the other districts in the state, but because we have these other sources of revenue, we have not needed to charge an assessment in 25 years, unlike other places. So we're proud of that, and we think that means that we have a wider variety of options open to us. So this year's budget, fiscal 20, we are looking at revenues in the amount of 12,628,865 dollars. We are expecting expenses in the amount of 11,450,520 dollars. Our capital and allocation charge in our budget is about 665,468 dollars, which nets us approximately $331,000. And that net, to get us down to zero, that amount will be transferred into our Sol Waste Management Fee Rate Stabilization Fund. We haven't had to increase that tax on trash in, oh gosh, almost close to 10 years, maybe seven or eight years now, so because there's been enough in that fund to be able to stabilize that rate. So last year, our board and staff spent a lot of time talking about infrastructure. We've been doing some of the same things for 25 years, so I've been on board for about three years, and looking forward to the next 20, 25 years, we want to decide and make sure that we're doing things. Could we do things better? And just ask them, why do we do things the way we do, and making sure that there are improvements to be made that we set ourselves a good path to make them. One of the big changes was actually transitioning our entire financial system, so we have a brand new financial system, and I'm really happy about that because it will hopefully make it much easier for anybody to go onto our site, look at our financial report, and know what we're doing, and that's important. It was a little, you know, up to before, now it should be much more clear, so I'm thrilled about that. We focused last year on our Opianics Diversion Facility, Green Mountain Compost, changing the name internally, our Compost Facility, our Materia Socratic Facility, and our Doppler Centers. So the reason we focused on the Compost Facility was because Act 148, the Universal Recycling Law, the final piece of that is in next July 1, and that final piece is the ban from disposal and the level of food scraps. Anybody who generates food scraps is gonna have to figure out a way to keep them out. That has been phased in over time, so the largest creators, so businesses that generate multiple tons have already been folded into that program. This next bit, July 1, 2020, that's everybody, that's all of us. So we're working on making sure that our facility, our Compost Facility, can accommodate that increase that we expect. We're already the largest food scrap manager in the state, and we're looking at that and seeing that we expect more material to come in and realizing that we need to do business differently. We've been trying to operate in a retail arena. We produce a lot of bags of Compost. We produce bulk Compost. We sell our bags all over the place, too far afield. And as a municipality, we decided that we needed to get back to that efficient and economical piece in our mission. So as of July 1, we'll no longer be producing bag Compost. We're reducing our products from 12 to three. We'll be producing Compost, topsoil, and probably Garden Mix, Garden Mix, Rays, Bend Mix, but one of those, available through wholesale customers and outlets only. So looking at local garden centers, garden supply, SXAGUA, that kind of thing, but no longer doing bags. We were never able to recoup the cost of the bags. We were trying to sell into the North Shore of Boston to Cape Cod. We were looking at New York City, trying to be able to increase those sales to maybe recoup, it wasn't working. And we said, you know, we need to get back to basics, get back to our roots, which is managing organics. That's our charge. So we're gonna be managing organics first and producing Compost second. We received a grant from the Agency of Natural Resources for Compost Infrastructure Improvement. So over the course of the next few months, staff will be working with the consultant to look at two different pathways. One will be transferring some amount of material to other facilities because we recognize our site just can't accommodate the increase. We're right now taking 6,000 tons of food scraps. We anticipate full implementation to be taking 10,000 tons of food scraps. We need to do something different with that extra bit. That's one option. The other option may be to create a deep packaging situation. So if you think about a supermarket or food manufacturer who may have material that foods that have spoiled or is not suitable for human consumption or for animal feed that is now going to the landfill, it could come to a facility like ours. We would separate the organics from the packaging. We would divert that organic material, create a new product, either compost that or send that to a register. So that's another option we're looking at. There may be other options, but those are the two that seem most promising and offer a lot of flexibility for Chapman County. So that's where we're headed right now on the next immediate future for the Mountain Compost. And just to be able to find the brand new Mountain Compost out in the world, but again, not in bags. We've been subsidizing the operation for a very long time in a very high amount. And that has been by choice of the board, but we need to again ramp that back in. So in this budget, our expenses are dramatically lower because the materials that we're making is different. So we don't have to spend as much on the other goods that are involved in that, but we do need to raise our user fee at that facility. So right now we charge $52 a ton for food scraps. We'd be raising it to $60 a ton for food scraps. And I want to put that in perspective. If you are a hauler and you are bringing trash to either Kasella's Coventry landfill or to one of the transfer stations here in the county, you'll pay