 I will call the board of finance to order at 507. Do we have a motion to adopt the agenda? So moved. Great, do we have a second? Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Do we have anybody from the public? Let me just check the inbox. I didn't see anyone who was signed up for the board of finance specifically. President Tracy. Would anybody like to make a motion to adopt the consent agenda? We are trying to stay on top of the minutes. So as you noticed, we have the minutes from last week. Any changes or are we ready to move forward with those? I think I'm ready. Yeah, I feel good about them. Okay, good. Somebody like to make a motion? Yep, I'll make the motion to adopt the consent agenda as indicated and take the action indicated. Great. Do we have a second? I'll second that. Great. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay, none opposed. So that brings us to item 4.01, the BIPOC owned business support grants. How would the board like to proceed? One second, I'm sorry. Yes. I'm just getting word from Councillor Pine that he is having trouble getting on. So just wanna try and figure that out. Yes, definitely. Oh, I see he's joined. Oh, okay, all right, perfect. Okay, cool. Part of me is here. Excellent. Sorry, Councillor Pine, it's been a challenging Monday. We are so glad that you are here. Yeah, me too. We are just moving on to the fun part of the agenda. Item 4.01, I am filling in for the mayor for the whole meeting. So you know, it's gonna be a fun meeting. We've got BIPOC owned business support grants. How would the board like to proceed? Yes, was just wondering if Taisha is around to maybe give us and also those who are listening, a general overview about what is this specifically? Yes, I see Director Green is here with her camera on. Could you please give us a brief overview, Ms. Green? Definitely, hi, hi, Councillors. So this grant came about when we realized that the CDBG funds for small businesses here in Burlington were a little restrictive, well, actually a lot restrictive for BIPOC business owners. A lot of BIPOC business owners are being left out being able to receive assistance. And so this grant is going to fill the gap of that. So that's kind of a bird's eye overview of what we're trying to achieve here. We do have a group called the Rapid Response Team, which was assembled to carry out the eight point plan to ensure a racially just recovery from COVID-19. And that group will be administering the funds. Yes, Councillor Pine. I would like to move that the Board of Finance recommend that the city council approve the expenditure of $50,000 from the regional programming budget to be distributed and monitored by the Director of Racial Equity, Inclusion and Belonging for the purpose of providing BIPOC-owned business support grants. Excellent. Do we have a second? Great. President Tracy, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. None opposed. Great. Thank you, Director Green. That was very helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Moving on to item 4.02. Authorization to sign a licensing agreement with Garnet Transport Medicine at the airport. How would the Board like to proceed? Would staff like to make a presentation at all before we move in? I would recommend that we get a brief overview because if you didn't have a chance to read the memo, it's really cool and you should know about it so that you can tell your constituents. So yes. Thank you. Can you all hear me? Yes, sir. This is Gene Richards. I have Nick Longo on with me as well in case you have any questions for either one of us. So Garnet is a company who does different types of COVID testing. I had a experience personally with them where they were testing all the employees at Beta, technology who is a tenant of the airport. And Beta asked if I was interested in being tested and I go, absolutely. And so we did it and it was amazing. What's really nice about their rapid test is that you have results within two hours and it really put me at huge peace. Not that I thought that I had it but I thought I may have done it because it's very populated at the airport. And once I started thinking about it, I go, boy, we are the cause, the airport of many people coming into our community and what a great tool and amenity to give the flying passengers is this service. And if I benefit from it this much, I bet our community would like it as well. And so I started conversations with them and asked them if they would be interested and they said we would be interested. And so we looked at space and we found our parking ride space that isn't being used anymore, it was being used as a construction kind of trailer. And they said that would work out really fine for them. So we've been working together for now probably two and a half months trying to figure out what this would look like. And I think today, we're ready to bring this to you for a license. It's not for everything because we don't know how long COVID will last. We don't know how long the demand will be but we do believe that the flying public and some consumers would like to have the ability to be tested if they wish to be. And this gives them access to that type of tool. So that's pretty much sums it up. There is, it's not a long-term thing. It's like I said it was short-term and it's basically day-to-day and either side can end the licensing agreement whenever the business goes away. Any further questions or would the board like to make a motion? Yes, Councillor Pine. Sure, I would move to approve and recommend the city council authorize the licensing agreement of certain identified space at the Toronto International Airport to Garnet Transport Medicine for the provision of COVID-19 testing services and to authorize the mayor to execute the agreement subject to final review and approval by the city attorney's office. Excellent, do we have a second? Yes, Councillor Paul. Great, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay, I think that's unanimous. Excellent, thank you. Thank you. Thank you all very much. And with that, we move on to item 4.03 which is approval for a contract with Farrington Construction for improvements to City Hall. Before I ask how you would like to proceed, I'm actually gonna turn it over to the wonderful Martha Keenan who has been spearheading the capital committee on this project. You will recall we came to you a few weeks ago and before the RFP process and here we are at the end of it. So I am going to turn it over to her for a brief overview and then you can decide how much more information you would like. Martha, take it away. Thank you very much. It's a really exciting time. We had fun, we spent two years revisioning City Hall and realized that really the important thing that we needed to do right now was improve security for both the public and the employees in City Hall. So the RFP that we put out was with revisions that accomplished that. And we had hoped that we would fit within the budget that we provided in August which was $600,000 and as you can see from this request, we did not. Some of the challenges that came up to this were that we had some code improvements that we didn't realize we would have to do, sprinklers on the third floor and in the attic that we did not know were not there. And also that due to COVID, I don't know how much of you are in construction but construction costs have skyrocketed. Just materials are extremely expensive at this point. And so our pricing came in much higher. I do have a PowerPoint that goes through what the changes are. It does include a new Sharon Busher conference room on the first floor. It does include a wellness room that is required by law these days for potential of lactating women or other people who have a need to separate themselves for a time. It has redone the staff bathrooms on the third floor due to the change in actually numbers of gender within the building. And it does separate off on each floor the office space from the public spaces. That's quick overview. Hope to answer the PowerPoint. Yeah, how would the board like to proceed? Are you ready to make a motion? I'm not sure if you had a chance to review the PowerPoint if you'd like to go through that in five or 10 minutes or if you're ready to make a motion. Yes, Councillor Jen. Yeah, I am willing to make the motion but before was just wondering if Marcia can speak a little bit about when is the project end date of the project? When will it be finished? It will be finished in January of 2021. Perfect, wonderful. Thank you. Yes, Councillor Tracy. I was just wondering to sort of in a similar vein to Councillor Jiang, where work stands now like what you've been able to accomplish since the initial approval? So the initial approval was for the architects who did the final design and construction documents for us and then they also worked with our building inspectors and the fire marshal to make sure that we had everything up to code. We posted the RFP in early August and we got back, we had eight companies actually come to it but because of our schedule and timeline we ended up with just three proposals. And so we're very happy where we have our building permit and our expectation is that we'll be able to start next week. And if I may add and then Councillor Pine, the floor is yours. The other thing we have been able to accomplish with Martha and Kim Bleakley is moving all of the city hall employees and files who are affected as you will see from the plans, the Clerk Treasurer's Office is accepted but unfortunately most of the city attorneys have to move their offices and the assessors in retirement. So there has been a lot of pre-work and thinking about how we store all of those files securely. So all of that has been kind of going on in the background, Councillor Pine. I would just ask Martha, she and I spoke earlier today because I had questions about in the memo there is a section which says that essentially we'll be returning in the future to discuss additional energy efficiency improvements and document storage in the attic. And I just, I thought it'd be helpful for the rest of the board to hear that explained it a little more detail just because people should just be aware that's coming and what's the order of magnitude of that project. Excellent point. So we, over a year ago, we have wanted to insulate the attic in city hall. It has been shown, we did energy modeling and one of the top items is to insulate the attic in city hall and we put on our P last year, we were ready to award it and we met with BED and they brought up the good question, is this the best carbon footprint you could have for the insulation? And we hadn't done that research. So we went back to the drawing board, we went back to the energy modeling person who we were working with and asked them to do the carbon footprint on the various insulation types. And so they did that and we came up with two proposals and we were only able last week to meet with both the BED and Vermont gas to find out what their support is and also what the rebates might be on it. So this RFP has not yet gone out and will go out and we expect the work to go concurrently with this. When we found out that we were going to insulate it, it required a fire rating on the inside of the insulation and so when you put a, for instance, a sheet rock wall on the inside and you newly sprinkle it, you have a space that now becomes somewhat usable. And so at the same time, we asked the architects to look at how we could use that space and the city is very challenged in having enough storage space. And so we were able to carve out 2,000 square feet of space that could be used for document storage in the attic. And so having to do the other work, it's not an extreme addition to put up walls and create this room in the attic for the document storage, which is much needed. So these two items will be coming to you in the future. They will help us move towards our net zero. They will also help us with our document storage problem. The size of it is somewhere in the range of $400 to $500,000. We have right now $375,000 in our green revolving loan fund. So the majority, the attic insulation portion and any mechanicals, LED lighting, all of that will come out of our green revolving loan fund. And then the city has someone to put aside to do document storage. And so a portion of that will go to this project as well. So the lift on it is not going to be as high because we already have funding that is available for both of those purposes. We are ready to bring that in at this moment. And my next question is really just, how will the public experience these security measures? Will it be different for the public when they come into the building? So the security guard is going to stay. And then what it will be is that there will be glass doors that separate the employees portions apart. So they'll be able to see down the hallways, but they will have the electronic locks that we currently use throughout the city so that the staff will be behind those. So it won't look that different because you'll have a glass wall there, but it will provide that barrier for keeping the public from the staff and vice versa. Thank you. Yes, Councillor John. Yeah, so I would like to make the motion then, right? Yes. Okay, to move and recommend that the city council authorize the director of department of public works to sign a contract with Barrington construction for an amount of 1,414, 155 that includes $184,455 for contingencies. And all this is for the deferred maintenance and security improvement to city hall. Subject review and approval by the city attorney. Excellent, do we have a second? Councillor Pine, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All right, none opposed. Excellent. Thank you, Martha and capital committee. Thank you very much. Item 4.04, restoration of the rainforest mural and adding some more money here. Yes, Councillor Paul. Thanks. I would recommend that the council approve the attached resolution. Do we have a second here? Councillor Pine, any discussion? No, okay, great. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Great. Moving on to item 4.05, authorization to accept US department of housing and urban development led hazard control grant for CEDO. How would the board like to proceed? Councillor Pine. I would move approval and recommendation to the council. I believe that is in order, right? We do need council authorization on this. Yes. Is there a second? President Tracy, any discussion? Great, all in favor say aye. Oh, Councillor Pine, did you have discussion? Just one sort of point of privilege, if you will. This was a program that was launched during my tenure at CEDO in 2003 and it's pretty remarkable that we are on the, I think it's the fifth round of funding and have reached almost 700 homes in Burlington. And it's really made a difference in making our homes more safe, the older homes more safe for young children. So a real testament to our commitment to our future generations. I just wanna point that out and thank you. It's an accomplishment. Thank you for pointing that out, Councillor Pine. All in favor say aye. Aye. Great. All right, only one item left. And that is approval of the FY21 security contract for City Hall. How would the board like to proceed? Councillor Paul. I believe this only goes to the Board of Finance. So I would make a motion to approve and authorize the execution of an agreement for City Hall security services with chocolate thunder, security for a price not to exceed $85,630 and to authorize Catherine Shedd, Chief Administrative Officer to execute the agreement and any related documents needed to carry out the project subject to the review of the city attorney's office. So is there a second? Councillor Pine. All right, all those in favor? Yes, Councillor Tracy. Just wanted to be clear. None of the security guards would be armed in any way. And they're just there as a sort of to watch. I've been in City Halls in recent days. This is for the person who's on the first floor by the city sort of outside of the bathrooms. Is that what this is for? Just to be clear. Yes, that is correct. I'm glad you asked, President Tracy. This is for unarmed security and this has traditionally been for the public restrooms to make sure that they are safe and that our employees are safe. Excuse me. As we are opening the clerk treasurer's office and for anyone on the public who is listening, that is Monday afternoons. Nope, Monday mornings, Monday mornings and Wednesday afternoons. And we hope to be able to expand that. So we are also using that security guard to enforce mask wearing for the clerk treasurer's office as well as social distancing. So yes, it is unarmed. It is somebody who just alerts the police if there is a serious issue. Okay, all right, thank you. Are we ready to take a vote? Yep. Excellent. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Great. I think a motion to adjourn is in order. Anyone? No. Yes, Councillor Pine. Is there a second? Okay, President Tracy. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Great. A quick question for you, Catherine. Of course. We staying with the same link for the council meeting at six? Yes, we are. Perfect. So we have a break. Yep. You have a break. Please enjoy a half an hour to yourselves turn off. Yeah, mute yourselves, turn off your camera and we'll see you soon. Do you know where Mayor Weinberger is? Or if... He's gonna be here in about two minutes. Okay, would he like for us to wait or should we get going? I don't think you need to wait. Okay, excellent. All right, I will convene the meeting of the City Council at six o' five. And the first item before we get going is that on our agenda, given what happened over the weekend is I would just like to recognize the tremendous contributions to our country and to really our world that Ruth Bader Ginsburg made. And I would just like to honor her life with a brief moment of silence so we can just reflect on all the things that she did for us. Thank you, Councillors, I appreciate that. So next we'll do the Pledge of Allegiance. Let's just please stand. All right, and our next item on the agenda is the agenda itself. Councillor Paul may I please come to you with a motion on our agenda? Thanks, President Tracy. So I would make a motion to amend and adopt the agenda as follows. To note additional material for consent agenda item 5.46 which is a communication from the capital committee regarding the approval of a contract with Farrington construction for improvements to City Hall per Martha Keenan add to consent agenda item 5.55 a communication from Jamila Jadala regarding a resignation from the tax abatement committee, the Board of Tax Appeals with the motion to waive the reading except the communication, place it on file, advertise the vacancy in seven days and send a letter of appreciation to Jamila Jadala thanking her for her willingness to serve on the Board of Tax Appeals. To note written materials and title change for agenda item 6.05, which is a communication from Eileen Blackwood, city attorney regarding the open meeting law violation cure letter her city attorney Blackwood. And then I'd also add another motion that is not on our prewritten agenda changes and amendments, which is to move item 6.06 which is a resolution regarding the restoration of the rainforest mural or to finance from the deliberative agenda item 6.06 to consent agenda a new item 5.56. I so move. Thank you, Councillor Paul. I see a second from Councillor Sronberg. Any discussion on the motion for our agenda? Councillor Shannon. Thank you, President Tracy. I would like to add to that motion that on item 5.55, communication Jamila Jadala, the resignation from the tax abatement committee that that also be referred to the police commission as she speaks to some issues facing them. Okay. Are you making an amendment to Councillor Paul's motion? Yes. Can you please make a motion because we're not, you don't run on the practice of friendly amendments. I move to amend the motion to include sending 5.555 to the police commission. Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second? Seconded by Councillor Jang. Any discussion of the amendment? Hearing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, we're back to the motion on the agenda as amended. Any further discussion on that? Okay, hearing none, we'll go to a vote on our agenda. All those in favor of the agenda, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, hearing none, we now have an agenda. And so, like I said, for members of the public, we are going to be going into our second item prior to public forum, because that is a time certain at 7.30, so we will get started with the item number three, which is a communication from city attorney regarding BPD personnel matters. And there is an expectation of executive session on that item. I will go first to attorney Blackwood, just for any explanation that you're able to provide in public session, understanding that we may come out of executive session after having deliberated there and provide further explanation or action. So attorney Blackwood, go ahead. Yes, as you know, we have been looking at and discussing issues related to requests that the city and demands that the city fire three police officers. And we have been doing some work on that. And I would like you to go into executive session to hear what we've been doing, both to receive legal advice about it and that this may involve the negotiation of contracts as well as employee various employee matters that could be considered their employment or discipline discharge evaluation, all of which are subjects as well as contracts that you can consider an executive session. Okay. Thank you, attorney Blackwood. I appreciate that. I see Councillor Pine. Are you looking to offer a finding in that emotion, Councillor Pine? Yes, that was what I proposed. Okay, excellent. Please do so. I would find that the council needs to discuss potential action and resolution concerning the employment, employment of the three police officers that has been discussed for some time now and receive legal advice about that premature disclosure which would put the city at a substantial disadvantage and for purposes of approving our open meeting law compliance. I would just cite one BSA 313 subsections A1A contracts, A1F legal advice and A3 employment of officials in a four potential discipline or discharge. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Pine. Is there a second to that finding? Seconded from Councillor Mason. Any discussion on that finding? Okay, hearing none, we'll go to a vote on the finding itself. All those in favor of the finding, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, hearing none, we now have a finding. Now, based on that finding, Councillor Pine, are you prepared to offer a second motion to go into executive session? And if so, can you please, as part of that specify who you'd like to include in the motion? Sure, yes. Based on that finding, I would move that the council enter executive session to discuss the personnel matters to receive legal advice on the topics that were previously mentioned in the finding and would request that department, city attorney staff and members of the mayor's staff. And perhaps, I don't recall if we are going to include Director Green or Interim Chief Murad. That's a question, really. Councillor Pine, I was able to speak with Director Green about entering into executive session. Director Green is a menable and would be willing to join us in executive session. So it can make sense to include Director Green as well. And I think if Chief Murad or DC Sullivan is here, I think it would be good to invite them. Okay. I would include them both, yeah. All right, so we have a motion to go into executive session with the invites established. Are there, is there a second to that motion? Seconded from Councillor Stromberg, any discussion on the motion to go into executive session? Okay, seeing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That carries unanimously and we'll go into executive session as for members of the public. If you are signed up for public forum, we will come back at 7.30 for a time-certain public forum. And Councillors, so you'll want to stay on, this will be the link, this will be the meeting and we'll just come back into this for that session. But for Councillors, you should look into your inboxes and we'll have a separate link for executive session shortly. So please just take a look for that. Thank you. Just gonna give Councillors a chance to switch over. We'll be going into the public forum in just a moment. Do you want to alert folks that we will have a resolution coming out of executive session that will be posted on board docs shortly? So I just want to alert members of the public that there is a resolution coming out of executive session that will be posted to board docs on the city website as a part of the agenda. So please take a look at that. And I just wanted to make alert folks, we won't take a vote on that resolution until after the public forum is completed. If you are a member of the public interested in signing up for public forum, you just go to burlingtonbt.gov slash city council, which is one word slash public forum. And that will take you to a forum to fill out. So you can sign up there. If I could, I believe I just see, I don't have hosting responsibilities. So if I could please be made a host so that I can enable microphones for public commenters that would be wonderful. And as has been our practice with public forum, I'm going to prioritize voices of color or public commenters of color who have identified themselves. We do have a time limited forum tonight and we'll be stopping at 9 30. So I have within that group of initial signups if that it has, if someone has identified I have done that. I've also prioritized Burlington residents which has also been our practice and folks will have two minutes we'll have the timer up on the screen if folks can just please hold to that two minute time. That would be wonderful as we would really like to hear from as many folks as possible in that timing. So very much appreciate folks respecting that and directing as best you can your comments to me as the chair. That's sort of the way that we tend to that the council rules are set up but certainly want to hear what everyone has to say. And again, there is that resolution that will be posted to board docs momentarily. So just keep an eye out for that as well. Believe I'm not yet, I've not yet been made a host. So if either Chief of Staffordell or city clerk Bobi could please just make me a host. Okay, perfect. Awesome, appreciate that. And then if we could get the timer up we can go ahead and get that public forum started. I'm gonna read off just our first set of public commenters just so that folks know who's on the lineup. I have, sorry, one second. I have Jess LaPorte, Ashley LaPorte, someone who signed up as Zee, someone who signed up as Marisha, Jill Allen, Jamie Gay, Emma Sopchak, Abby Hodson, Sienna DeVoe Toludo and Danielle Shaw as our first group of 10. So I'm gonna come to Jess LaPorte now. Jess, I've found you and I'm gonna enable your microphone. Should be enabled, Jess. Hi, Councillors and the public. My name is Jess LaPorte and I am a resident of Ward 2. I am a black woman who was born and raised in Vermont and moved back to Burlington recently. I'm calling in tonight and am waiting with bated breath to learn more about the resolution that has come out of executive session. I am alongside protesters in Battery Park who have been out here for 28 days to protest police brutality and to call for police accountability and for this city to not only address egregious wrongs in the past and police brutality that was directed towards people of color in this community, black residents, and also resulted in the death of a white man. And we are asking the city council to act in bravery and courage to address these past patterns and to set up systems to have further accountability in the future and to ensure that the city is not standing with their hands tied again when the people are asking very clearly to have violent cops removed from active and armed duty. We ask that tonight the city council take steps forward in addressing these egregious wrongs. We ask that this resolution be a part of moving forward in the same spirit as a racial equity resolution of June. We on that resolution was intended to have action against these three cops. And in the interim before these protests popped up, there was not action on the city council's part to make any change to our charter or how you function to gain the control and power to address these issues better in the future. Now, thanks to the people and those who have tirelessly raised their voices with us, you are forced to act and we act that you act in as full of a capacity as you can. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker will be Ashley LaPorte to be followed by Zee. Ashley, I've enabled your microphone. Hello, councilors. My name is Ashley LaPorte. I am a Burlington South End resident in Ward 5. I'm calling to you tonight standing in front of the Burlington Police Department where for the past 28 days, I've stood shoulder to shoulder with other BIPOC residents in the Burlington communities and our allies and supporters far and wide demanding that this council take the right steps to removing violent officers in the Burlington Police Department, Bellavance, Corot and Campbell. As my sister just stated, we are at a place over the past three months in Burlington in which there has been symbolic movement but no action when it comes to holding the Burlington Police Department accountable to racial injustices and holding the city accountable to racial injustices. This moment has demonstrated to everybody far and wide just how systemic the racism is. There is body cam footage and evidence that shows just how violent these three police officers are and yet they are wrapped in layers and layers of system and process that are meant to leave BIPOC for monitors and other marginalized folks out of the system and continue to support the police department. It is my sincere hope that this resolution tonight takes some real action to move in the right direction. We cannot declare racism a public health crisis in the city of Burlington and sit on our hands and wait and point to all of the systemic racism that keeps us from taking action. What I need this council to understand is that this is a first important step, a first important step to justice and accountability. And as you vote tonight on this resolution, know that whatever small symbolic steps you think you're doing by not voting for it, whatever small symbolic intellectual exercise you want to have that's going to be a justification to do nothing leaves all of us sitting out in Battery Park cold and just fired up to keep going. We deserve justice in this community. We deserve action in this community. And I know Burlington can do better. Let's take this first step. Thank you. Thank you. I have the seeing next and see, I think I'm able to identify you. So I'm going to enable your microphone. Should be enabled. There you go. Yep, go ahead. Perfect. It's been 29 days. And before I repeat myself to the many crooked forms of government that still continue to silence this revolution, I want to make one thing clear. If being president at Battery Park taught me one thing, it's that we don't need you. When our lives are put in danger, the police come when it's politically inconvenient. When we ask for change, we're told to be patient. When we ask for compassion, politicians begin to staple their upper lips hoping it'd be enough to pass for a smile. When we ask for accountability, we're told is too expensive. We've built safety with the foundation of trust. We've built support with the foundation of compassion. We've built resilience with the foundation of peace and we've built community with the foundation of radicalized revolution. This isn't the community of Burlington on their hands and needs pleading for you to do the right thing. We're telling you to lead by example, or we will. In fact, we're showing you no more talking, no more words, a revolution without action is a movement with no direction. And we've literally paved the way. We've done most of the work for you. This is not a finish line. What's your price limit on Black lives? Don't let the people that pay you make it seem as though your job is too expensive. Before you ask about the level of importance the most marginalized hold in politics, listen harder and you'll find that without Black voices you couldn't put on a mask and pretend to be progressive. Some of you have never heard of before until now which means you're one of the many South end politicians who can move in silence and continue to disregard the violence surrounding you. Wake up Burlington, wake up council members and in the words of Madam Devine herself, revolutionary bitches take action. I yield my time. Thank you. Our next speaker is Marisha to be followed by Jill Allen. Marisha, I'm gonna enable your microphone. Be enabled. Okay, can you hear me? Go ahead. All right, perfect. Just frozen here. So hi, my name is Marisha. I go by she, her pronouns. I'm a Black woman who's lived in Vermont my entire life and I could not be more disappointed and uplifted by my community right now. It's tough to have both of those things that we're dealing with with disappointment and being uplifted really by Battery Street and that's the only safe haven that I've had recently. I've been falling further in the direction of disappointment after our mayor has declared racism a public health crisis, but it doesn't seem like any changes are being made. Doesn't seem like we have hope for any changes to be made. The hope is within ourselves, but we need help and we need help to resolve the crisis that's going on that has been deemed a crisis and is and always has been, but we need change and we need to hold our violent officers accountable for their actions that they've been involved in and that isn't too much to ask. Battery Park has been a place of solace, change, patience and openness for discussion of so many different people coming together to make changes, but this is the only area, like I said, I've been feeling truly safe recently and that's a scary thought to really think about that. Walking around, it's way more hostile than it ever has been. I've lived in Burlington for about. Marisha, you're cutting, you just cut out. You could stop the timer please. Marisha, I don't know what happened. And yet we're at the standstill. Marisha, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but you cut out, I stopped the timer, so we cut out 10 seconds ago, I just want to make sure you just say your full statement. Is that we were just, we're at the standstill and it's exhausting and our voices and bodies, we need rest, but we need change. So we need to figure out a way to make this all work. And yeah, that's it, thank you. Okay, thank you. Our next speaker will be Jill Allen to be followed by Jamie Gay. Jill, I'm enabling your microphone. Ag, hi, can you hear me? Yep, I can hear you just fine, go right ahead. I'm sorry, can you hear me? Yes, I can Jill, go ahead. Okay, you can take your turn. Yep, I can hear you, go ahead. Okay, sorry about that. No worries, go ahead. I'm calling to voice my support for ranked choice voting, because I think it's a really good way to ensure that democracy is enacted. And that's my main comment, thank you very much. Thank you. The next speaker will be Jamie Gay. Jamie, I'm not able to locate you. I, our next speaker after Jamie was Emma Sopcak. Emma Sopcak, Emma, I'm enabling your microphone. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, I can, go ahead. Thank you. I'm a white resident of Ward 1 and a lifelong Burlington area resident. And I'm calling in to continue to echo the words of the BIPOC leaders in our community who rightfully are demanding the firing of violent officers, Coro Campbell and Bellavance. It's appalling that we, this supposedly progressive city have allowed the responsibility of holding the police accountable to fall on the shoulders of the very people who are being victimized by the institution of policing. And I said this at the last meeting and I'll say it again, this city's government and all of its citizens should consider it, all of its white citizens should consider it a personal failure that this protest that's going on in Battery Park has had to continue for 29 days. It's an outrage and it's something that we should all be thinking about all the time and wondering, well, what brought this on? How can we fix this? Because this is a collective problem. It's not just the problem of those who are camping in the park. It's not just the problem of the people who have to have run-ins with the police that make them fear for their lives every day. It should be every single citizen's problem in this city and it should be the personal mission of our government to make sure that those citizens who are being victimized are feeling safe. And it really has shattered the image that I have of my home that in a good way and a bad way that we have let this go on for so long. A lot growing up, I think if I had, if someone had told me that there was gonna be a 29 day protest in Battery Park to protest something as obvious as police brutality, I would have assumed that action would have been taken and yet here we are, Eve of the 29 day, nothing has been done. So please fire the officers, do what you have to do, bring them to justice. It's literally the least we could do. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Abby Hodson to be followed by Sienna Devoe Toludo. Abby, I've been able to your microphone. Hi, can you hear me? Yep, go ahead. Great, thank you. Thank you for hosting this meeting tonight and thank you to everyone who's spoken before me. I'm calling for the same reason that everyone else is calling to ask that you listen to the protesters in Battery Park and fire the violent officers. I think at this point, everyone understands that it's certainly not easy to fire these officers. It's certainly gonna be expensive. But like many people have said before me, that's kind of the point. We're living in this system of systemic racism. It's gonna make it difficult to hold people accountable. But I just wanna say that if you kind of push through that it's gonna make it easier to hold other people accountable. If incidents happen again. So the first time is always the hardest and yet it's difficult legally and financially and the public understands that. But it makes sense that it's difficult. And I think it's important that we push through for this first time. And ideally it'll make it that much easier the next time we need to call for justice. Thank you very much. I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. Our next speaker is Sienna DeVoe Toludo to be followed by Danielle Shaw. Sienna, I've enabled your microphone. Looks like you're muted on your end. Okay, hi. Can you hear me now? Yep, go ahead. Amazing, hi. My name is Sienna DeVoe Toludo. I use she, her pronouns and I've lived in Vermont my entire life in the Burlington area and now I'm a resident of Ward 5. I am really looking forward to reading the resolution that you guys have all created or that has been put forth earlier tonight. And I would really like to speak to the counselors who have been less supportive of what's happening in Battery Park right now. I think that the demands are abundantly clear and this is something, so the officers must be fired and they will be fired. It's just a matter of when. And there are people who have been camping in Battery Park for 29 days. It is getting colder. So these officers need to be fired and I hope that within this resolution that's addressed. And so to the counselors who have been not as supportive of the protesters or what's happening, I urge you to truly vote to fire these officers. This is truly a revolution and we need you to be supportive of the protests. Thank you, I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. Our next speaker is Danielle Shaw. To be followed by Robert Bristow-Johnson. Danielle, I've enabled your microphone. Thanks, President Tracy. My name is Danielle Shaw. I'm a Ward 2 resident and I've lived in Burlington for the past five years. I'm not down at Battery Park tonight. I wish I were. I've spent some time there before and I hope that all city council has as well, though I doubt it. I am cautiously optimistic about the resolution that will be posted tonight. But I really, I guess, want to speak to city council to say that I've lost faith in city government, that you are the people that have all of the tools and the power available to you to make changes in the city. And for the city of Burlington to declare racism a public health crisis, after doing so for COVID-19, I think puts it into really stark reality about where our city and our city's government priorities lie. When COVID-19 was declared a public health emergency, every single person in this meeting made sacrifices for themselves, for the good of others. The city, you know, lost money and changed the way that businesses had been running up until now. And there's a reason why the city and city council isn't willing to do the same for the public health emergency that you declared that racism is. I'm no longer interested in your symbolic gestures. I don't care what you paint on the streets. I don't care what flag you fly above city hall. I care about what you actually do. And I don't understand how you can declare racism a public health crisis and then expect to address it by following the rules and the laws and the contracts that were written under a racist system. And I just hope that you all can really think through your systems of logic. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker will be Robert Bristow-Johnson to be followed by Alex Levan, our lab, and I'm sorry. Robert Bristow-Johnson, I've enabled your microphone. Okay. I think I am unmuted. Is that correct? Yes, you can, I can hear you. Go ahead, Robert. All right. When I previously addressed the city council, channel 22 inaccurately labeled me as against ranked choice voting when what I'm advocating for is ranked choice voting that keeps its promises, fully baked ranked choice voting instead of half baked. Elections are about majorities. Please don't allow that principle to be violated because of a current trend among organizations or political parties that purport to be in the business of political reform. Voting reform that is shown by scholarship and demonstrated in our very city 11 years ago to favor a single party at the expense of the other two is not really reform at all. 11 years ago, by an 8% margin, the majority of voters in Burlington marked their ballots that candidate Andy Montrell was preferred over candidate Bob Kiss. Yet candidate Bob Kiss was elected at the office of mayor. That's not majority rule. As a result, this election in 2009 was spoiled and candidate Kurt Wright turned out to be the spoiler. A loser whose presence in the race changed who the winner is. Had Kurt not run, the same voters voted their same preferences with the remaining candidates, Andy Montrell would have defeated Bob Kiss in the IRV final round by a margin of 588 votes. Those voters for Wright were promised that they could vote their hopes, not their fears, but that was an empty promise. Had a fraction of those voters not marked right as their number one choice, they would have prevented the candidate they dislike the most from winning. These are the goals of ranked choice voting to elect the majority candidate, to prevent spoiled elections, to let people vote for the candidate they like best without fear that they will elect the candidate they dislike the most. Instead of being Trumpian about this, let's consider other parties that all the people, other than just the base of one party that they're using to ram through legislation that can stick with us for decades and possibly fail again. This is as important as redistricting was in 2013. It's a charter change. As with redistricting, let's put together committee of citizens to consider this charter change and the multiple options for it. Let's give voters a better choice than what they had already rejected 10 years ago. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker will be Alexander Laban. Alex, I've enabled your microphone. Hi, Max. Can you hear me? Yep, I can, go ahead. Thanks. I'll try and stay on topic this time. My salutations to everybody on council. I know you all are dealing with a lot. I would just submit to you that it's never too much to deal with a greater and more enhanced democracy. Ranked choice voting is part of a historical thread that the United States has been working on, whether it was expanding voter rights from white male property owners to then all white males to then some people of African descent in the North to then women and then eventually, hopefully more people of African descent in the South and in places where there aren't scandals against the voting franchise. We wanna expand the voting franchise. I don't think anybody can make a good faith argument against that, except when I read things like in Vermont Digger about how it made things too complicated, I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound like a good faith argument. It's going to take needed resources away from the fight against the pandemic. I'm sorry, but this is a time, a fulcrum point in our democracy when it's time to really embrace the people's values and the people's values are moving every day. History is moving rapidly. And so to simply have Coke and Pepsi and say, oh, well, if you can't be happy with one of those then you don't know what you're doing. That really just, that won't wash anymore. And so I do appreciate the previous commentators' contribution about how we need to look at this carefully. The one last thing I will say is, don't take the brief experiment and then the dissolution of ranked choice voting as a referendum against the system itself. That was really a referendum against Bob Kiss and the poverty of his leadership. Thank you. Our next speaker will be Joe O'Brien to be followed by Whitney Bentley, Jay Griffith, Keirdra Graham, Brian Cina, Kate Lapp and Abby German. Joe O'Brien, I think I found you and I'm enabling your microphone. Can you hear me? Yep, go ahead, Joe. All right, great. I've come out to a bunch of these meetings and spoken before in favor of ranked choice voting. I think I would just go ahead and back up with pretty much anybody who has supported it tonight has said. And just seeing my time, I know there are a lot of speakers so I want to let people go on and say what I want to say. Okay, thank you. Our next speaker is Whitney Bentley to be followed by Jay Griffith. Whitney, go ahead. I found you. Whitney Bentley, it looks like you're muted on your end. Hello. Hello. Hi. So I'm calling in regards to the battery part protests. We must remove these three violent officers, Bella Vance, Campbell and Caro. It's been 29 days and many years. You must act. Our community here is strong and clear. We will hold the BPD accountable. We'll hold city leadership accountable. We are watching. I just want to reiterate that tonight's resolution is one step in the right direction, but it's not anywhere near what we're asking for and I really encourage you to continue this progress. I want to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of the police. Okay, our next speaker is Jay Griffith to be followed by Deirdre Graham. Deirdre, Jay, I've enabled your microphone. Jay, it looks like you're muted on your side. Jay, it looks like you're muted. Jay Griffith. Jay Griffith, okay. Okay, I'm going to come to Deirdre Graham. Okay, I see you. Deirdre, I've enabled your microphone. You should be able to go. Looks like you're unmuted. Deirdre, if you'd like to go ahead. Oh, can you hear me? Yes, I can. Go right ahead. Hi, my name is Deirdre. I'm a resident of Ward 5. I'm a woman of color and I'm calling tonight to speak to the council about the resolution, which I've been incredibly anxious about all day, as I'm sure many are. We need to get these officers out. As many have said before me, this is just, of course, one step in the right direction, but we really need to do the right thing. I mean, the council, how can you... Deirdre, you cut out. If you could stop the timer, please. Deirdre, we lost you. If you could just... I can't make that clear enough. We've been out there for 28... Deirdre, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but we lost you just a second ago, so I stopped the timer, but I just wanted... We lost you about maybe 15 seconds ago. Deirdre? Can you hear me? Yep, I can hear you. I'm sorry, I just... We stopped... You cut out for a second, so I had the timer stopped, so go ahead. I don't have much else to say, except I'm very anxiously waiting to hear about the resolution after public forum. I know, no matter what happens, we will be watching. And as many have said before me, especially from the BIPOC community, we're gonna keep fighting, and we're gonna hold you accountable. It shouldn't be up to us, but we will. And I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. All right, our next speaker will be Brian Cina. One second. Brian, I've enabled your microphone, go ahead. Max, can you hear me? That I can, Representative Cina. So this week, the Vermont legislature is poised to pass a series of police reform bills that will address police use of force, body cameras, police training regarding de-escalation and a bunch of other measures, and none of this would have happened if it were not for the massive awakening that is happening in our country and for the people coming out to the streets in our state and all around the nation. So I wanna thank all of the people who have been exercising the First Amendment right to protest. Every major reform in the history of our nation has come as a result of this kind of social action. And there's many people out there who are complaining about the inconvenience of being stopped for five or 10 minutes in their car. I just wanna remind them that minor moment of inconvenience that you felt is what black indigenous people of color feel every day. It's what queer people feel every day. It's what poor people. It's what our houseless people. It's what all marginalized people feel every day, many times a day. So I'm not sorry for the inconvenience that has caused people. And I hope people can reflect on that and remember that moment next time they're doing it to a marginalized person or a vulnerable person. And for the businesses that want to criminalize loitering, for these businesses that are saying that they want to criminalize behaviors of people who are homeless, why don't we come together instead and homelessness? Why don't we provide people with the basic needs they need in healing instead of further demonizing them? And then as for the resolution before you tonight, I just wanna say that this resolution, I did being a legislator, I did look it up and read it and I'm not gonna get into the details of the language, but in general, I appreciate that it is a first step towards holding our police accountable. And in addition to terminating all three of these officers who have engaged in abusive behavior, the city needs to move quickly towards implementing policies that improve accountability of the police, that reimagine how we enforce the laws, how we respond to emergencies, how we offer support to people when they are at their most vulnerable and how we take care of each other better in the pursuit of empowerment, wellness, public safety and justice. Thank you. Thank you. I believe I'm gonna go back to Jay Griffith. Jay, I called you, but I wasn't able to get you on. So Jay, I'm gonna come back to you. I've enabled your microphone. There we go. Hi, can you hear me now? Yes, I can, go ahead. All right, my name is Jay Griffith. I use he-him pronouns. I'm a Ward 8 resident and a preschool teacher here in the city of Burlington. And I'd like to echo the demands made by callers and protesters down at Battery Street. I'm standing here in solidarity with BIPOC organizers who have been calling for the removal of three violent police officers and also increased public accountability for police officers within this city. As someone who spends a lot of time with the real young people of Burlington, three to five year olds, I want everyone to know that this is an issue that transcends age. This is something that directly impacts every single resident of Burlington. And if we truly want to make this a city where kids feel safe to play and grow up and learn about the world around them, we need to have public safety that is just, that is equitable and that does not further marginalize young people of color within our city. I would like to use the remainder of my time to take a moment of silence for people who have been victimized by police brutality. Thank you. Okay, next speaker is Alexa. I've identified you and I've been enabling your microphone. Yep, go on. Okay, excellent. So I'm just calling in to uphold the demands of the battery product protests. I just read through the resolution that's put forth tonight. It's definitely the first step in meeting the demands. There's still a lot more to be done. We really need to reimagine what public safety looks like in this town. We cannot have violent officers on the streets. I really just really, the city council really needs to hold BPD accountable. Sorry, I'm like very out of breath right now. Hold BPD and city leadership accountable. I would like to yield the rest of my time to all BIPOC who have lost their lives and police brutality and those in our town who are still facing this brutality every day and this violence. Thank you. I'm sorry, did you say you wanted to yield it or use it as a moment of silence? I'm sorry. A moment of silence please, for the rest of the minute. Thank you. Okay, our next speaker will be, was I was not able to locate Sarah Siratino, but I did find Bella Weston. Bella, I'm enabling your microphone. Hi, can you hear me? Go ahead. Hi, I'm calling in to in support of firing three officers from BPD, Bella Vance, Coro and Campbell. There have been protesters in Battery Park for 29 days now and I think it's time, it's past time for our city government to take action on this matter. I'm in a resident of Burlington in Ward 4 for 20 years my whole life and I must say that I'm disappointed in my city government over the past month. It's much past time as I've said to fire these officers and I'm anxiously hopeful for the resolution that has been put up for tonight. I'd like to leave, take the rest of my time to for a moment of silence for all those victims of police violence in Burlington and across the country. Okay, I was not able to locate Phoebe, but I did find, I have found Sheller. So Sheller, I'm gonna come to you. Your microphone should be enabled, Sheller. Hi, thank you for taking the time to hear from us tonight. My name is Sheller, my pronouns are she, her. I would like to reiterate the fact that police cannot police themselves. Saying that we can't change the system because the system says that we can't change it is absolutely ridiculous. In 1776, the writers of the Declaration of Independence sent the following. Governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers, its power in such form. As to them, shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness. Our country was founded on certain principles and the way that these police are acting and the way that our mayor is acting and the chief of police is acting go against the principles of the founding of our country. We have people that we need to protect, we need to be protecting and the people that say that it is their job to do so are not doing that. In fact, they are doing the opposite. We need to fire Coro, Campbell and Belivance immediately. I would like to save the rest of my time to consider the lives of the people in our community that are in jeopardy every single day that we do not make this change. Thank you. Okay, I have Dana Steinhoff to be followed by Leah Dwyer. Dana, I've enabled your microphone. Hi, I'm calling from Battery Street Park where protesters have been for almost a month and we just read the resolution and it was super freaking exciting and we're all waiting with bated breath to see what happens once you vote on it. Like one of our colleagues said before, it's a huge step in the right direction but there's still more to be done. For one, reading through the legal document, I saw the reasoning for why to pursue the separation with Belivance but I didn't actually see the reasoning why not to pursue separation with the other two officers in question. So for one, I'd really like to know why you were deciding not to move forward with the separation with them or if that's not the case, if maybe that's still on the table which is what we all want to be the case. I'd like to get some communication on that. But all in all, just here to say, like the rest of the people on this call today, our community here is strong. We're still not gonna go anywhere. Really looking forward to seeing how we keep moving forward and like just keep this momentum going. And I would like to yield the rest of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of the police. Thank you. Okay, our next speaker will be Kate Lapp to be followed by Abby German. Kate Lapp, I've enabled your microphone. Thank you. My name is Kate Lapp. I'm the government reform associate at VEPIRC, the Vermont Public Interest Research Group. VEPIRC is a nonpartisan research and advocacy organization with about 50,000 members and supporters statewide including around 9,000 in the city of Burlington. By now I'm sure you're aware that VEPIRC supports ranked choice voting is a fair way to ensure that citizens feel free to vote for the candidate they like best and that our elections produce winners who have the support of the majority of voters. I've spoken to this body before about how ranked choice voting has been proven effective and how it's grown increasingly popular in the decades since it was last used in Burlington including examples of bipartisan support from the Conservative Party in Canada to the Labour Party in the UK. I've spoken with this body about how as voters look for fair and efficient ways to make their voices heard, ranked choice voting is becoming more and more popular and there's growing recognition that ranked choice voting encourages candidates to engage with more voters and not just their base that as voters seek to learn more about what different candidates are saying, they tend to spend more time learning about those in ranked choice elections. I've spoken about how we don't all need to agree on the merits of ranked choice voting in order to understand the value and importance of giving the citizens of this community a say in the matter and about how it's time to bring this approach back to the voters of Burlington. It's been about a year since I've started making these comments to this body and since this body has begun considering bringing ranked choice voting in any form to consideration of the people of Burlington and still we have failed to do that and I'm again begging this council to move ranked choice voting forward and to bring the voice of the citizens of Burlington to the discussion. I would really like to see a ranked choice voting resolution on the ballot in March. It's a perfectly democratic way to determine whether the citizens of this city think it's time to return to an electoral system where the majority and not the plurality decide who holds office. So on behalf of V. Perkz, thousands of members in Burlington, I really hope that you adopt resolution 6.04. Thank you. Next speaker will be Leah Dwyer to be followed by Abby German. Leah, I've enabled your microphone. Hi, can you hear me? Go ahead. All right, hello. Thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. My name is Leah Dwyer and I'm a resident in Burlington in World 8. I'm here in regards to the battle for protests. As mentioned, we must remove these three viral officers, Bella Vance Coro and Campbell. It has been 29 days, rain or shine, heat or cold and we're not getting up. Our community here is stronger than we could possibly ever imagine. We will hold BPD accountable as long as to be, as well as just to be leadership. We are watching and we're still here and we're not gonna go anywhere. The proposed resolution is to start. I would like to take the rest of my time as a moment for a silence for the many lives lost from police brutality. Thank you. Okay, I have Abby German next. Abby, I've enabled your microphone. Can you hear me? Yep, go ahead. In 1777, Vermont proved itself to be on the right side of history when it became the first state to abolish slavery. Systemic racism, unfortunately, was not abolished and is upheld in many of our institutions today, including law enforcement. To remind the council what we're dealing with here, the police is a violent, anti-black colonial institution that originated as slave patrols. Their primary mandate is to protect not citizens but property and to militarily enforce white supremacist capitalism. And this has been working with and embedded into our state government and economy for decades. It was not, quote, good for the economy, unquote, to abolish slavery. And it will likely cost the city of Burlington millions of dollars to hold these officers, Belivance, Coro, and Campbell accountable for their racist and violent actions. This should not matter. The protesters in Battery Park have been at the encampment for 29 days straight. And there have been people protesting this for years and years. It is long past time for the council to heed the demands of the BIPOC community, which starts with firing these officers. We are such a small and powerful community. If we come together and stand for justice, we set the standard for other cities and states and nations. Now in 2020, it is time for Vermont to prove itself to be on the right side of history again. It is time to take a stand against the prison industrial complex and the racist and violent police institution. Lastly, I would like to thank the progressive leaders of the council, Zariah Hightower, Max Tracy. I'm forgetting the other names, but thank you. And for the last 10 seconds, a moment of silence for the people of color who have died at the hands of police brutality. Thank you. I think I've identified our next speaker, Hannah Richard. Hannah, I'm enabling your microphone. Go ahead. Can you hear me? Can you hear me? Yes, I can. Go ahead. I know. There's a little bit of space back on the phone. Here we go. That's better. Okay. Hi. My name is Hannah Richard and I'm calling from Pottery Park where I've been many nights during these protests. I'm calling like many others to demand the firing of these three violent cops, Campbell, Corot, and Bellavance. It's been 29 days of fighting here and many years before that. You must act. Our community here is strong and clear. We hold the BPD accountable. We'll hold city leadership accountable. We are watching. I want to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC, others who have been brutalized by the hands of the police. Okay, I was not able to find Emily Wanzer, but I was able to find Brianna Borsch or Bork. Brianna, I've enabled your microphone. Hi, my name is Brianna Bork. I'm calling in regards to the removal of three violent officers, Bellavance, Campbell, and Corot. I'm calling from Pottery Park where protesters have been for the past 29 days. It's been too long without action being taken against these officers. Our community here is strong and clear. We will hold the BPD accountable and we'll hold the city leadership accountable. We are watching. Action just needs to be taken with these officers. The history of violence in Burlington and racism in Vermont is clear and we must do something about this. City leaders have the