anywhere between $125 a ton and $150 a ton. So it is still a pretty good deal to divert your organics at $60 a ton. Similar to the materials recovery facility, we have been talking a lot about the changes in the global market. And we are part of a global marketplace. Up until last year, we were selling material, mostly domestic, mostly in the United States and Canada, but we're also selling our paper and cardboard products to China. China said, nope, all set. And they have stopped taking a lot of the world's materials, us included, so that put the brakes on things and our costs skyrocketing. We are still moving our material, but we are paying to move it versus being paid to move it. Not so much the aluminum and the plastics, but that paper products, mixed paper junk, they own cardboard is costing us a lot of money to move. So in order to be able to continue to put the capital investment we need to and fund that budget, we're going to raise the user fee at the materials recovery facility from $55 a ton to $65 a ton. The Murph in Rutland currently charges $90 a ton. So we still have some maneuverability within the local market. Albany is charging over $100 a ton for recycling. So we're still on the low end, but we also can't react as quickly as a private entity can. We own the Murph, the district does. So we have a certain responsibility to our customers contractually to be able to notify them. But we do recognize that we need to continue to try to recoup some of the losses there. With that, we are still looking at the need to build a new facility. That facility is over 25 years old. It was designed for 25,000 tons. We're taking 47,000 tons. And it's not, even the tonnage is still following. So we can't go up, we can't go out. So we are still looking at building a new facility. We're looking throughout the county for space. I tell you this now to let you know that we do not have the cash in the bank to do that. So we will be looking at a bond. Each of our member towns would need to vote on that. And it would be of the voters, not just the legislative bodies. So we're hearing a lot more from me over the next 12 months as our board decides which path they want to go down. They have not yet said, yes, we definitely want to do this. We're still bringing them information. So they'll be making that decision probably in the sometime of the next six to eight months. And then I'm back with you, talking about, well, what does that mean for Winooski? What does that mean for everyone in the district? But I let you know that now, so that you've got it in your minds as well, that this could be coming up in the next two to three years. So I say about two to three years because we're looking at paper product capacity, recycling capacity coming online fully within three years in the region. New Mill is being built in Maine, coming online at the end of this year, another one next year. So we want to be able to meet that need and be able to have a facility that will set us up for the next 25 years where we can continue to help everyone achieve their mandates. And then the last infrastructure piece that we looked at were our drop-off centers. We currently own and operate six drop-off centers. We have money in the budget this year for a facility in Hinesburg. We add duty commission Hinesburgs while they built their highway garage. It is built. So now we're looking at what will cost to come back. And we will bring that initial cost system as to our board next month. They will say yes or no. If it's a million dollars, it will be no. But I don't have a million dollars in my budget for that. But it is part of an overall system look at how do we want to operate as drop-off centers, convenience centers, going forward for the next 20 years. They're all a bit tired. I don't know if you've been to any of our drop-off centers. They're all a bit tired. They need some help with the flow. So we're looking at all of that system-wide. There are some modest scheduled fee increases every three years or so. We look at raising the prices there. This year, a small bag will go up by 25 cents. Medium bag by 50 cents. We are looking at some dollar increase on some of the bulky furniture pieces. The mattresses will go up and I also flag the mattresses again. Because we've been told by Cassella that not this year we have a little grief, but the next year they'll be increasing their fees on mattresses to $15 per piece. So per box spring, per mattress. Right now we pay by the ton. So if we have to pay by the piece, that is going to require a huge increase in our fees. So we're gonna take this time to talk to our legislative delegation and say we may need some help here. There are mattress programs that are manufacturer input and responsibility in California, Connecticut, Rhode Island. We don't look at those. See if maybe something could work for Vermont. But again, in the vein of no surprises or few surprises letting you know that that could be coming down the road and in a short amount of time. Another change that is happening and it's not a new fee, it's actually an old fee that's coming back, we're gonna be charging our customers who only bring us recycling to our drop-off centers and it's just recycling $2 per trip. So right now when you go to a drop-off center and you bring a bag of trash and recycling and maybe some food scraps, you pay one fee. You'll pay $4.54 in the median bag or $2.75 in the small bag. And the price, the cost to cover the recycling and the food scraps are built into the cost of that. So if you only bring us recycling right now, we pay nothing. So essentially the trash customers are subsidizing the recycling going to customers. And those customers tend to be bringing recycling because it's overflow or maybe they had to be more on their party or something. Or they've made other arrangements for their trash and they've paid nothing. And there are costs involved in managing that waste. So we'll be charging $2 per trip, not per bag or bucket, so you can bring one bucket, four buckets, five for $2. And again, it's to be a bit more transparent about the costs of that system. And that is, again, it's not a new fee, but it is not, we did it about 10 years ago as coming back. And just lastly on that, it's always measured fee or that tax trash that is remaining the same at $27 a ton. And again, that's charged out the landfill to the haulers. And I welcome any questions about anything you might want to ask whether it's about budget or about taste degree tea. And I thank Brent for being here as well. Just the perspective for the drop-off centers, our closest drop-off center is just off Patch and Road. It's a great resource. I know that there are upgrades that we're looking at, but I think that's a wonderful proximity for Winooski residents. As it relates to the increase in the fees of the drop-off centers in relation to curbside collection, it's significantly cheaper for a drop-off center user than somebody that is opting for a curbside convenience collection, probably if you're looking at monthly service for a local hauler, it could be anywhere from $30 to $40 depending on the size of the container that you're getting, could be a little bit more, depending on the frequency if you want weekly collection versus every other week. And so if you're spending $30 to $40 a month on a curbside, whereas drop-off could only be maybe $10 a month. So it's significant savings. And I think that proximity and the resource to Winooski residents is really valuable and something we want to keep in mind as the conversations move forward on the board about upgrades and modifications for flow and safety being a priority as well. So I wanted to just mention that, thank you as well. Thank you. Thanks for calling that out for folks who aren't aware that this is something they can do. I personally have some budget questions, but I would like to first open it up to if there are any general questions about the work of CSWD. The building, if you guys build a new building, what would you do with the current building of the facility? Would you keep it or would you try selling it? It's a great question and we don't know. So if we were to sell it, I think we could easily sell it. And that money could then go back into, again, the drop-off system could go into the compost system or go back into facilities. However, we could possibly reuse it. So one of the things that we talked about as a potential need is a place where people could bring mattresses, bring bulky things, things that they don't have all the time, but every now and then big blocks of styrofoam or, you know, not as much plastic bags anymore, but feel a little more things like that where it's just, you don't always have it, but when you have it, you want to get it right away and it's a pain. But to consolidate that for the entire county, that would free up some space in the drop-off centers if we'd no longer have to collect mattresses or bulky furniture. So there is definitely the possibility of repurposing that facility for kind of occasional use rather than regular use. Right now it's just so tight for regular use, but it could be great for occasional use. So that still is on the table as far as what we might want to do with that property. But we do own it, so we have the option. And would you just mention where the location is? Yeah, so the location is in Williston. It's between Avenue B and Avenue C. It's right next to Kosella's main transfer station, which is why if we were to sell it, we might have a buyer for that potentially. So it's at the end of the road, oh, just about the end of the road, there's nowhere to expand that space. It's very close to a drop-off. So there'll be a lot of fill is right next to Baker Commodities, which maybe they might be interested. So we're kind of bounded by not a lot of options. But it's an industrial area and we're looking at all industrial zone areas in the county to be able to kind of narrow down on options. There's been an extensive amount of research by the staff looking at the options to retrofit, build out, tear the roof off and drop new equipment in and put the roof back on, basically, and then just exploring around the county. Where else the option, the best options are for proximity to mean arteries, our decreased impact to residences and a number of other factors that have gone into it. Availability of land being a key point too. So. Absolutely. And all of those presentations, I can work with Sarah to make available to the council if there's interest. They are online. We have a year of our minutes and presentations on our website. So they're definitely there. We can let that bring up specifically which ones you have to go searching through 12 months and stuff. So yeah, absolutely. And part of the issue with, again, with the MRF is not necessarily the tons, it's the volume. So if you think of a water bottle and 10 years ago, that water bottle was pretty sturdy. Now, when you try to open it and you twist the whole thing, water flows out. One ton of water bottles 10, 12 years ago, 15 years ago was maybe 12,000 bottles. Now it takes 19,000 bottles to make that same ton. So it's not necessarily the weight, it's so much more stuff. Which means we have a lot more to talk to you about waste reduction and about smart consumerism and thinking about things before you buy them and thinking about where they get in them. But that's a big part of the consideration is we don't have space that we need. Either store the finished product before it goes off to market or as it's coming in the door. And that, just for a relation to what Sarah's mentioned is that light weighting of materials, using less material to make the same product, factors into cell waste because everything is