chance to do something now. I'd like to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of police. Okay, then next, I was able to locate Phoebe. Phoebe, I'm gonna enable your microphone. Go ahead. Hi, can you hear me? Yep, go ahead. My name is Phoebe Lowe. I use she, her pronouns. I'm an Asian American and I've lived in Burlington for a decade now. I'm calling from a very chilly battery park alongside many protesters in support of this movement to hold the city council, the mayor and the BPD accountable. If you're not with us currently in these protests and in this fight is not too late to join us and if you are resistant to change, it is not too late to look inside yourself and remember why you wanted to do what you do. The resolution here calling for Bella Vance's resignation is a first step towards justice. Thank you for this. I would like to remind you all that this is not enough to make our BIPOC community members feel safe in their home here. I urge you to move forward with the same plan for Corot and Campo. I have to say from battery park, this community here is one of the most beautiful things I've had the opportunity to witness here in my time on earth. I yield my time for a moment of silence for all of our BIPOC last at the hands of police brutality and racism. Thank you. Okay, our next speaker will be Emily Wanzer. Emily, I've found you and have enabled your microphone. Hello, I'm calling from battery park. I am here to say that we must remove these three violent officers, Bella Vance, Campbell and Corot. It has been too long. We've been out here and it's time to act. I have been heartened by everything. I've witnessed down at the protests and I am hopeful for the future, but I am also grappling with reckoning with all of the atrocities committed in Vermont against black people and indigenous people and other people of color. Our community here is strong and clear. We will hold the BPD accountable, the city government accountable and all leadership across the city of Burlington and beyond. We are watching. I would like to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence of those who have been brutalized at the hands of the police. Thank you. Okay, our next speaker will be Avery Lentini to be followed by Jesse Gustafson. Avery, I'm enabling your microphone. Hi, can you hear me okay? Yep, go ahead. Hi everyone, I'm Avery Lentini. I use she, her pronouns and I'm a student at UVM. I wanted to thank the city council for this moment and I am speaking in solidarity with the protesters and organizers down at Battery Park and to reiterate their demands and the demands that I stand by as well. We must remove these three violent officers, Bella Vance, Campbell and Coro from the Burlington police force. It's been 29 days down at Battery Park and organizers have been championing these causes for many, many years. And it is our job as city residents and people who care about public safety to act on these issues here in our community. Our community down at the park is strong and clear. We will hold the BPD accountable. We'll hold city leadership accountable and we're watching as elected people in power. It is your job to serve your citizens and listen to what they're calling upon in the name of public safety and to keep the most vulnerable people in our community safe. And right now many BIPOC people are not feeling safe on the streets in Burlington. So I'd like to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of the police. Thank you. Okay, our next speaker will be Jesse Gustafson to be followed by Sienna McGraw. Jesse, I'm enabling your microphone. Hi, can you hear me? Yep, go ahead. Okay. Hi everyone, my name is Jesse and I grew up in the New North end of Burlington. I wanna start off by saying that despite recently to declaring racism a public health issue instead of firing Belivance, Campbell and Coro, the city has forced BIPOC leadership to have to put in physical, mental and emotional labor every day for almost a month during a pandemic which they're disproportionately impacted by. I'm in full support of the Encampment at Battery Park and the community care that I've seen there is really just amazing and beautiful. And I wanna use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for those that have been brutalized by the police. Okay, I was able to locate Sarah Sirtino. Sarah, I'm gonna enable your microphone. Hi, can you hear me okay? Yep, go ahead. Hello? Yes, Sarah, I can hear you, go ahead. Hey, are you able to hear me all right? Yes, I can hear you, Sarah, go ahead. Um, I'm sorry, I can't quite hear anyone. Can you hear me? Yes, Sarah, I can hear you just fine, go ahead. Um, hmm, can you hear me now? Yeah, Sarah, I can hear you. Okay, great. So, yeah, I'm just calling. My name is Sarah Ayushi, her pronouns. I'm calling to speak in support of the resolution to separate with Officer Belivance and urge the council to do whatever it takes to remove Officer Belivance, Campbell and Coro. It's been 29 days at the park and many years of injustice for BIPOC in Vermont and across the country and it's really important that we act now. The community at Battery Park is super strong and it's clear that BPD will be held accountable and as well as city leadership and we're watching. And, you know, at this point, it's like we really just have to, everyone has to vote in support of this resolution because if not, it will be more days of endless, you know, just being in the cold for BIPOC who are suffering more than enough and just putting ourselves in danger at Battery Park. I wanna use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of the police. Thank you. Okay, our next speaker will be Sienna McGraw to be followed by Pigeon Nelson. Sienna, I've enabled your microphone. Yep, go ahead. My name's Sienna McGraw. I'm the resident of Ward 8. I am calling in to maintain the focus on this incredibly important demand to remove the three violent officers, Bella Vance, Campbell, and Coro from their positions in the BPD. This is a crucial decision to ensure that the members of our community BIPOC and otherwise feel safe in where they live and in the city that we call ours together. We've been here in Battery Park for 29 days now and we've been waiting for a decision like this and recognition of the safety of BIPOC members as members of our community for years and now is your opportunity to act and make this decision that's in your power. Our community here is so inspirational and strong and we have raised a group of people together that can support themselves in a way that represents what we need to see. We will hold the BPD accountable, we'll hold city leadership accountable and we're here watching you. Thank you for listening and continuing to listen to BIPOC leaders and voices. And I wanna use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of the police. Thank you. Hey, our next speaker will be Pigeon Nelson to be followed by Lane Dibbler. Pigeon, I've enabled your microphone. Can you hear me? Yes, I can, go ahead. Okay, my name is Pigeon Nelson. I am a student at the University of Vermont and I want to reassert what so many others have said regarding this movement. I want to start by stating that this council and the city of Burlington needs to do whatever they need to do to fire officers Bellavance, Campbell and Coro. They continue to, by continuing to serve the Burlington Police Department, they continue to put people in our community in danger, specifically black and indigenous people of color. I also want to, it has been 29 days since the encampment at Battery Park started and many, many years of the same stuff being said, black and indigenous people do not feel safe in the community of Burlington. And that is something that we have the potential to change here and we have the potential to be very forward in changing for the rest of this country. I have seen the encampment. I've heard about the encampment and they are doing so much for each other and for the community far more than the Burlington Police Department ever has. And I would like to use the remainder of my time to honor those, to honor black and indigenous people of color and others that have been harmed and brutalized by police and the rest of a predatory system. Okay, I was not able to locate Lane Dibbler. I was not able to locate Atalaya Leon Murphy. And I was not able to identify Danny Aitken or Emily Tardy, but I think I did find Jane. So Jane, I'm enabling your microphone. Maybe again, should I begin? Yeah, I can hear you Jane, go ahead. Hi, I'm Jane. I'm a student at the University of Vermont and I just want to echo what everyone else has been saying and say that we must remove these three violent officers, Belivance, Campbell and Corot from their position on the police force. It's been 29 days and so many more years and we just, we have to act. Our community here is strong and clear at Battery Park and we will hold the BPD accountable. We'll hold city leadership accountable and we're watching. And I would like to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others to improve and brutalize at the hands of the police. Okay, I was able to locate Emily Tardy. Emily, I'm enabling your microphone. Hi, can you hear me? Yep, I can. All right, so I would also like to hop on and echo a lot of what my peers and colleagues are saying. I'm actually, I'm in the middle of a chemistry exam right now, but I felt it was incredibly important for you to really consider what you need to do to remove the violent officers, Bella Vance, Campbell, and Coro. It's been 29 days of protesting and community effort to try and get these people out. And it has been years of having like ridiculous amounts of police brutality that should never, ever, ever be like allowed or go without repercussions. And yet they have, our community is here. We're not going anywhere. We want to hold the Burlington Police Department accountable for these terrible actions and city leadership as well. I want to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of police. Okay, our next speaker will be Jake Volvlier. Jake, I've enabled your microphone. Hi, can you hear me? Go ahead. Hi, I am calling in support of the demands of the Battery Park protests and the firing of officers, Campbell, Bella Vance, and Coro. It's long past time that these dangerous officers are taken off our streets. And I'm disappointed in the city council for taking so long to act on this. And I will yield the rest of my time in solidarity of victims of police brutality in Burlington and the rest of the country. Okay, our next speaker was able to locate Atalaya Murphy enabling your microphone. Okay, can you hear me? Yep, go ahead. My name is Atalaya, I use she, her pronouns and I'm a Burlington resident calling from Battery Park on the 29th day. We must remove the three violent officers, Bella Vance, Campbell, and Coro. Our community here is strong and will hold the BPD accountable and we will hold city leadership accountable. If you couldn't tell already, we will be out in Battery Park until these officers are fired. I want to use the rest of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized with the hands of the police. Okay, our next speaker will be Lane Dibbler. Lane, I've enabled your microphone. Yep, go ahead. Hi, I'm calling from Battery Street just to reiterate everything that's been said. I want to make three points. I want to first say that we need to remove the three violent officers. Am I up? Bella Vance, Campbell, and Coro. Two, it's been 29 days and many years. I think the city deserves some action. Three, our community here is strong and clear and we will hold the BPD accountable. We'll hold city leadership accountable and everyone's watching. I yield the rest of my time for a moment of silence for the BIPOC, others that have been hurt and brutalized at the hands of the police here. Okay, our next speaker will be Danny Agin to be followed by Kayla. Danny, I've enabled your microphone. Hi, I'm calling from Battery Street Park sending in support with the protesters here. We must remove these three violent officers, Bella Vance, Campbell, and Coro. It's been 29 days here, protesting at Battery Park and many, many years. You must act the time has far past when you should have acted. Our community here is strong and clear. We will hold the BPD accountable. We'll hold city leadership accountable. We are watching, everyone is watching. I want to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of the police. I'm so excited to be in class. Okay, our next speaker is Kayla Flanagan. Kayla, I've enabled your microphone. Hi, can you hear me? Yep, go ahead. I'd first like to say that these three officers must be removed, Bella Vance, Campbell, and Coro and that it's very disheartening that it's been 29 days since protesters have been at Battery Park and still no change, especially after racism was declared a public health crisis. It's obvious that no one's going to stop and that BPD will be held accountable and that city leadership will be held accountable. And I would like to use the remainder of my time as a moment of silence for BIPOC and others who have been brutalized at the hands of the police. Okay, that concludes our public forum. I have gotten through everybody who signed up and do not see anyone else in the box. So we will conclude the public forum. Go ahead and close that. Thank you to City Clerk Bobi for your work in managing the timer. That always helps keep things moving smoothly. So very much appreciate that assistance and for getting the public forum set up, always helps with these virtual meetings. So we're going to move into our agenda now, counselors. So I'll give you a second to, probably I'll have board docs opening, I'm going to give myself a second to move over. So we are on, we're still on item number three. I'm going to come to that item since it is right after the public forum on board docs. We have a resolution that has been posted to board docs. For members of the public that you may view on the city website, if you'd like to take a look at that. And we now, given that there is a resolution, I would entertain a motion on the resolution. Councillor Hansen. Sure, yeah, I can move it. I'll move that we waive the reading and adapt the resolution. Okay, we have a motion on the resolution seconded by Councillor Freeman. Is there, did you want the floor back Councillor or did you just want? I'm happy to kick it off or someone else feels very compelled to start this discussion, that's fine too. Okay, so go ahead. Seeing none, go ahead, Councillor Hansen. Okay, happy to, just to be clear, even though I'm kicking off the discussion, this isn't in any way my resolution. This is the product of the council as a whole working over the course of weeks, if not longer, trying to find common ground and trying to find a way to move forward on this extremely difficult issue. I think we all, on the council, we have different perspectives about each of the three. First of all, we've heard loud and clear from at this point, thousands of community members about the desire for these three officers to be off to the force. Just want to first say that and really acknowledge and uplift and honor all those who are working so hard on this and I've been really impressed by what's going on down at Battery Park in the time that I've spent down there. I've been kind of blown away by the community that's built there and people's fortitude to push for a better community and a safer community, especially for BIPOC folks and other marginalized folks. So in terms of the three officers, I think there's different perspectives on this council about each of the three of them and there's a lot of disagreement around this sensitive topic. I think I've been pretty clear since last May when these videos first came out that I've been appalled by all three of the incidences and personally I don't feel the discipline was appropriate in any of the cases but I think what we're doing tonight is really important, which is that rather than continuing to debate on what we disagree on, we are moving forward and taking important action, meaningful action on the one area where we do have widespread agreement, which is this separation agreement that's laid out in this resolution for Sergeant Belivance. So I think I'm pretty heartened by the fact that the council is coming together around this and taking decisive action and moving forward on this. I hope that the full council or as close to full council as possible are gonna come together around this and show our community that we hear you and that our goal isn't to just keep fighting one another on the council and having you kind of watch that play out but rather to find the common ground that we do have and take meaningful action moving forward. Thank you, Councillor Hanson. I have Councillor Paulino. I see you, Councillor Stromberg. I'll get you to you next. Councillor Paulino, go ahead. Thank you, President Tracey. I just wanna say that I think unlike most resolutions, I think most resolutions involve a lot of city staff or a lot of city staff sort of or some administration support. I think that this resolution by itself is unprecedented and I think it's unprecedented, the amount of effort put on by the administration to bring this to light. As you can see, I'm a co-sponsor with Councillor Hanson. I appreciate that Councillor Hanson co-sponsored it as I as sometimes we don't always agree on the issues, although we get along very well. I think it shows that many of us wanna move forward, wanna get to the real work. The real work involves systemic racism, it involves equal treatment of all Berlin-tonians and I think this resolution speaks to that because it pushes this issue where it's solely focusing on three officers but not the rest of the department what we can do moving forward. So we have to take this step in order to move forward. I am very supportive of it, but honestly, I just really wanted to say that it's pretty remarkable the amount of time that we have all put to give our input on this. I don't think the administration has been as receptive to us and any other issue that I've been around for and I just wanna say that this is a big deal. We are doing a separation, I think it's a fair one. It's a lot of money, no get me wrong, but I think it is the best possible outcome and I think it should bring closure to many. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Paulino. I have Councilor Stromberg next in the queue. If others want to let me know, go ahead, Councilor Stromberg. Thanks, Max. Council President Tracy. Yeah, so I wanna really echo the sentiments that Jack kind of put out there and I do wanna thank the administration for helping to put this forth and I just, I wanna kind of pivot and focus truly on the organizers and what is being demanded. The demand is that we fire these three officers and the demand is actually reparations. As a city, we vowed to explore reparations and now when our BIPOC community and allies camp outside during a global pandemic and a drastically changing environment outside now, and also take the time to call in the public forums and are sincerely asking and naming specific reparations, we are not really coming through on that and I just wanna acknowledge that. I wanna acknowledge that a bio is not a firing and we've heard that from folks tonight and I want to let you know that I hear that and that a lot of colleagues hear that. This resolution is not resolution per se, but a very, very important move at this time. I will be supporting this resolution but not because this is putting this issue to bed by any means, we have so much work to do ahead of us as a city, as people in government and we do have a real responsibility to take. This resolution exonerates no one and it certainly does not exonerate us in government. I have felt so cynical at times, so disheartened by our justice system, by the innate bias so interwoven in our systems of law enforcement, but then I also have felt incredibly determined and inspired because I am inspired by the organizers, by the activists in our community, even the activists within ourselves, the movement toward real justice and most of all, I've been just honestly very beyond honored and privileged to serve this community that is honestly just so, so honed in on holding folks accountable, holding us accountable. That is what our job is, is to be voices and to be mouthpieces for our constituents and we need to be held accountable and I commend that, I commend the bravery of everyone calling into us and telling us exactly what they are feeling and thinking. You are doing the necessary work and you are all leaders and I just want to communicate that I appreciate you endlessly and we wouldn't be doing this tonight without you at all and I want to acknowledge that, so thank you. Okay, I don't have anyone else in the queue who also would like to speak to the resolution. Councillor Pine. Mr. President, the comments are really trying to offer a little bit of perspective on how as counselors faced with this decision and trying to take action on this issue has been at least for this counselor and I believe for most others has been extremely challenging, extremely difficult. We've taken dozens of hours of public testimony, thousands of emails and many calls around these issues of racial justice over the last three months. Conversation has really provided a badly needed focus on deeper issues of racism that have plagued our community and really our entire country for most of the last 400 years. I think as a city we're really in the early stages of beginning to address, acknowledge and accept and call out the structural changes that are needed to do our part to dismantle systemic racism. Policing is an area that I think is especially important for us to focus on since it involves state sanctioned use of force that has the potential for causing harm and even death in extreme cases. So we're being forced really to reckon with situations that occurred and events that occurred in our own community that caused real pain and suffering and harm in our community. And I believe that the harm that was caused to BIPOC residents didn't just hurt them and their families, although it certainly did but it really tore at our fabric and who we are as a community. It really shook our community and really I believe had lasting impact. I think the old labor saying that an injury to one is an injury to all is really especially appropriate for this situation because I think most Berlin Tonians when they grapple with what happened, forget the actual details, logistics and sort of fact patterns and all the legal side. It just didn't feel right for people in Berlin to witness the footage of what happened to see the result of that type of use of force. And so I feel like what we're trying to do here is to accept some responsibility as a community, not the legal issues, hold those aside but really for the harm that was caused by the actions of our local government essentially even when it involves things like lawsuits and financial obligations. I believe that we have a moral obligation to look beyond those issues and at times it can be challenging as our role as counselors but we're going to begin the process of dismantling systemic racism and making amends for harm that has been caused. We have to start somewhere. We have to begin a restorative process, something like a truth and reconciliation process is something that I've discussed with many people and I think is something that we need to commit ourselves to. I believe this tonight is an important step in that direction. So I will be supporting this resolution. I appreciate everyone that was involved in making it happen, the administration, the council and I look forward to hopefully unanimous approval tonight. Thank you. Thank you, councilor Paine. I have councilor Jing next. Go ahead, councilor Jing. Thank you, president Tracy. And I think one of the people that spoke at public forum insisted to find out why not the legal separation with the two other offices which I believe Joseph Coral and Corey Campbell and was wondering if the mayor can speak to that. Sure, thank you, councilor Jing. Mayor Weinberger, are you able to speak to councilor Jing's question? President Tracy, I have extended statement. I'd like to give it a certain point that addresses that. I'd prefer to hear if there are any other councilor questions before giving that statement. Okay, councilor Jing, you still have the floor. Councilor Jing and you're on mute. All right, thank you, president Tracy. I do think that this has been a silence in response. And because these demands, they did not start 29 days ago. They started way back when. And in June, it was in front of us. The racial justice alliance made the same call of firing the three abusive officers. Responses from the city was all of this is not just possible. It's not possible. And because why these officers has already been disciplined. And in front of us today is we have a resolution. And I do believe the resolution in front of us is putting the taxpayers of Burlington in jeopardy. This is not a call for justice. This is not solving the issue. And this issue could have been done prevented long time ago. To date, nobody has taken a responsibility. Talking about my council colleague, nobody has taken any responsibilities about what happened. The chief of police was voted back to his seat easily. And I remember councilor Shannon refusing to divide the question. It was just like yesterday. So I believe as a person of color, what we experience when we see injustices, it's not something that you can understand. You cannot understand it. And it still hurts that we still playing games and playing politics. Because I know if it was somebody's child here, this council for those who have kids, it will not be something we sit down here still talking about. We're receiving thousands of calls and emails from young protesters here and putting their safety in jeopardy. There has not been any level of accountability. But I wanna state this publicly. Councilor Freeman has shown courage over and over and over again about this matter. There are some who are new among us, right? You weren't here. But Freeman stood up and I think she took responsibility of what happened. Just like I did. I am not interested in competing with anyone. I just want all of us to fight and win for justice. I would not be voting for this resolution that is putting the taxpayers of Wellington into jeopardy. Thank you. Thank you, councilor Chang. I don't have anyone else in the queue. Councilor Hightower, go ahead. Thank you. I think it's hard to see this resolution as a true and complete win because it's not, I think the outcome that anybody wants to see in its entirety. But I hope that this is the start of the city taking responsibility for not, I believe aligning our policies with our values in a timely fashion. For not acting boldly when we should have an addressing issues, whether it's at the individual level, the department level, the council level, or the city level as a whole. And I hope that this confirms our resolve to not make those same mistakes again, to act boldly when we should have to make sure that we are listening to the community and align our policies in a way that aligns with our community's values so that we're not in these positions again. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Councilor Hightower. I don't have anyone else in the queue or anyone else like to speak to the resolution. Mayor, did I see Councilor Shannon? Did you want to go? Are you trying to be recognized, Councilor Shannon? Yes, but I can defer to the mayor. Okay. I'm happy to have Councilor Shannon go first. All right, go ahead, Councilor Shannon. Thank you, President Tracey. I just want to say that while I do not think that this resolution is going to put to bed the issue of racism in our community, I do certainly hope that it moves us towards peace and reconciliation in our community. The issue of racism is pervasive and as long as it exists in our community, it's likely to exist and be reflected in our policing. This issue isn't limited to policing. It's simply a fact that as white people, we have benefited from racism for generations and we need to start facing that and we need to start addressing that in really deep and meaningful ways. And we need to better understand how our own racism is affecting many different aspects of our life. And so, but as far as dealing with the calls for addressing these three officers, I don't really know what more we can do. And if other counselors think that there is further action to be taken with regards to these officers, if they have plans to take further actions with these officers, I hope they will let that be known now so that I can take that into consideration prior to voting. My understanding is that we're coming together to do this in an effort to move forward. And I hope that we are able to do that. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Shannon. I had Mayor Weinberger next and then to be followed by Councilor Jane. May I speak before the mayor and maybe the mayor can close it. Just an offer. Happy to defer. Sure. Thank you, Councilor Jane. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I think I wanted to respond to Councilor Shannon's request if there is any other opportunity that we have in front of us. And you all know that I did propose something that is very simple. And I ask our city attorney and we can ask her again here. As a city, can we ask a member, a police officer that you do not have a contract when your contract are up again, which is in 2022? I think it was a very practical solution that will not involve any funds from the taxpayers of Burlington knowing that we're experiencing currently also financial hardship with COVID-19. And I would want the city attorney to weigh on that. And I do remember her statement was, it is possible but not in the way that I formulated it. And to me, we were all together. Why the administration has not explored that avenue that will give us more closure to this issue. So that's a question to the city attorney. Attorney Blackwood, are you able to speak to that, please? I'm not sure that I, the question is, is whether or not you can, I'm not sure I'm following what. The question is simple as this. The city council or the administration, can they go to a staff of the city and told that person, you will not have a renewed contract when it's due? Is that clear enough? Well, to a person who has a contract or an annual appointment like a department head, yes, but to a regular city staff person, they don't have contracts, individual contracts that would renew at a particular time. Yes, we understand that, Irene. We understand that. And I think the question is very specific to those who have bargaining contracts through their unions. Yes, unions. Can we say X, Y and Z, we do not want their contracts renewed? That's what I'm asking. I believe all four of the union contracts have a provision in them that say that if we get to the end of it, we haven't reached agreement that the contract continues. Basically, so you're saying to my question, I wanna know if you understand it already. Do you understand my question, right? As I understand what you're asking is if the contracts currently run through June 30th of 2022, if the city now says, hey, everybody be unnoticed that we're not gonna renew the contract following that time, that's what you're asking. Can you put people on notice and say, police union, we're not going to renew the contract in after June 30th of 2022? Yeah, police union, we will not renew the contract of X, Y and Z employee, but for anyone else, we should be able to go to bargaining and move forward. No, I mean, the individual employees don't have a contract. The union has a contract. And we cannot ask the union to remove three of their union members while doing bargaining with us. Right, they don't remove people. They can't take individual people and say, you're no longer part of the union, you're not covered by the union contract. The city in order to terminate the folks would have to have just cause. Yep, and I think the just cause is very clear here. And that's what we all experiencing with the protest, with the discipline that were not applied appropriately, with also the city council not knowing about the wrongdoings at the right time. I think that is enough for just cause. Just say these three offices, we do not want them in our force as we move forward. And I believe your answer last time is it's possible, but not the way that I formulate the question. And there are attorneys also watching this meeting right now. Right, you can't say now these particular employees who are union members, you will not have a job. You can, you could terminate positions via, and go through layoff processes, but those have rules around how they work, but you can't say you people are not gonna have this job. Thank you for the record and no for the questions. Okay, thank you, Councillor Zheng. I had Councillor Mason. Do you wanna speak to this Councillor Mason or are you? Yeah, yes, please. Thank you, President Tracy. I just wanna and city attorney, if you could maybe come back on the queue cause I wanna follow up on that. Just so I think the concept or my understanding of the concept that was being articulated was that somehow we as the council or the administration in the next union contract could use that negotiation to force the removal of two specific individuals. And what I thought I heard you say was, that's not how the union contract works and we have no ability to do that. Is that correct? Yes. And the other piece where maybe you could confirm cause my remembering back to your legal advice was specifically disciplining individuals based on conduct that had already been disciplined, not only was a violation of the contract but it exposed us as a city to constitutional claims as well? Yes. Okay. So I just, for the public's benefit, my takeaway from this conversation is, I appreciate what a councilor has put forth as a potential solution, but I'm hearing there are the continued legal and contractual concerns with exploring that when that contract comes up. Okay. So to sort of speak to that, I will say that this council has bandied about in response to the concerns that have been raised by many of our constituents. This is one of many paths that we have heard you and we have explored, I would say, with the city attorney and as a body, any and all options in order to at least see whether it was possible to effectuate that which the protesters and I would say that our constituents are asking for. And where we've landed today, I hope represents a turning point for this body and the public to recognize we have done what we as a body feel is within our legal and contractual rights. We're potentially, if this approves, entering into a settlement agreement with one officer, the other two are somewhat off the limits, but also focusing our attention now, because there is much work to be done on let's stop looking backward. This is what we can do looking backward. Let's now use direct our energy into looking forward and invite the protesters and those who are concerned about doing the right thing into that process. But I'm hopeful that with this, we as a body can start to move forward and do the hard work. Thank you. Thank you, councilor Macy and councilor Chang. Okay, so I think this is exactly what I was trying to convey earlier today. Not interested in competing, but what I want us all to do is to fight for justice and fighting for justice is we should make sure that officers that do not serve us well are removed weed out from this. And whatever it takes, we will do it. Whatever it can take for justice, we should do it. And that's what my colleagues refuse to do. Let's take responsibility about what has happened. This is not justice and it can never be justice. Yes. And I will talk about this more, to develop more what I wanna say. Thank you, president Tracy. Okay, thank you, councilor Chang. I have councilor Paulino. Well, I was gonna speak to, I'll speak to both points, I was gonna speak to, I specifically did not mention, and I think it's worth mentioning, having Eileen Blackwood's advice throughout this period. I don't know other city attorneys' backgrounds, but I don't think anybody here doubts her labor and employment law. And I think over the course of this year, her expertise have been put to the test. We have now seen that she was right. I think that what she has said is, we can't, but we can't means we'll get sued. So we can, but we will get sued. So we have to just decide what we wanna do. And this is governance, we're not gonna take that risk. So I think that when people talk about justice, that's a relative thing to different people. The best definition of that word is to prevent injustice. And I think that's what this resolution speaks to, is that a large group of people feel it would be an injustice for these officers whose incidents were mishandled to continue to serve without significant repercussions to their law enforcement career. And we're in an unprecedented swift manner doing that tonight. And I'm very proud of that. And I just wanna say that it isn't pretty, it isn't perfect. Not everybody will be happy, but that is governance. That is making, that is taking a hard problem where people fall on the different spectrum and trying to come to a resolution after many hours spent on it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Paulino. I have Mayor, Councilor Shannon, go ahead. Thank you, President Tracey. I have a question for Attorney Blackwood. If you'll allow it, which is Attorney Blackwood, if we take an action that we know to be illegal, will we have insurance to either pay the liability of such action or to cover our legal defense of such action? There are never absolutes. There is significant risk. I would be very concerned that it would be considered an intentional act that if you know something to be illegal and you do it anyway, that you will not have insurance coverage and or that it will be considered an intentional act under the law. An intentional means more than I meant to do it. It means I'm meant, I knew that the result of my doing this was breaking the law. And then the insurance policy doesn't cover those kinds of acts. It covers negligence, it covers mistakes. I think that sufficiently answers my question. So I would just say that I think what I hear Councillor Jang saying, and I'm sure that he'll correct me if I mischaracterize this, but when I hear him saying that we need to do whatever we have to do to get rid of them, it seems to be without regard for whether or not that is legal. And so if we were to take an illegal action, we would be at extreme risk of putting the city in a terrible financial situation far worse than the $300,000 that we're talking about tonight, I would think. And if it's an illegal action, then you can fire somebody and they're entitled to get their job back and then you owe them all this money. So I don't see that as being a legitimate solution to a problem, that's just a solution that will put the city in terrible jeopardy. So I hope that that is not a solution that is brought forward and I haven't heard, but I do appreciate that that Councillor Jang is putting on the table, things that he's thinking about. And I hope that if others have things that they're thinking about, bringing forward that we'll hear them at this time. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Councillor Shannon. I have Mayor Weinberger in the queue. Thank you, President Tracy. And thank you to my colleagues. I would like to share a few thoughts with you and the public on this significant action, which I believe the council is about to take. For approximately a year and a half, there has been significant community discomfort with the actions of three police officers, each of whom was involved in a separate use of force incident in the fall of 2018 or early 2019. In the wake of the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis and a national reckoning with police violence and systemic racism, many more members of the community, including the protesters at Battery Park have expressed concerns with those officers continuing to serve and the city's been exploring the legal and moral implications of a range of actions. Tonight, the city council is considering taking action on a proposal that the administration brought forward and negotiated that is intended to bring some measure of resolution and finality to the controversy surrounding these three officers. The resolution before the council would authorize me to enter into a separation agreement with Sergeant Jason Bellavance, setting forth that he has agreed to resign in return for the equivalent of approximately three years' compensation. Further tonight, now I am announcing my final decision not to support separation agreements with officers Coro and Campbell. Although the three officers have been grouped together in public discussions, the three use of force incidents are distinct and the city council and I must consider each individually. And I'd like to share a little bit more of my thinking on each of their cases. Because I think, in this moment of unprecedented community discord that is intertwined with an overdue national reckoning on racial justice and policing, I support a separation agreement in the case of Sergeant Bellavance, both because of his actions and position within the department were significantly different than those of the other two officers. Although the police department's internal investigation found Sergeant Bellavance did not use excessive or unlawful force, it did find that the force was not necessary given the circumstances. The investigation concluded that consistent with his training, there were a number of de-escalation techniques that Sergeant Bellavance could have used but did not attempt before using physical force. These findings are different from what occurred in the other two cases where officers Coro and Campbell were not found to have violated departmental use of force training and policy that were in place at the time. An aggravating factor for Sergeant Bellavance is that as a Sergeant in charge on the night of September 9th, 2018, he was in a leadership position where officers under his command were looking to him to model what was expected of them. We must apply a higher standard to our leaders and we must look to our leadership to establish a culture in the police department that is in line with the Burlington's values. Finally, in my discussions with Burlingtonians over these past years, I've listened carefully and heard clearly from many who have expressed that of the three