weight-based and not necessarily volume-based as far as the money in exchange of the revenue. Yeah, the revenue goes, expenses of revenue go. So the more by volume, but lighter weight material, it imposes a lot of challenges. Right. So I know last year, this recycling issue came up. Yeah. There's a big budgetary concern there. It's ongoing. How are you feeling about the way you're addressing it in this budget? And are you concerned it's gonna continue to bleed in the future? Yeah, so I wish I could be here telling you that the future is super rosy. It has gotten worse. Quite frankly, we still have markets but ours are real strong component. I always been cardboard. And I think anyone who orders anything online and gets anything home knows the Amazon effect and we've seen a lot more cardboard. And for some reason, over the past three months, the cardboard market has also taken a dive. So that because the overwhelming vast majority, 80 plus percent of what we manage through this facility is either mixed paper, junk mail, and cardboard. That has been the biggest bulk of the hit. However, again, the opportunity is, is instead of sending all this material far from literally halfway across the world, looking closer to home. And being able to, again, it's supporting green jobs here at home but it's also reducing our footprint and making sure that we're producing a quality that domestic mills can accept. And that was always the issue. China always just took anything because they were so wrapped up with their production. They wanted everything, they dealt with the garbage. The world sent them a lot of garbage. They said, no more garbage. So now we all need to literally clean up our apps and get a much better product into the stream. We're actually quite fortunate here in Chittenden County in particular and that when I go to recycling conferences, waste conferences, I hear horror stories from other facilities that 25 to 30% of what goes into the recycling truck is garbage, pure garbage. Here, it's six to seven to eight percent. We have really engaged and knowledgeable recycling public and that's fantastic. We can continue to do better but we're doing very well. So where we want to stress is making sure again that people are looking at what they're buying in the first place to kind of reduce that impact in general, but to keep reminding them, yes, cleaning up the stream is important. Continue to do the good work and keep it going. So the recycling markets, again, it's always cyclical. The China issue is the biggest wrinkle and there's a lot of focus in the industry on building domestic markets, strengthening them, growing them and that's really what we're focusing. It just makes sense. I think you have a... Yeah, well, it's kind of along those lines of, I think this is obviously a challenging situation but it's a little somewhat confusing to me to see increases and fees and the things that we'd like to see people doing and it's another year of no increase in the fee that we'd like to see people not do in terms of the solid waste management fee. So I guess I'm curious if that's a function of how you're structured in terms of matching expenses to revenues or if there's gonna be some discussion at some point in increasing your fees for trash so that people are more incentivized to move to recycling and compost erosion. Yeah, thank you for bringing that up. That is the difference between the user fees so the fees at drop-off centers or at our materials recovery facility versus the tax at the landfill and stuff that's already been disposed. So we could certainly raise the user fees. It gets to Brent's point of affordability and making sure that we're providing a base level of service for our members. We know that not everybody in Chittinac County can afford to hire a hauler and not every person wants to hire a hauler. Some folks want to take care of things themselves. It's very much of a montage ethic. And we recognize our role as a municipality in finding that base level of services. There are costs associated with every single level of service. So the recycling piece, we've been doing recycling in Chittinac County as mandatory for function firms since 1993. It's part of what we do. It's part of our ethos of who we are. So there's no longer necessarily that need for a financial incentive. There's also studies that show when you tie in kind of what you perceive as a moral incentive or a moral good to money, when the money changes as we're seeing now, that good thing to do, because it's the right thing to do, sometimes goes away. So getting back to, well, we need to do this because it is the right thing to do. It's who we are as homeowners. It's what we want our state to be. And recognizing there's a responsibility and accountability and a cost associated with that. Our job is to keep it affordable. So we charge according to how much you produce. So that's where the user fees on trash, for example, if you're bringing in a 45 gallon bag of trash, it's a lot of trash, you're gonna pay more. So there is the incentive, the financial incentive to reduce your trash and to put more into the recycling. If you're a trash recycling food scrap customer, you'll still pay that one fee. So it does incentivize people to reduce that bag of trash and to put as much as it can in the recycling. If you raise the trash too much, people are gonna find ways to reduce their cost and they may be putting things in the recycling and the food scraps that we don't want them to, that then further adds to the cost of managing that spin because we've got to get that contamination out. So it is a balance, right? And we work really hard to know what that balance is. So the $2 on recycling only, it's to acknowledge for those customers, it's about 45,000 trips a year out of our several hundred thousand trips to drop-off centers, they are again being subsidized