incidents that led to this moment of community anger and discord, they find the incident regarding Sergeant Bellavance the most trouble. Now to address officers Coro and Campbell, I do not support pursuing voluntary separation agreements with officers Coro and Campbell. Their uses of force were found to be consistent with the policy and training that were in place at the time and to pursue separation agreements under these circumstances would set an unmanageable precedent that would challenge the department for years to come by suggesting that future employment decisions will be decided not by fair, deliberative processes that are clear to employees at the time or rather that those decisions will be subject to retroactive reopening by the passions of public opinion. Further, officers Coro and Campbell have been with the BPD for only a few years at the time of the incidents and deserve a chance to show the public that they can serve the community in a manner consistent with Burlington values. I encourage Burlingtonians to consider that the most effective way to address today's challenges is by moving forward with action steps designed to address systemic racism. Such steps include police training, governance, discipline and body camera footage policies and more. You must advance changes that are responsive to the concerns that have been raised in our community and that improve accountability and transparency while providing a foundation for moving forward. I'm committed to that significant systemic change, the administration and partnership with the city council and the police commission has embarked over the last 18 months on numerous substantive efforts to improve these systems and policies. Later this week, I will announce additional steps to accelerate their form processes underway and ensure that they lead to meaningful change. I hope that the public will see tonight's action by the city as a sign of our seriousness and commitment to complete that work. Even as the city is limited in our ability to change what has happened in the past, I urge the Burlington community to join me in completing the hard work of systemic change so that our policing fully aligns with the values of our community going forward. Through my conversations with protesters, other Burlingtonians and the police, I remain confident that we have much opportunity for common ground when we are looking to the future of policing in this community. Now there's great consensus that we must work together to overcome our country's racist past and ensure that black and brown Burlingtonians feel fully safe and supported in this community by the police and the city. I look forward to working alongside Burlingtonians to realize the great promise and potential of this moment. Thank you, presentation. Thank you, Mayor Weinberger. I have Councillor Stromberg next. Go ahead, Councillor Stromberg. I'm good. I think at this point, I mean, I don't want to cut anybody off, but if it's necessary, call the question and move on. Okay, we have a motion to call the question. Is there a second to that motion? Seconded by Councillor Jang. I see others having raised their hands as well. Just so folks know, it's a non-debatable motion and it does require two thirds to cut off debate. So we will go to a vote. Will the city clerk please call the roll on the motion to call the question? Councillor Carpenter. Councillor Carpenter, couldn't hear your vote. You're on mute. Thank you. Councillor Jang. Yes. Councillor Freeman. Yes. Councillor Hanson. Yes. Councillor Hightower. Yes. Councillor Mason. Yes. Councillor Paul. Yes. Councillor Paulino. Yes. Councillor Pine. Yes. Councillor Shannon. Yes. Councillor Stromberg. Yes. City Council President Tracy. Yes. 12 ayes. Okay, that passes unanimously and we will now go to a vote on the resolution itself. Will the city clerk please call the roll on the resolution itself? Councillor Carpenter. Aye. Councillor Jang. No. Councillor Freeman. Yes. Councillor Hanson. Yes. Councillor Hightower. Yes. Councillor Mason. Yes. Councillor Paul. Yes. Councillor Paulino. Yes. Councillor Pine. Yes. Councillor Shannon. Yes. Councillor Stromberg. Yes. City Council President Tracy. Yes. 11 ayes, one nay. Resolution passes. We appreciate everyone's hard work on that and we will now continue with our agenda. So the next item on our agenda is the climate emergency reports. So we have, anybody have a climate emergency report that they would like to offer? Councillor Stromberg, go ahead. Yeah, real quick. I know that we have some important things to still get to tonight, but I just, I wanted to, this is like a true report, I guess, of what's going on overall. And I just wanted to acknowledge that like the fires out west are as large as they've ever been. And there's a lot going on in terms of our hurricane seasons and things like that. And I just want us to remember that this is something that is actually very much intertwined with racial justice and climate justice. And everything kind of has that overlying umbrella because our most marginalized populations on this planet are severely impacted by climate change. And I just, I don't know, I had a lot more to say about this item, but I think that that's the main point that I want to get to. And I just want us to remember that. So I just want to take that second to say that. Thank you. Thank you for that, Councillor Stromberg. Is there, are there further climate emergency reports from councillors? Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to item number five, which is the consent agenda. I'm going to come back to you, Councillor Stromberg, for a motion on the consent agenda, please. So I move to adopt the consent agenda and take the actions indicated. Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second second from Councillor Pine? Any discussion? Seeing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor of adopting our consent agenda, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes unanimously. We will now move down into our deliberative agenda. We have a couple of event permits. So 6.01 through 03, Councillor Hanson, may I please have a motion on 6.01? I would move that we approve the special event outdoor entertainment permit application for Burlington City Arts, September 11th, 18th, 23rd and 25th, 2020, Waterworks Park, 6.30 p.m. to 10 p.m. fall flex. We have a motion from Councillor Hanson, a second from Councillor Stromberg. Any discussion of this event permit? Okay, hearing none, we'll go to a vote on this. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passes unanimously, which brings us to item 6.02, another special event permit. Councillor Hanson, can you please offer a motion on that? Yep, I'll move to approve the special event outdoor entertainment permit application for Burlington City Arts, Wednesday, September 23rd, 2020, 6.30 p.m. to 9 p.m., Waterworks Park, near the Moran plant and the Burlington Harbor Marina, architecture and design film series. Thank you, Councillor Hanson. Is there a second to that motion? Seconded from Councillor Stromberg. Any further discussion of this? Okay, seeing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes unanimously and we'll go to our third special event entertainment permit. Councillor Hanson, can you please also offer a motion on that? I move to approve the special event outdoor entertainment permit application for the Burlington City Arts, Saturday, September 26th, 2020, Waterworks Park, near the Moran plant in Burlington Harbor Marina, 7.15 p.m. to 9 p.m., for the Vermont International Film Festival. Okay, we have a motion and a second from Councillor Hightower. Any further discussion of this? Councillor Hightower, go ahead. Sorry, I was actually losing my mind for discussion. I'm not sure I have to, but just in case, because I'm a speaker at this event, I think it'd probably be better if I just recuse myself. Oh, okay, all right. So if Councillor Hightower is recusing herself, you're still in need of a second for this and please note that Councillor Hightower, okay, second from Councillor Freeman. Any discussion? Okay, hearing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passes unanimously. We are moving right along. Now that brings us to item 6.04, Ranked Choice Voting Charter Change. I will go back to Councillor Hansen once again for another resolution. Go ahead, Councillor Hansen. We're wearing me out, President Tracy. I will move to wave the reading and adopt the resolution and ask for the floor back after a second. Okay, we have a motion and a second from Councillor Stromberg. Go ahead, Councillor Hansen. Great, so this council has discussed and debated Ranked Choice Voting numerous times, beginning last December, when we initially voted Ranked Choice Voting through to advance to the Charter Change Committee. There's been a lot of debate and discussion both among community members and this council and something that I think, so I don't wanna rehash the debates that we've had over and over about the substance of Ranked Choice Voting as a system and why some of us prefer it over the current plurality system or why some of us don't. But what I do think is beneficial is to explain the changes that exist in this resolution and those changes were really in an effort to bring more people along and try to avoid this issue becoming a partisan issue because I really don't believe that it should be and I think it's detrimental to the community and to our democracy and to the issue itself to have it be turned into something partisan. So I've been working over the past several weeks with Councillor Shannon, who's been a long, long-time proponent of Ranked Choice Voting and trying to find common ground and an approach that would move forward based on those interactions and based on working with other advocates and community members who have shared their feelings about this issue. So what we have before us here tonight, kind of as a result of that, is a proposal to bring Ranked Choice Voting to the voters for March. So we, as you may remember, the council did vote to bring it in November. The mayor had vetoed that and the override was a seven to six vote, so that failed and a lot of the objection to bringing it at that point to the November ballot was around the additional costs and resources to place that November. So now we're talking about placing it on the March ballot where there'd be no additional expenditure costs and hopefully a high turnout election with mayoral races. The only substantive difference with this resolution is that this is specifically a resolution to implement Ranked Choice Voting for city council races. The previous resolution was for city council mayoral and school commissioner. Some folks felt that, you know, to jump to using all those three offices was maybe a big jump and then folks felt like it would be better to start off with city council, allow the community to experience this and then allow the community, if they so choose and wanted to expand it further to do so at that point. So that is the idea behind this resolution. And I had submitted a small change to the resolution per Councillor Shannon. I'm happy to make that motion now or Councillor Shannon would like to, but I've sent that around to staff and forwarded to the council as well. Is that Councillor Hanson? Sure, yeah, if Councillor Shannon wants to make it, I would welcome that or I'm happy to make the amendment now, whatever Councillor Shannon would prefer. Councillor Shannon, are you able to clarify which one you prefer? Yes, I'd like for Councillor Hanson to do that, thank you. Okay, Councillor Hanson, go ahead. No problem. So the amendment that I would make would just be on lines 41 and 42 delete the line, delete the words and to allow for the adoption of ranked choice voting for the election of mayor and school commissioners upon an affirmative vote of the voters at a subsequent election. Okay, we have a motion to amend from Councillor Hanson. Is there, okay, second from Councillor Schromberg. Discussion on that amendment. Okay, Councillor Shannon, go ahead and then Councillor Hightower. Could Councillor Hanson just repeat that? I didn't see what he circulated, so I just want to make. Yeah, that's fair. I'm sorry, can you please reread? But I thought it would be. Yep, so the motion would be on lines 41 and 42 to delete the words and to allow for the adoption of ranked choice voting for the election of mayor and school commissioners upon an affirmative vote of the voters at a subsequent election. Okay, are you clear, Councillor Shannon? What about lines 67 through 73? Oh, okay. I'm happy to, if I may present Tracy, I'd be happy to delete lines 69 through 73 as well. Okay, I'll allow. If I could do that, please. Okay, I'll allow that. Councillor Shannon, are you now clear on his motion? Yes. Okay, thank you. Okay, is, okay, further discussion on the amendment. Councillor Hightower, I'm sorry, go ahead. Yeah, sorry, I have to, I wasn't, I'm worried about just having one office and not having a quick way to implement additional offices, which I've talked to about both with Councillor Hanson and Councillor Shannon. And I guess I just want to know what the advantage is to us to not allowing, not having the mechanism be another Burlington wide vote to allow this, why we feel the need, why we're eliminating that when that's a positive for us, it still would take it back to the voters that Burlington would still get to weigh in. Yeah, I don't under, I don't understand this amendment. Were you, Councillor Hightower, were you looking for clarification from Councillor Hanson? I would be, I would love to hear it from Councillor Shannon as she's open, but otherwise we take it from Councillor Hanson. Sure, Councillor Shannon, I saw you raising your hand. Are you looking to address the question? Sure. I think that this is an issue that's been controversial in the community that people are apprehensive about. The language that has been offered in no way makes it clear to people that this would not go through the normal charter change process. I think that that was really not in any way transparent to many of the readers of the language, including myself. It was pointed out to me by an attorney amongst us. And without that guidance, I wouldn't have even understood that. So I don't think that that process should be circumvented. I'm not going to say that there's an advantage particularly, but I don't think that we should add further controversy. To a matter that's already controversial, I have some reluctance about bringing this forward at this time. I will say that, well, it is my preference. I believe that rank choice voting is a better system than first pass the post, which is what we have now. But I also respect that for a lot of voters, that system did not give them confidence. And I don't think that we should in any way circumvent any part of our system in this approval. And I am more comfortable with implementing it at the council level. I think people will feel a little less risk with that and see if people are comfortable with it after using it for a little bit. If they want to advance that to using it for mayor, then we will have another vote and we will go through the complete and legitimate process of adopting it for mayor. So, and I guess I want to push back on that a little bit to say I don't think that this circumvents the process. I think it actually adds more process to the process because it still has to go to voters. It still has to go to the state and then it has to go to voters again. So it follows all the normal processes and then adds in a whole another process. I don't think it's circumvents in any way the way that it is written. The second thing that I want to ask is because we're waiving the reading and adopting the resolution and I've heard conflicting things. Is this going to charter change? Is there an opportunity to make additional changes to this? Are we, what is happening to this resolution? That's a question for Councillor Hansen or Attorney Blackwood. Yeah, I'll go to Councillor Hansen first. Are you able to clarify Councillor Hansen? Yeah, and I wrote to Attorney Blackwood on this. My understanding is that, and I just messed up because the language wasn't updated but I had asked to change the language on board docs and apologies for not reading, or apologies for not catching that it hadn't changed. But my understanding is that this would have to go to charter change committee. Is that correct? City Attorney Blackwood? There's not, President Tracy, okay, if I go ahead. Yes, absolutely. There's not a, you don't have a specific rule that absolutely requires it. That would be your normal process because charter change looked at a question and the council passed it. I mean, that's, to me, that it's really up to you all as a council whether or not you wanted to go back to charter change, or if you're comfortable with it moving forward. That's what. Got it. For myself, I just want the issue to move forward. So I guess it depends where other counselors are at. I'm comfortable going back to charter change or not. So it really just depends how the council's feeling about that. I didn't realize that it was an option to skip that. But I would be fine to do that or I'm fine to go to charter depending where other counselors are at. Okay, so the motion is to not send, there's no motion to refer at this time. The motion was just to adopt the resolution. So back to you, counselor Hightower. Yeah, I think it's just, then to me, I think there's some language clarification that I think I assumed would happen as part of this being sent to charter change, which currently sounds like it's not part of the process. It's a complicated issue. So I think being as clear as possible on the language to counselor Shannon's point is good. I'm not necessarily sure that that necessarily means that we have to throw out, oh gosh, after 10 cliches just come out, the baby with the bathwater and throw out our ability to implement this in three or four years instead of five or six years. Just because the language wasn't as clear on it as it could have been. So thank you both for that clarifying point. I thought that was helpful. Okay, so we are still on counselor Hanson's amendment. I don't have anyone else in the queue on this. Okay, everyone ready to vote on the amendment and clear on what the amendment was. Okay, all those in favor of the amendment, please say aye. Aye. Aye. I'm sorry, let's call the roll. I don't know that we're gonna be unanimous. Felicity Clerk, please call the roll. Counselor Carpenter? Counselor Jang? Yes. I'm sorry? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Counselor Freeman? Yes. Counselor Hanson? Yes. Counselor Hightower? No. Counselor Mason? Yes. Counselor Paul? Yes. Counselor Paulino? Yes. Counselor Pine? Yes. Counselor Shannon? Yes. Counselor Strongberg? Yes. City Council President Tracy? No. Ten ayes, two days. Okay, so the amendment passes. We're back to the original resolution as amended. Counselor Hanson, go ahead. Great, thanks. So I'm wondering if Counselor Shannon's willing to share whether she would prefer to send it to Charter Change Committee or not. Counselor Shannon, are you able to weigh in on that please? The Charter Change Committee is pretty overwhelmed with just cause evictions and the evaluation of different bodies that might evaluate police discipline, which is a lofty task in a very short timeframe. I don't, this issue has been to Charter Change and the Charter Change Committee members did not have interest in wordsmithing this language. So it was exactly this language, but it included for Mayor School Board and City Council. So the only thing that I see coming out of Charter Change is a possibility that the majority would change who we're voting on and it would come back different. So I don't really see the point honestly. I think that unless you want to send it to Charter Change to deliberate on whether it should be for Mayor School Board and City Council, we kind of have already had that debate. I specifically asked members if they wanted to discuss the language, they did not. So I don't really see anything coming back from Charter Change that would be useful to this body at this point. Okay, Councillor Hanson, you still have the floor. Okay, that's helpful. Like I said, I'm fine either way. So I'm fine with the council moving it forward as laid out in the motion. And then we would still under that scenario, we would still have the public hearing and if there were any small massaging of language, based on the city attorney's feedback, that would still be possible if there's any tweaks we would need to make there. But I don't see the need for any substantial changes. Okay, thank you, Councillor Hanson. Councillor Hightower. Yeah, and I guess I was actually going to ask the same question that Councillor Hanson just kind of said as a statement, which is to ask Attorney Blackwood if there was some clarification around the language that we wanted to do later on, what that process looks like and what our options are around them. Sure, Attorney Blackwood, can you please weigh in on that? Sure, the process is that we will set the Charter Change for public hearing and at the public hearings, and there are two public hearings on it, and at those public hearings, if there are comments that people make that say please make these changes, then the council can direct staff to make those changes and present a revised question to be approved to go on the ballot later. So if you have changes, generally what we say is let's get them read into the record at a public hearing and then we can make them. Okay, that's helpful. Thank you, Attorney Blackwood. Thank you. Okay, I don't have anyone else in the queue. Okay, Councillor Stromberg, go ahead. Yeah, real quick. So I realize this is a Charter Change, but I'm curious like is there, and I guess I would turn to Attorney Blackwood on this, but is there another committee that makes sense for this to be like kind of looked over in or no, not really at this point? Not that I can think of. It would normally go to Charter Change. Okay. Okay, I don't have anyone else in the queue. You're ready to vote? May I ask a quick question? Sure. Thank you, President Tracy, and this is for Jack Hanson, Councillor Hanson. Let's assume we have rank choice voting is passed and we come to a voting vote and there are only two candidates, right? What voting system will the voters use in determining who's the best in picking their elected official? Will it still be under rank choice voting? Councillor Hanson, are you able to answer that? Yeah, no, I'm happy to. Yeah, no, it doesn't rank choice voting in a two-way race is no different than the current system. It's only when you have more than two candidates is it a different system than the current voting system? Yeah. So you wouldn't need to rank one, two out of two candidates. You would just select the one candidate that you preferred or leave it blank. Okay. It would operate no differently than the current system. I also just wanted to state this the following. I think I want to appreciate your hard work around this. And I think you've been very persistent in bringing it back, getting pushed back. You're still being persistent. I will, and I think I told you that I will not be voting for this. And my reasoning is this. It is all about good governance. How do we govern to the best of our abilities? We are colleagues and we work with the mayor. He did veto this rank choice voting. We also came together and tried to sustain it, but it fails basically, right? I don't really see the rush here to tell you the truth. I love the concepts and I like you at the city council, but to me it would have been imperative for us to hold on to this until at least January. It's a new year and we will call on making sure that by 2022, this will be on the ballot. To me, we are being very attacked. We're not good governors. We don't govern very well. This is, there is so much going on. And the reason why I'm voting against this, but it's not the concept itself, but it's just the rush that I feel is happening and we can do much about it. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank you, councillor Cheng, councillor Shannon. Thank you, President Tracy. I just wanted to say that while councillor Hanson might be right in his answer as to whether or not rank choice voting would be used in a two-person race, not necessarily because it depends on the rules that we develop by ordinance that would apply to this. In order for rank choice voting to not apply in a two-person race, we would have to prohibit right-in candidates. Otherwise, it would apply in a two-person race. And I don't know that that necessarily affects your vote, councillor Zhang or anybody else's, but just wanted that clarification. Okay, councillor Hanson, are you able to clarify? I didn't want councillor Hanson to clarify. Sorry, I misinterpreted that, I apologize. Councillor Paul, go ahead. Thanks. Putting aside the fact that we had instant run-off voting 10 years ago, one of the reasons, probably the main reason why I feel like I can't support this is because I find it interesting that in 2022, we're gonna have a very interesting ballot. If this were to pass and if it's approved by the legislature and it becomes part of our charter, we would have a very interesting ballot. We would have city council races that have one method of voting. We would have school board races that have a different method of voting. And not to say that I think that voters can't understand that there are two different methods, but I do think that it is, it's a challenging way to run our elections. And I'm just sort of baffled by that. This has come back in different iterations and I'm not really sure exactly what the logic behind going with city council races, but not other races. And then one of the other things that was in the resolution is that one of the reasons for using ranked choice voting and I don't have it in front of me, so I may be paraphrasing here, but that it avoids run-offs and the cost of run-offs. And there is a cost to a run-off election, it's a couple thousand dollars. But I, and this is not a conclusive study, I may have missed one, but in the last 15 years, I think there have been two run-offs. So this isn't something that happens very often. And so I question whether that's a reason to use ranked choice voting. And I guess the other thing that I question is just simply that, you know, I guess the other thing that I question is that, you know, up until, you know, Councillor Hansen brought this forward, which I guess was now back in December of last year. In the years that I've been on the council since the repeal of instant run-off voting, I, at least in the constituents that I serve, up until the time that this was brought forward in, you know, by Councillor Hansen, I never had a resident, a constituent come forward and asked me to bring back instant run-off voting, but I have had people ask me not to bring it back. And, you know, I just don't feel like, you know, I feel like that there is a compelling argument that people, up until the time that it was brought forward in December, I don't think people were really looking for instant run-off voting as a way to run our elections. So while I do appreciate the fact that Councillor Hansen and others have brought this forward and have tried to bring it forward in different iterations in the hope of bringing it forward, and much as I appreciate that, this is not something I can support, thanks. Okay, all right, Councillor Hansen. Great, thanks. I just wanted to respond briefly to one thing, which is the idea that this is rushed. I don't agree with that. I think we're almost 11 months into this debate. And I think at this point, it's beneficial to hear from the people of Burlington, the residents, how they feel about the issue rather than continue to go back and forth with 12 Councillors. And it's a different council than it even was when we started the debate. And if we're not talking about this March, then we're gonna move into a third council that continues to have that debate. And I think what we really need to do at this point in the process is understand where the people of Burlington stand on this. Thank you, Councillor Hansen, Councillor Macy. Thank you. Yes, I'm off mute. Thank you, President Tracy. We've had this discussion multiple times. My view has not on rank choice voting has not changed. I do not believe that this system is a better system than that, which was rejected 10 years ago. Every time I hear Robert Bristow-Johnson go through the analysis or read the UVM professor that says if Kurt Wright voters put someone different for their second vote, we would have had a different result. I cannot wrap my head around how we collectively believe that that's a better system than first to the post. We wanna talk about 40, 50%, great. I'm willing, I think that's a legitimate conversation, but when I hear that from Robert Bristow-Johnson, I cannot in good faith move forward saying, this is a better system. Let's give it a shot. And I also, I would agree with Councillor Paul. No one has come to me saying that was such a good system. It's too bad, we took it away. Let's bring it back. Other than very few people who are really interested in this, the voters are not paying attention to this. They are focused on other issues that are on our forefront. I don't think it's rushed. I just think it's a bad idea. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Councillor Mason. Councillor Pine, go ahead. Just a quick little, I think analogy that we should avoid thinking that the people somehow need to demand something that then ends up being really valuable. How many people said they needed an iPhone, right? Nobody knew they needed an iPhone, but now look at iPhones. So let's not kid ourselves into thinking that people need to demand something in order for it to be of value. That's really, I don't think that's the right way to think of it. We really have to think about how this will expand our democracy. If it can expand our democracy, it has value. So let's not trick ourselves here. Thank you, Councillor Pine. Councillor Jain. Yeah, Councillor Pine, I respect that statement, but I think this is not an iPhone. This is about our democracy. And this is about the people electing their representatives. And I don't think to date this has received so much public input yet. My last conversation here about the Charlie Cheneh, there was like maybe 50 people and I was corrected to say it was not 50 people, total. And it's exactly the same exact people. This is an issue that many people will ask you, what is that? Because they don't know. And I think it is our role as elected officials to educate our constituents. And to me, that is missing. That was even missing back then. But to me, I mean, Councillor Henson just said it. It is not about us, but it is what the people have to say. And they rely on us. Personally, I mean, I think this need to be even tabled maybe. And if it passes, we just heard from Charlie Cheneh that they are already booked. There may be some other issues again over there. It is important that we just put our acts together, focus and agree on something that's great and we move forward. But the analogy to me doesn't fit here. Sorry, thank you. Thank you, Councillor Jang. I don't have anyone else in the queue. Everybody ready to go to a vote? Okay, will the city clerk please call the roll? Councillor Carpenter? No. Councillor Jang? No. Councillor Freeman? Yes. Councillor Hanson? Yes. Councillor Hightower? Yes. Councillor Mason? No. Councillor Paul? No. Councillor Paulino? No. Councillor Pine? Yes. Councillor Shannon? Yes. Councillor Stromburg? Yes. City Council President Tracy? Yes. Seven ayes, five nays. The resolution passes. Point of order, I guess. Yes, we need a motion on the suspension of the rules. Are you gonna make such a motion, Councillor Stromburg? I would, I'd appreciate input as to if anybody wants to continue certain parts of the agenda. I think we're almost done though, right? Yeah, we only have one more item on our deliberative agenda, 6.05, we have already taken action on 6.06 because that was moved to the consent agenda, which we did already approve. So 6.06 has been approved. The only item that we do need to take up is the open meeting law violation cure. Okay. With that, are you able to make a motion? Yeah, I'd like to move to suspend the rules and then only take up through item 6.05. Okay. So we just would complete our deliberative agenda. Is there a second to that motion on suspending the rules? Seconded by Councillor Shannon. Any discussion on that motion? Okay. One of these days we'll get to those committee reports, but it may not be that night. All those in favor of just completing our deliberative agenda this evening, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passes unanimously. So with that, we'll just move on to our last item of the evening, which is the communication from Attorney Blackwood regarding the open meeting law violation cure. Gonna go to Attorney Blackwood first to just run us through the memo and then the council, we'll need to have a motion from the council after that point. So Attorney Blackwood, can you please kick us off on this item? Yes, just as a reminder, we received a complaint from seven days that the city council had invited members, the public into the executive session and that that was a violation of the open meeting law that city council met and determined that there was a violation from inviting those individuals in and asked me to prepare something concerning a cure. I spent some time and I wrote you all a memo which is on board docs that is three pages long with kind of setting this all up so that you could all, that everybody who wanted to have a little bit more information about this could see the what had led up to this. And then I noted a recommended cure that had basically five paragraphs to it. And I think what I was suggesting is that either you could decide you wanted to do some or all of those suggestions. Would you like me to run through those to summarize those quickly? Yes, please, Attorney Blackwood. Okay, so the first part is that I thought that there was certain information concerning the executive session that you might want to agree to waive the executive session privilege and reveal and the items that I listed on, this is on page two number one under the recommended cure that the items I recommended were not particularly sensitive it seems to me but they were making clear that no action was taken, no advice from the city attorney was done during when the individuals were present and they were excused and left the meeting 11.45 p.m. I actually had made clear to take a note of that when it occurred and that no minutes were taken or record made of that executive session. Then the second point I said is that seven days requested the names, titles and affiliations of the individuals present during the executive session. And that seemed to me a reasonable cure to provide that information. The next one was that seven days had asked the council describe what the topics of conversation were discussed. And I thought that that made some sense that the council should consider describing the topics that were discussed. And seven days asked a request for an explanation of how having the protesters testify in public would have put the city at a disadvantage. My feeling was that was moot given that you determined that there was a violation and you would cure it. Number four, there are two sections. One says that the cure would be to revote on any action that was taken because there wasn't any action taken, then you are looking, I think, at adopting specific measures to prevent any future violations. So to avoid this, I was suggesting that you consider describing and writing a statement such as that you would not, generally, would not invite members of the public into executive session unless you know ahead of time that they have information that cannot be publicly shared or they're directly involved in the matter. Being discussed, again, I'd suggest that as a general rule because I do think there may be times that you may have exceptions. This was one you decided was not. You could also consider strengthening your commitment to transparency. And one of the things we've already started doing is giving the specific statutory exemption and trying to make sure we're describing what the premature disclosure might be and that we in the future state names and positions of each person invited in. Finally, I thought that seven days requests that the council immediately discontinue its abuse of executive session and conduct trainings on the open meeting law that the above recommended cures probably respond sufficiently to that. But if the council desires additional training on the open meeting law could be provided. And I know seven days sent some recommendations about individuals you might want to invite to speak to you. So those were the recommendations that I have suggested that you adopt some or all of. Okay, thank you, attorney Blackwood for that. I think I see Councilor Mason. I would entertain a motion Councilor Mason based on those recommendations. Well, may I ask with your permission to ask a question of the city attorney before I make the motion? City attorney, I'm a little confused because some of these, for example, providing a description, the council, I'm just curious how the council doesn't speak with one voice. So I'm not sure, is that your office gonna be providing that or what would be the next step if we were to even adopt that recommendation? I think you would have to decide that. I think you would have to decide what do you think, how would you describe the topics that were discussed? How would you, and I think that's what you have to decide. But I guess my point is, is the expectation that we would have that conversation in public session to come up with a collective because no one took notes. I mean, I know I have my recollection of what transpired, but it may be very different than any other councilors. So I don't disagree with the action. I'm just trying, I'm not sure how we effectuate if we were to move forward on those motions. I think you would have that discussion in open session because I think what you've decided is that that you've made a decision it's a violation. So you need to reveal what was discussed at that time to the extent that you were called. So if there were a motion to adopt the recommendations procedurally, would that then be followed with a line by line, what are we disclosing or saying as it relates to each of the five actions? I think so. Okay. I'm just making sure it wasn't upon the onus of the maker to actually articulate all of those. So at this point, thank you for answering that. President Tracy, I would make a motion that the council cure the violation of the open meeting law on September 8th by taking the actions recommended in the city attorney's September 18th memorandum and ask for the floor back for a brief second or after a second. Okay, we have a motion. I see a second from Councillor Freeman. Go ahead, Councillor Mason. I just wanted to, for purposes of public disclosure read into the record, I think the five bullet points that the city attorney wanted, you know, the first was as part of the cure, it was important for the public to know that no action was taken at or resulted from the portion of the executive session that's at issue. No advice from the city attorney was discussed in the portion of the session for which those individuals were present. The individuals were excused and left the meeting at 1145. The executive session to discuss legal advice with the city attorney and consider employee discipline matter commenced after the three individuals left. And finally, no minutes were taken or record made of the executive session. And with that, President Tracy, I will turn it back for you to guide us through two through five. Two through five. Well, I, I think the other councillors there, I was not expecting you to come up. Councillor Shannon, go ahead. I see you in the queue to be followed by Councillor Pine. Go ahead, Councillor Shannon. Thank you, President Tracy. I took notes in that meeting. And the notes. President Board, our President Tracy. Yes, what's your point of order, Councillor? Did we have a second? I didn't catch a second on the motion. Yeah, there was a second from Councillor Freeman. Oh, okay. My apologies. Yep. Sorry, go ahead, Councillor Shannon. I did take notes. And as fate would have it, they disappeared from my computer. They weren't, they weren't saved and they're possibly recoverable, but I haven't yet been able to recover them. And so I think that what the public wants to know is what was said. We are not going to have a single recollection of what was said. And so I wonder if, first of all, if Attorney Blackwood could clarify, are we at liberty to discuss generally what we heard? If somebody asks us, what did they say? Are we now at liberty to discuss that as we've established that this was not a legitimate executive session? And secondly, as I don't think that anybody else had notes and maybe they did, but would it be appropriate for us to kind of go around and I mean, either now or at some point just state what we recall from that or just be available to people to discuss what we heard. Can you give us some guidance on what we can do and what we cannot do? This isn't, yeah, this is an unusual situation. And so I don't think there is no precedent that I can look back on or guidance that I can say about it specifically how you choose to do it, but I think the guiding principles are, you have decided that the portion of the executive session up till 1145 was not, you've decided it was a violation. So nothing is privileged that was said during that time when the individuals were there. So yes, you should state what occurred, what topics were discussed. There was not a request for every statement that was made by one person or another. The request was for what were the topics that were discussed. So I think to the best of your recollection, it would make sense for you to go around and identify the topics. And if somebody's already identified the topics, you move to the next person. That would make sense as a way to do it. Thank you, Councilor Shannon. I still have the floor. I will yield the floor for now and continue to think about that a little bit. Thank you. Okay, Councilor Pine to be followed by Councilor Stromberg. Go ahead, Councilor Pine. Mr. President, I hadn't really prepared to discuss the how we would take this resolution and essentially implement it, but my first reaction is, it's not something we want to