by the good work of the other folks. And this may cause them to think again. So they may want to again rethink about what they're buying and maybe they won't, maybe they'll buy things that are refillable or maybe they will use other products or to shop local instead of on Amazon, I don't know, but to reduce their impact. So there is still that financial incentive slash disincentive, but if you're a trash customer, you don't pay that additional fee. The fee on food scraps we've implemented last year is staying the same and is not being increased. There is no fee if people drop their food scraps off directly at our compost facility in Williston, but we recognize that that's not feasible for everybody. So, but it is an option. There are also many more options for managing food scraps. There's not a lot of options for recycling, but there are a lot of options for managing food scraps. So you don't have to use our drop-off centers necessarily. You can compost in the backyard if you have that ability. You can, your Whisper Treatment Plant says, yes, you can put in a garbage disposal, go ahead. You can learn how to, again, reduce your food waste in the first place. So I hear just saying, and again, that tax on trash, it doesn't get to the actual, I don't pay the $27, I'll pay a portion of that because it's built into my bag, but I don't pay the 27, so if I raise that to 54, that bad price wouldn't necessarily be affected in the way that I think people think it is. It's more on, this has already gone to landfill, it's tax on the haulers, they pay it, that tax on the haulers, the material that they deliver, it's not a one-to-one. This actually kind of brings the light that, well, the work of Chittin' and Solid Waste District is to manage materials. The mission of Chittin' and Solid Waste District is to prevent the disposal of materials in the first place. It's to reduce overall generation of both recyclables, compostables, as well as trash, not just to take it and then find the best place for it. It's to prevent the waste. So the state adopted a pay-as-you-throw system as part of the universal recycling law. Chittin' and Solid Waste has been doing that for a while and adding the $2 fee on recycling brings in that component of this still is a cost. There's overhead, there's employees that need to be paid to and gets at that avoidance of disposal altogether. Thanks for breaking that down, I appreciate it. Good question, thank you. It seems like you have to do a lot of education between now and next summer with the compost change and the fact that you may have to pay $15 per mattress. Does any of the new budget include an increase in education for your educational programs? You guys have such good questions. So we have the largest education outreach department of any of the districts, and Michelle Morris is here, she's the director of outreach and communications. And the overall budget is the same-ish, but we're redirecting our efforts. And so there's some things that we used to do that cost a lot of money, and we're saying, how can we do those better for less? So we have more money to do something else. We are hiring some additional help for the summer. We spend a lot of time on events. We're hiring a summer intern to help us get the word out more about that. We have been doing a lot of trainings. We have volunteers who come to our trainings, then they train as waste warriors and they go in the community and they help educate. We have, we work extensively with the state on developing state-wide campaigns so that we're making sure that everything is kind of coordinated. But as far as hiring more staff, I would love to, but I think we're very effective. Again, it gets to that six to 78% contamination rate. So it's one of the lowest in the country, quite frankly, of any program that is as extensive as this one is in Vermont and in Jimmie County. So I think what we're doing is really, we're looking at, again, how do we do things better? How do we target things? How do we know what people don't know so that we can better address that? Going to where people are, finding out what people are, whether it's meeting a person, doing fix-it cafes, or really better utilizing our online presence. So making sure that we're in social media where we need to be, if that's where we need to be. We know that some folks just also don't access computers. They don't have a computer. They don't like it, whatever. So we do need to have some traditional means of education as well. We have a hotline phone, an actual phone with a real person who answers it. Between January and March, we entered 641 calls. Just our little district, our big-ditch fellow district. So it's also a personal task, right? We're very keyed into that. We do composting workshops that are always overbooked. We do tours of our facilities that we encourage everyone to go on. We are more than welcome to come and see what we do in person. So this particular budget is more about, again, making sure that we are spending our money wisely and when we see gaps in the next year, to be able to say, okay, we've identified this gap because of the data behind it, and then going forward. But again, you're right. Part of the July 1, 2020 is also on the state. They very much need to be advertising and they have that in their plan. So that will be happening. We'll be piggybacking on that. But we will be very active in making sure people know what their options are, because they do have options for the food scraps as well. Any questions from the public? So we are being asked this evening as the board for when you speak to approve this budget. Any other questions coming? So I would entertain a motion to approve the changes. So technically, we just put it on in discussion. Oh, I see. So if there is additional information that you would like to ask for that, and then we would, assuming that it seems like you're open to this, we'd approve it on the consent agenda. Thank you, Jesse. That's fine. It's normal to do that. Were there any other details that you all wanted? No, I found this very comprehensive. I'll do it. Can I ask one, like, hopefully small question? Sorry, I have one too. I'm really curious. Because in this report you mentioned there's been an increase, a year of year increase in trash tip-off, and then last year it was noted it's the same, a similar increase. And it's like, we don't know why. We're gonna study it. This year's budget says we don't know why. We're gonna study it. I'm curious if you, what, why we don't know yet. But the increase in trash? Because it's really hard to know, quite frankly. I mean, I know that sounds like a terrible answer, but there's not one thing. A lot of times, if you can find that one leading indicator, great, you're good. There could be any number of factors because it's individual, right? People either do or don't make waste. They do or don't recycle. And why they do or don't is hard to nail down. But our board was very clear in saying, we need to try. So we have money in the budget to hire a consultant to help us sift through some of those factors. We do know that the economy plays a big role. We have seen in times of recession, trash generation goes down. In times where they're good, it goes back up. We have one of the very, very low unemployment rate in Jitman County. So weather can play a factor. Anytime there's a very large, devastating weather event, obviously, that will add artificially to that year. Changes in packaging, as Brim was talking about, changes in the ways people consume. Population increases. Population changing, so many factors. But our board said, okay, stop giving the answer that you've been giving for the past few years and try to figure it out. So we are gonna be working on that. I think very much so it is very tied to the economy here in Jitman County. But I can't say for sure. It's great to hear that, see, I have consultant money to try and investigate that. So what we're gonna do is, much of the work in houses, we can. And so we're looking at, you know. But again, because we've given the same potential factors for years and, well, maybe we're missing something and we don't wanna miss something. And so if there's other studies out there that are on a different track, we wanna look at that and make sure that we're not making assumptions and we shouldn't be making. We have one little question. Your clean fill, you don't currently charge for residents to drop clean fill, such as leaves and lawn scraps, right? So leaf and yard crap, there's currently no user fee for that. Is there, have you guys done a study on how much potential money you could charge if it $5 on trailer load? Yes, yeah, we looked at that last year and that was something that I wanted to put in the budget both last year and this year. And it's an operational issue as far as. Because you're paying the guy to move it from the, because I've been there before dropping my leaves off. Yep, yep. Internally, you know, we use our own guys there's still a cost associated with our own trucks to move them back and forth. And yes, I personally think there should be a small fee. So, but it was how do we, how do we measure it? How do we decide what unit do we use to be able to charge? So if our landscaper's that might be easier to do and that was what we thought we would start. And so we did a poll with some of our landscaping customers saying, well, what's your tolerance level for that? So we do have that information because we, again, we don't wanna overcharge and then see it, you know, in the back for you, right? So, but you're right, it's, what's that unit? And it's getting down to kibicars. You know the kibicar, I mean, I don't know how do you explain what kibicar is? Is it by the bag? Well, which bag, you know, does this guy sells a bag this size and someone sells it this size? It's more subjective. It's very subjective. So, but yes, we have thought about it. We haven't figured it out yet, but yeah. And it serves as some essential feedstock for green mountain compost. Correct. So, it's very sensitive to get into, getting into that feed. We don't want to discourage it because we do need it to continue to name our compost product, but yeah. It's something that, we see a lot of volume. Well, yeah, well, I'm popular too to the residents, but heck, I'm that guy today, so. Yeah, well, you're right. And we've thought about it for the past two budget cycles and haven't come up with that right. Suggestions are local, I mean, yeah. My suggestion would be to start somewhere and make sure you don't overcharge so you do get anything better than nothing. Sure. In my opinion. Right, right. That's why we thought maybe the landscapers because they're generally coming in and have known volumes, and that'd be easier. Thank you. Thank you. Anything else or do we want to see this on the consent agenda next week? We're good. Of course, we're seeing it on the consent agenda. All right, thank you very much for coming. Thank you. I appreciate your time. All right, our next item is for discussion or approval. This is about security camera and server replacement, a fund balance request. Welcome back to both of you. Thank you very much. So as we were putting together the capital plan this year, one of the needs that we looked at with public safety that they have brought up was our existing camera system for police department, exterior and the parking garage. So we knew this was a need that had to be addressed sooner or later. We had, I think we have one failing camera. So there is a portion of money in the capital plan to help fund this project. We did not have a good understanding what the total cost would be. So we worked with the public safety to kind of put together some performance specs