do on the fly tonight. I think that's something we would come back to at the future Council meeting, hopefully, and it gives us a little time to think through how we're going to do that. But I just wanted to, I feel that it's important that we can explain sort of our own view in how this unfolded in addition to the resolutions. I just want to share that, my view is that at our special meeting on March, on September 8th, a majority of Councilors believed that the protest organizers had confidential info that would help inform us as we consider the options related to the personal matters. And we sought to provide a safe and confidential forum for the organizers to share this info with us. We requested a proffer, which is essentially some evidence from the guests and in good faith, we accepted their evidence as sufficient to warrant inclusion in the executive session. This was not done in violation per se. It was not until hearing the testimony that it became clear to us that the information was not truly of a confidential nature. So it's really our, I think our responsibility now is making this acknowledgement and to commit to performing greater due diligence and considering future executive sessions. I think that it's easy to say, but I just think it's important to say it again and remind ourselves that government works best in the full light of transparency and it allows the public full access to our processes. So I think that's a piece that I just wanted to say. Okay, thank you. I see Attorney Blackwood looking to be recognized. Go ahead, Attorney Blackwood. Yeah, I think the problem with waiting to another meeting is that you have to do the cure within 14 days of when you voted, which was last meeting and you don't have another meeting scheduled in that time. Which is why that's why we tried to have it here. I mean, so I think generally if folks could state some topics that would probably be a good way to do it. And we can certainly do something later, releasing names, titles and affiliations. If somebody has that information and can give it to me, I can write something up about that. I don't, yeah. Councilor Prine, I'll still give you the floor. I think it's, if we're supposed to reveal topics, I think one of the most important topics that I personally was looking for conversation about and we had it, but it wasn't really of a confidential nature. I don't believe was, we know clearly what the demands are of the organizers and many of, not all of the people who spoke with the council. We wanted to know, would anything short of meeting those demands be open day things other than the demands themselves? So I think that we can just say that was a topic to discuss was the demands are public, but we wanted to have a conversation with the organizers. Would you do something, would you be open to something less than meeting you fully at those demands? That, I think that was an important topic. Okay, thank you, Councilor Pine. I have Councilor Stromberg to be followed by Councilor Hansen. Go ahead, Councilor Stromberg. Yeah, so taking into consideration Councilor Pine and Attorney Blackwood. So I'm prepared to recollect, I guess, on some things, but I'm also, I just wanna propose or maybe it's not a proposal, but more so overarching thought on the fact that there's a huge gray area and nobody has anything to my understanding fully written down on who said what when. And so I just wanna, like I don't want us to be throwing out like kind of theoreticals or things like, I don't want us to like let it become more murky. So I think if anything, we kind of share what we know for a fact, but we don't try and be like, I think this happened or this or whatever. So that's just all I'd like to propose. And then if I can continue, if that's something that sounds good, I guess, I could maybe share with you like what I remember. So, Counselor Stromberg, unless you're making a motion, I would just encourage you to continue. Okay, thanks. Sorry, I'm tired. Yeah, so I guess like another theme of the whole night was safety and that these individuals are young people of color feeling really exposed, very, very exposed. And I know that they were calling into a city council meeting, which is a public affair, but I think that there was what they personally felt, they felt that 110% what they were sharing was something that they didn't wanna share in front of everyone, especially given their current location. And that's something that I personally took into account when I decided that they should be allowed into our executive session. None of us, another thing I think I can say, like wholeheartedly is that none of us walked in there thinking like, oh, what do you have to do? We're gonna go and violate our executive session open meeting laws, not a chance. So, I think we all just were like really thinking with our hearts in that evening and just trying to figure out what's the best route to take, especially given these incredibly heavy circumstances. So, public safety actually in and of itself was a huge driver of why we, some of us invited folks into executive session. So, that's what I remember. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Councillor Stromberg, I have Councillor Hanson in the queue. Go ahead, Councillor Hanson. Great, thanks. I think one thing, kind of building off of what Councillor Stromberg said that's really important to note in all this is that we know in Vermont, this has been well documented and well reported over the last couple of years, but has been true way longer than that, which is that public, highly public-facing people of color in Vermont have faced an obscene amount of vitriol, death threats, direct racism. This is pervasive throughout our state is that the small number of elected leaders of color in our state, as well as non-elected, just very visible public figures, especially those that are fighting for racial justice, it's dangerous. That is a dangerous thing to do in Vermont. So, the idea that we were trying to create a space that would give some shelter and some ability for folks to be able to speak without facing some of those dangers when they had directly voiced to us that they didn't feel comfortable, I think it's just important to name that aspect of how this decision happened. In terms of recollecting what was heard, one thing that I remember hearing that I felt was important was just kind of a description, and I've experienced this firsthand at Battery Park, just a description of the fact that the community at Battery Park has provided a lot, it's provided a safe space and it has provided a lot of resources, whether that's food, whether that's de-escalation, whether that's conversation. There's been like trained social workers, trained de-escalators who have been there interacting with those coming to protest as well as houseless folks down there. There was an expression in that meeting around how that community has stepped up and kind of filled needs and filled a role that city government has in many ways failed to fill for many folks in our community. That was a message that I remember hearing in the executive session that I took to heart. Okay, thank you, Councilor Hanson. I don't have anyone else in the queue. Councilor Jang to be followed by Councilor Shannon. Go ahead, Councilor Jang. Thank you, and I completely agree with Councilor Hanson that that was something also that came up. But in addition, the new media, they all reported that someone with AR-15 was walking around the city. But I think the protestors we had in executive session made it clear that that person with AR-15 sat at the park, next to them for minutes. And I remember that exactly. Maybe some people also recall that. And I remember also at the end of the meeting, I said, this is new information to me that I did not know before. Just wanted to add that into the mix. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Jang, Councilor Shannon. Thank you, President Tracy. Like Councilor Jang, I don't agree with this statement that no information that had not already been publicly shared was shared in that executive session. I do think that we heard some things we had not heard before. And certainly the members of the public we invited into executive session had just spoken to us in public session. They told us that they wanted to tell us things that they weren't comfortable saying publicly. And they did share with us more than they had shared publicly including the issue that Councilor Jang spoke of. I also recollect as Councilor Pine stated that the question was asked, would anything short of the specific demand suffice was their room for compromise? And in general terms, I think that my biggest takeaway from the executive session was a willingness to compromise and a willingness to consider options short of firing three officers that was welcomed. We were told that they had a strong desire to end the protests. And I have a suggestion, I'll let other people go around to speak to this. I will also again note that I took notes about exactly who said what, I reviewed those notes and then I lost those notes. So I will try to find them, but I don't want to agree to a statement that says there were no notes because I definitely did have them. And it is amazing to me that of all things to disappear from my computer that that would be it, but that is what happened. So for number four, I have a suggestion slightly different than the example that Attorney Blackwood gives. I think that it would have been helpful to us if we always struggle with verbalizing the findings because it's really legal terminology and nobody on the floor really, we always need the guidance of Attorney Blackwood on those findings. And it would be good to have those findings stated in advance and there's a section in board docs called Recommended Action. And if we are planning an executive session, if in the recommended action we had the findings, that would be really helpful. I think it's easy for us to do the second step of saying, now we're gonna go into based on the findings, we're going to vote to go into executive session. We don't need that part, that part is obvious. But having the findings there is key and having who is expected to be in that executive session would also, put that in the record in advance because what happened in this case was I had no idea that anyone would propose to bring members of the public into our executive session. I have never seen that happen before. It caught me totally off guard. And I really, while I objected at the time and I think I stated my objection strongly and clearly, it was late at night, I had no chance to give it any consideration in advance. And if that had actually been on the agenda that we were considering inviting members of the public into our executive session, I would have had a much better opportunity to think about it and prepare what I was going to say either in favor or against that motion. So that is what I would recommend in the future is that we always have the finding and who's invited into the executive session published in board members. And I have some wording for that when people are ready. Okay, Councilor Shannon, I would actually ask that you put that out there. I don't have anyone else in the queue. Okay. To avoid a repeat of this situation, the Council shall post in our recommended action, in quotes, on board docs, the findings for going into executive session and who will be included in the executive session. Okay, are you making a motion on that, Councilor Shannon? Yes, I so move. Okay, we have a motion from Councilor Shannon. Why is it amendment? So is there a second seconded by Councilor Mason? Any discussion on this motion? Yep, go ahead, you may clarify. And then I'll come back to Councilor, and then I'll come back to Councilor Mason and Hightower. Go ahead, Councilor Hansen. I mean, Councilor Shannon. In number four, in terms of recommended actions, Attorney Blackwood kind of provides a menu of examples and my proposal is that number four will read as I just suggested in whole. Okay, can you please reread the motion just so that everybody's clear on it? Yes. To avoid repeat of this situation, the Council shall post in our recommended action the findings for going into executive session and who will be included in the executive session. Okay, is everybody clear? Okay, I have Councilor Mason, Hightower and Freeman. Go ahead, Councilor Mason. I'll pass on the amendment. Thank you. Councilor Hightower. I'd still like to speak on the original after this, if that's possible, just like that. On the amendment, I think that's a good idea. I think I'm a little worried about the mechanisms of that in terms of like when we don't always know the findings and how much of that can we communicate over email or we don't always know the reason for the finding. For example, Attorney Blackwood has an issue. Sometimes she says, oh, this is what I wanna discuss so I think it's a good idea. I don't know if I wanna move on this tonight. So I would suggest that we take that up at another Council meeting if at all possible given that we haven't had time to think through this. Okay, I have Councilor Freeman. I wanted to voice that as well. I think it's a really interesting idea. Glad you brought it forward, Councilor Shin, I just weren't in hour number five. We've not had a meeting since seven hours. I have some weird timing. Something really loud, so. We haven't had a meeting that's less than seven hours in months. I just really want time to digest this information. I just feel like that's not happening at this hour and given the very long meetings that we've been having for months and the level of deliberation that we've had. So can I make a motion on an amendment to postpone an amendment or is that not really a possibility? Would it just have to be, is that something I can do? I don't believe so. Again, there is the issue of the 14 day cure that we need to adopt. Otherwise, if we don't take action. But this is not related to the cure. I mean, it's related to the cure, but it's not necessary to the cure. It is additional. So it's part of the, so number four is part of the cure. It's an amendment to number four to strike what's in number four and replace it. I just don't feel ready to vote on this specific item, amendment item, so I don't know what to do. Okay, I have councillor Shannon to be followed by councillor Mason. I appreciate the point that councillor Hightower raises, but I don't, I'd like to hear from Attorney Blackwood because I think that going executive sessions are always on our agenda. And we actually do know in advance the reason why it's being proposed as an executive session. I think that Attorney Blackwood would know what those findings are in every case or a pretty good estimate of the findings. If they had to be modified slightly, these are only recommended actions. These are not required actions. They can still be altered, but it gives us a window into who we're expecting to invite into this. It gives us a trigger to say if we want somebody other than that, we should probably send something out saying we'd also like to invite so-and-so and so-and-so. And it creates a forum to put that all out in advance. That quite honestly, councillor Hanson didn't really have that. When he wanted to bring in people that we would not have expected to be asked to come to our executive session, he didn't really have a structure in which to say, this is who I wanna invite to executive session. So if attorney Blackwood has a problem with that, I certainly would be willing to modify this, but I think that attorney, I'd like to hear what attorney Blackwood has to say about it. And attorney Blackwood? I have no problem with it. It will, I think we can figure out how to make it work. Okay, councillor Shannon, you all set? Yes, thank you. Councilor Mason. I'll just quickly note, I mean, we do it for every other motion. I don't see why this is different. You know, on board docs, it has the recommended motion for everything other than going into executive session. I think I agree that we sort of stumble through it and this would go a long way to sort of institutionalizing what we should be doing. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else on the amendment from councillor Shannon? Okay, hearing none. Will the city clerk please call the roll? Councilor Carpenter. Okay, could you clarify? This is on the amendment to add councillor Shannon's or replace, use councillor Shannon's language for number four, is that? Correct. Okay. Yes. Okay. Councilor Carpenter. Yes. Councilor Jang. Yes. Councilor Freeman. Yes. Councilor Hansen. Yes. Councilor Hightower. Yes. Councilor Mason. Yes. Councilor Paul. Yes. Councilor Paulino. Councilor Paulino. Yes. Councilor Pine. Yes. Councilor Shannon. Yes. Councilor Strongberg. Yes. City Councilor President Tracy. Yes. Councilor Vice. Okay, that was enormously, we're back to the original motion as amended. I had councillors Mason and Hightower in the queue for just the general motion. I'll go to you, councillor Mason. I don't necessarily want to speak on the underlying. I wanted to see if maybe we could shift back. We have provided no information in response to number two relating to the names, titles and affiliations of the individuals. So I was going to try for maybe to put that out for the public. My recollection was, you know, Xenavia, Ashley Laporte and Z. I'm sure others can provide maybe Xenavia's last name and Z's full name. In terms of affiliation, you know, I think they made abundantly clear going in while they are part of Black Presence, they did not purport to be there in any official role. So I'm not sure I would call it an affiliation. Thank you, councillor Mason. I have councillor Hightower in the queue. Yeah, I was quickly going to speak on the notes. I think it's great that councillor Shannon had such an abundant memory on what happened. And I feel like generally agree with what was said so far in terms of remembering. councillor Mason, it's Black perspective. Thank you. And yeah, I think on affiliations I would definitely just only be comfortable saying that they were BIPOC community members, which is how they affiliated themselves. And it was this. Okay, thank you councillor Hightower. I have councillor Shannon again. I just wanted to say, shouldn't we leave it to them as to how they identify themselves and we share as they did not identify themselves to us with a title, I think all we can do is share their names as we know them unless they had stated to us something more specific, but they even said that they couldn't represent the protesters and I don't remember them saying that they represented the Black perspective, though I appreciate that they are affiliated with the Black perspective. I don't think they said that to us. Thank you councillor Shannon. I have councillor Stromberg next. Go ahead councillor Stromberg. Thank you. Yeah, I mean, I remember, I don't remember who specifically said it, but I remember it was said that they are among many leaders and protesters. They didn't say that we're above anyone else in terms of representing anyone in particular. And I believe they did identify as BIPOC community members going into it. I don't know if that was said publicly even before we went into executive session, but that was kind of the whole theme. That was the whole, I think that's as much detail they provided on that front. So yeah, that's what I remember from that. Okay, thank you councillor Stromberg. Anyone else on this item? So we have a motion as amended. Let's say for my part as council president, I can certainly work on getting those, the number four that we voted on to get the titles and the names of the people on board docs before executive session as well. I think that I'll work with folks to try and clean up the motions and make sure we cite what is put forward. I appreciate councillor Pine having done that this evening. I thought that was right in the direction that we need to be headed with those motions you made earlier, councillor Pine. So appreciate that clarity there and we'll need to hold to that too. So we can work with city attorney Blackwood on that. And then, well, I believe that there is on the number five, which is the question around the conducting trainings on the open meeting law. I do believe that attorney Blackwood has explained a number of things about open meeting law this evening that have certainly broadened our understanding of this. I however would also like to have a work session potentially as a council, maybe prior to our next meeting to provide councillors with additional context above and beyond what is provided and can work with folks who are experts in open meeting law in addition to attorney Blackwood in order to do that. So I would put that out there as well. Okay, are there any further comments on this item? Okay, seeing none, we will go to a vote on the motion as amended. All those in favor of the motion as amended, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passes unanimously. We have now completed our deliberative agenda and we are in a motion to adjourn is now in order. Move by councillor Jang, seconded by councillor Shannon. Any discussion? Hearing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor of adjournment, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? We are adjourned at 1112. Thank you councillors and we'll see you in two weeks.