on the camera types based on, you know, other projects that they've worked on, that your staff has worked on in other communities. And we put out a bid back in February and we received competitive bids, roughly five contractors that bid on this. Total project cost came in at $53,760. That's a combined project for the general fund, which would cover the police department and the exterior cameras in the parking garage. That also includes a new server that would be housed in the police department and that would run the software and then be sort of a networking connection for all those cameras. So we are requesting on the general fund, $10,100 to cover that general fund portion cost, which is in total $29,365. So we had $19,249 previously allocated. The parking garage piece is covered by the current capital plan. So that would be, you know, covered, including the portion of the server that would be for the parking garage. So I don't know if you wanna speak to how you- Yeah, sure. So the need for the security cameras is for a few different things. The most major concern is for evidence when we send down criminal cases. Right now, a workaround that we're using is the officers are using their body cameras for all interactions with people that are in custody or being interviewed in the police department, where normally we have an in-house for lack of a better description. Like if you've seen like 48 hours where you see like a fixed mounted camera and you get a good view of the room, that's what we normally have in place. Body cameras are unfortunately, like if the officers are turning or looking at a wall, you'll have the audio of what's going on and not necessarily a good video picture. So we had to send a memo to the state's attorney. It was, I think about six months ago now, just letting them know that our server was failing. We were starting to get questioned by defense attorneys because the cameras were either not downloading from the server or we were losing bits of audio and that obviously comes into question as to why are you missing 10 minutes of audio? So we're just trying to eliminate those types of questions in our integrity for the system. It's about 15 years old. It was when the downtown project was done, some grant monies paid for the initial security camera system. So it's gone well past its lifespan. Usually eight to 10 years is about what you hope to get out of that system. So yeah, this is a work we had planned, unfortunately, bits higher than what was estimated. Well, not even that. We didn't even actually have a number until we went out to bid and started courting this and it turned into an expedited need pretty quickly. This system that you're looking to put in, is this going to be the kind of server or system that will go into the CRPC? Is that what it is? The central dispatch at that place. Are we going to be able to implement the system that you are devising here? If they're going to have eyes on, or are we going to have to go through this again next year? If they're willing to do it, you could set up a static IP address so that they could monitor the cameras. So they can monitor the cameras. Any other questions or concerns from Council? Some might seem a little out of left field, but these aren't used for artificial recognition technologies. No, we're not the high tech. Don't give them any ideas, Joe. These are really basic color security cameras with audio capability. Any questions or concerns? I don't understand. Is replacing the system in the Capital Improvement Plan or not? And if so, for when? So in the Capital Improvement Plan we have a pretty vague security project access control. And the project was not, the money that's been allocated has not been defined really well. So in order to define the project, we actually had to put a bid out there, get real pricing, and the project is 50, well, for the general fund it's $29,365. We have 19 grand set aside, but there wasn't a defined project scope and cost. Okay, so this specific project wasn't defined in the security thing in the Capital Plan. I think you need to come to every council meeting because you're bringing up some good questions. I can't stand it, but thanks. Are sympathies. Any other questions or concerns from council? I would entertain a motion to approve security camera and server replacement fund balance request. So moved. Motion by Amy, second by Jim. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries, thank you. Thank you. Onto our last item for regular city council meeting, discussion, approval, O'Brien Community Center leases, Howard Center lease amendment. Oh, no brain. Right, so two, this would be very quick. Excellent. I have a lot of questions. So Ray apologizes for not being here. He has a home situation he is dealing with. We had told, so last week we talked to you about OCC comprehensively. We had hoped to bring you back three different leases tonight, the women works for women, Vermont works for women, CHCB and this one. The first two were not ready to come to you last week, but this one is one that is ready. This is essentially just allowing Ray to move into the OCC this fiscal year before the beginning of next fiscal year. So it's a slight amendment to the current Howard Center lease reducing theirs for three months by 8% and allowing, giving him permission to move in. Which we discussed in the last meeting. Which we discussed in the last meeting. Are there any questions or concerns from council? How many do you have? Seven. Doesn't give other people a chance to answer. Questions or concerns from the public? Now on this one. All right, so I would entertain a motion to approve the O'Brien Community Center lease, Howard Center lease amendment. Do I need to also authorize you? OK. I would entertain a motion to approve the O'Brien Community Center lease, Howard Center lease amendment and authorized city manager Jesse Baker to execute said amendment. So. Second. Motion by Mike, second by Jim. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. So before I adjourn this, let me remind you we have a liquor control meeting too. So I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Yeah. I would like to talk about the tree ordinance. And I was late. The agenda that I was looking at online on the city's website did not have a time for that. There were quite a few items to be discussed by you before that. So I did not know that I needed to be here at 6.05. The other thing is the agenda that's on the city's website, just tell me if I'm out of order, did not warn that as an action item. It was a public hearing. And so I'm concerned. I understand you adopted that ordinance, is that correct? Yes. I have some issues with that ordinance the way it was written. I think there's some big holes in there. And that's why I wanted to talk about it. And I looked again when I got here at the agenda on the website to see if that had been amended to show it as an action item. And then it wasn't. So I'm concerned. And if there's some way I can address some other venue, these concerns I have with that ordinance, as you adopted it, that's fine. I'll do that. But I don't think it should have been acted on. I think there are no big holes in there that you should have waited. Apologies. The agenda that I am looking at, which is the one I received from Carol, I'm not looking at the one online right now, does have it listed as discussion or a potential approval? I do doubt that the door here says that it says 605, but the one on the website does not. Can I make a suggestion? Sure. So I think your point is valid. We did do the public notice of the public hearing, including the notice in the newspaper and around town with a time certain at 605. You are correct that on the website with the documents listed, it doesn't specifically say the 605, although I think we did follow the warning requirements. Having said that, ordinance adoptions are also, once you approve them to go into effect, there's a 30-day appeal period. So this is a suggestion. A suggestion, since you have voted to approve it at this point, is you could decide to re-warn it as for approval at the next meeting within that 30-day window and see if there's other comments from the public at that point. So do you see what I'm saying? Or I could just appeal it. Or you could appeal it, yep. You don't do that, so you don't have to. So we don't have to go through your concerns tonight or do we want to? No, no, no, no, no. No, it's too late for that. Are you sure? It was bad, I just thought there were some holes that should have been. It's a lot easier to get something right in the first place. It's over. That's all we write and have issues come up. So the next, because we were saying we adopted it, we have to have this public comment period anyway, is what you're saying. So there's a 30-day public appeal period. Ornance doesn't go into effect for 30 days. There's a 30-day window in which the public can essentially appeal it or ask for reconsideration. So just kind of following the procedure, you all did approve it tonight. I believe we're covered enough in warning it, but you bring up a good point. There is a hole in our system. So an option for you would be to wait to see if it's appealed and address it at that point. Or to direct us to put it on the agenda as a, I guess it would be a follow-up discussion item, given that you'd already approved it to see if you want to make amendments to it as a result of public comment at the next council meeting. Okay. But who should I send my... And John. John, do you have a business card on you? Or can you get one? No. You have my email. No. John. No. Okay. Okay. Look forward to hearing more updates on this. I think that makes sense to have a follow-up. Based on public comments, whatever we receive afterwards for the 30 days. Yeah, and I don't think I would trust the time anyway, because sometimes discussions go a little longer or a little shorter. Well, so the time means we can't do it before that. Right. But yeah, like if you came late, it says you didn't know it was 6.05, it could have happened at 6.05 and you wouldn't miss it. That was a really long consent agenda this time. Okay. Sorry. Yeah, thank you for bringing it up. With that, I would entertain a motion to adjourn the city council meeting. So moved. Second. Motion by Jim, second by Amy. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. So, being 848, Monday May 20th, I would like to call to order the liquor control, I don't even know what our name is, the when you see liquor control meeting, we'll start with the Pledge of Allegiance. Mike, would you please leave us again? Sure. 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. Thank you. Help get the stand up for a minute. So we have one item on tonight's liquor control meeting and that is an event permit for Monkey Hospitality to cater for when you see Wednesdays on June 5th, July 3rd, August 7th and September 4th. So this will be, so tonight you approve the Wednesdays event permit. This will be their third year providing catering services at Wednesdays. They have had a great track record working with us. The advantage of working with them is that they also provide our rain location and restrooms for families as well. Excellent. Any questions or concerns from council? There's no public comment here. So I would entertain a motion to approve the event permit for Monkey Hospitality for Wednesdays. So move. Second. Motion by Mike, second by Jim. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. I would entertain a motion to adjourn the liquor control meeting. So moved. Second. Motion by Amy, second by Mike. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Motion carries. That's it. Thanks everyone. Thanks everyone.