 Meeting to order, so the first thing is to review and approve the agenda and I don't believe we have any changes. I have something, something, an adjustment to make and I apologize this is slightly spacey on my behalf but I got some last minute round of my first round of liquor license renewals. I've got just a regular renewal from Mobile Mart. I've got a slightly different one from Sodexo Operations that's just a name change. They had to refile another one and Capital Food Court which is just the folks who run the Capital Cafeteria, they're always constantly sending me a million catering requests and they just got recommended to just get their own local license and life will be better for them. So I may add those to the consent agenda, sorry. Any objection to that change? Any other comments on the agenda? Okay, so without objection we'll consider the agenda approved. So on to general business and appearances, this is an opportunity for any member of the public to address the council on a topic that is otherwise not on our agenda. Welcome. Oh and if you would say your name and where you live and try to keep your comments to about two minutes. Okay, I got the time we're going. Zac Hughes, Prospect Street, Montpelier and my comments will be rather brief on this subject and I'll defer my comments to later on other stuff. I would like to offer special thanks to Yvonne over in the community center downstairs here for her time on the homeless task force for assisting us in the beginning. I think her work with us was very valuable and we thank her for that. And I'd like to wish congratulations to Tony Fakos for his retirement. I'm sad to see you go, Chief Fakos. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, anyone else? And is your comment related to something not on our agenda? It's about something that happened in the last council meeting. In regard to the funding of the recommendations of the homelessness task force, which I don't see here. So that would be a part of our budget hearing? So if you would say your comments on that. Even though it's about comments made by a counselor in regard to said funding? So generally speaking, if it's something that's on our agenda? It's not really. Kind of like just the sentiment of what was said. I just figured I'd check. Thank you very much. So counselor, say your name and where you live. Laura Rose, Prospect Street, Montpelier. Counselor Bate expressed the desire to not have homeless people come here. Should we fully fund the recommendations? I believe that she said that, you know, they come from different places. And if we had, you know, the sentiment was really to me that if we had really good services that people might come here to be helped and that she didn't want to fund the recommendations in case that maybe people would come here because we do have open borders here in Montpelier. So if we had really great services for the homeless population? She was afraid that they might come from other places to take advantage of that. But I feel that maybe other counselors or maybe potential counselors could have a different feeling about homeless population in Montpelier and that we could really set an example by allocating funding and making a difference in people's lives. Our small financial contributions could change lives. And I'm just wondering if other people feel like counselor Bate not wanting to help the homelessness because there's a fear that more could come. Thank you. Can I comment? Yes. Ms. Rose? I'm sorry if that's how you felt about what I said. I was emphasizing, I even made the motion for the $45,000 was I do feel we need to have a regional response that it's not just Montpelier and that we need a regional commitment including the financing, the programs, and the whole networking and resolution. And I felt the regional approach was very important even though we started our own task force. I'm hoping we don't stop there but that we end up networking financially and resources with the region. So I apologize if somehow that sounded like what I meant. You were talking about our funding of the proposal here locally. So it really did sound like you didn't want to help that segment. Okay. All I can say is it isn't my intention. That's why I made the motion for the funding. But I also feel like we shouldn't fund it 100% that it is. That's all. Okay. We'll talk about it later. Thank you. Steve Whitaker Montpelier. I'd like to just again raise the alarm about our necessity for prioritizing public works maintenance. I know our director is working hard to get staffed up and rearrange and redesign that department. When I repeatedly have to deal with folks and help folks walk along a section of sidewalk that's too covered with ice. And I'm saying this not in the sense of criticism of the work she's doing but in the sense of the need to prioritize for the council to not always focus on year out, three year, five year aspirational stuff but work on immediate public safety quality of life issues like getting the garbage out of the pocket park and like taking care of ice and hazards. So that's brief enough but you get my point. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. All right. So we'll move on to the consent agenda. Jack. Move the consent agenda. Do you want to pull the necessity resolution? Yes. Well, yeah, we should. So with the consent agenda, I think we should probably pull the necessity resolution as I think we need to talk about that and we can talk about that when we get to the bond hearing discussion which is item seven. So I move the consent agenda as amended. Okay. And this includes John's item. Okay. Any further discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Thank you all for that. And so we have a presentation or update really from about five home farm way. Welcome. Sit here. And if you'd make sure to just speak into the microphone. Yep. Introduce yourself. Hi. Jamie Duggan representing the Two Rivers Partnership. Thank you for your time this evening and the place on the agenda. I submitted my report. I'm sure as you read the beginning part of it, there was no new news, but Councillor McCulloch requested or reiterated the interest in a written report and something also that the public could access. So I felt it was important to provide a little bit of context to begin with just to sort of for those following along. The progress, I guess, that I can report is that we have signed a letter of engagement with legal counsel. Jeff Polubinski is heading up the team. And they have been at work over the last few weeks doing research on title, indeed, the easements, rights of way and other instruments that are in place. I am hoping that we'll be able to meet as soon as next week to get a sense of sort of what lies ahead or what some of our options are. And we're at a point now we've had plenty of time to get prepared. So once we sort of have a sense of where we're going, our intent is to continue to keep moving forward in at least the first goal of acquiring ownership, so. Any questions for Jay? A short one. So you mentioned you engaged a lawyer and you feel that he will be able to get this property deed figured out? I believe so, yes. Okay. Is it more than a title search? It's a complex situation and dealing with a lot of property law. Yeah. But yeah, we've been working through it a little bit. And yes, Jeff specializes in real estate law and dealing with development and environmental considerations as well, all sort of part of that parcel. So I am. We tried to be very careful about whom we wanted to work with because of the complexity and just to ensure that our resources were being spent wisely. Thank you. Great. Any other questions? Okay. Well, I'm certainly looking forward to the next report and I'm just glad that you all have taken that step and that sounds like we're moving forward. That's very encouraging. And if at any point along the way, you know, there's anything that you need from us, certainly let us know. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Appreciate the continued support. And we'll be looking at April for the next. Sorry. I'm sorry. We'll be looking at April for. Okay. Yep. So it will be the eighth or the 22nd and the 26th is school vacation week. It is, yes. Okay. It will be the eighth. Yep. I'll keep an eye out for that. And I do, I do hope that I have a bit more of a robust report at that time. And that's all good. But I appreciate your, you know, continued support and patience with the process. Thank you so much. Thanks. Thanks for coming in. Your comments are helpful. Thank you. It's good to be coming back. Okay. So we are up to the bond discussion and at least as it was on the agenda was about the rec center. And I'm going to turn this over to Bill to talk about. So we've got a couple of things. I do have some numbers that you had asked to see. So I can flash them quickly up on the screen. And we do have another budget item as you saw that just came in after our last meeting for 134,000 to repay the state for land purchase. So we should talk about that. We're going to recommend for staff that we postpone the bond vote on the rec center until November. Sorry, John. In large part, unfortunately, well, it's not funny actually for those that were at the hearing the other night, the work session, one of the two gentlemen who's leading, in fact the gentleman who's leading the project unfortunately passed away two days after our public session and from from bread loaf, the lead design person. So they're scrambling to replace him and he really was the font of the knowledge. So I think we feel that we're not going to be able, if we were to really have to roll out information and have public sessions and those kind of things that we would be in a bit of a disadvantage to try to do that between now and March. So just in terms of the public interest and the ability to digest this and communicate issues. But nonetheless, I do have information about the bond numbers. Nonetheless, I'll be happy to give me a second to get set up. Is that still a value to you all based on the fact that we might do this in November and not actually do the numbers that you have reflect a bond in November? It reflects bonds. I think it would be useful for people to just to say it shouldn't take doesn't take very long. Great. That's not the other issue. Cool. Thank you. So while we're waiting for this to come on, I'll talk briefly about the other $134,000. You may recall the city purchased three properties from near where Montpelier beverage was and the Vermont Center for the Blind Independent Visually Impaired and the other parking lot. The TKS property with federal funds to develop the One Tailor Project. And then when we were going to have private development there in order for that to happen, the state declared part of that is surplus property so that we could then sell it to actually going to be the Moat Trust. And we were made aware at the time that we needed to repay those federal funds and of course we were planning to repay it with proceeds from the sale. And then when we chose or actually they chose not to, anyway, we chose not, when the deal didn't go through, we then were made aware, actually we thought it was going to be 167,000, but I guess our share, the federal share is 134,000. And that was partly understood, you may recall the state provided an additional $1.2 million in federal funds to complete that project. So we've known for a couple of years that we were going to have to pay this bill and they had said they'd give us some time but hadn't specified the exact time due on that in that last Friday after our budget hearing I got a note from the state saying here's the number and we need it by December of this year. So obviously that's money we don't have in the budget and there's no real project budget for the Confluence Park or any other development there. And we've put on hold the notion that we would, I'm sorry, I'm trying to do too many things at once here. Yeah, sorry. So two potential bonds or financings, one for $5.2 million, the estimated project for the rec center and the other was the land repayment that I started to fumbly discuss that is due back to the state. I have since, just continuing on that thought while it's up there, I have asked for some clarifying questions from the state such as could we move it to the next fiscal year, what happens if we don't pay it? If we do pay it, does that mean we then own the property outright and have no further obligations to transportation funds or are there still continued strings and those kind of things and have not yet received responses? Going back to the recreation center, if we, the impact on the budget, so the first year of a bond, depending when we issue it, it would be 114,000, about 1.3 cents on the tax rate if we were just to do it that way. The year two, 302,000, so it's just under 3.5 cents and then year three and thereafter it would decline from 300. So the year two is the highest payment. So if we were just to put that on the tax rate, that's what it would look like. If we were to look at it in our capital plan, we had a lot of discussion about this at the last meeting and I think it was a little confusing. So here's our capital plan as it sits right now, the bold is what's proposed for this current budget or the FY21 budget. So you can see the total is 2.4 million and 515,000 of that is equipment. We've got just under $600,000 of debt that we'll be paying, leaving us a balance of 1.285 million to do our annual projects where that's our roads, retaining walls, sidewalks, storm sewers, those kinds of things. All the things that facilities, all the things that show up in the capital project list. As you can see, that's an increase of 100,000 over last year because not only are we putting 25,000 more in, but debt is dropping off from last year 683. You can see if there were no additional debt in the general fund, the debt payments dropped down on about $300,000 between now and FY30. So the annual funding continues rising without us putting any more into the capital plan. I've actually factored a little bit into the equipment plan because that's been flat for so long and we're falling behind. But the annual and debt funding would just continue rising on its own, left to its own devices. If we were to put a plan where we put that first $114,000 payment in this current budget that we're talking about, you can see that we go, our debt goes up to $713,000 and our annual drops down to 1.1 million, so it's about the same as last year. And then the following year, of course, the $300,000 starts kicking in and everything else, but it's offset by the drop-offs. So that you can see, I can't really see well enough here to go backward. So that's what it looks like currently. This is what it looks like if we were to have the debt payment in this current budget. If we were to have the debt payment not start until the next year's budget, then obviously we would stay the same this year and then the money would start hitting in the future years. However, we would still have 1.2 some odd million in FY22 for annual funds, which is more than what we would have at 1.08, but less than the 1.4. It just makes sense. We're adding $100,000 and then $300,000 into this total money, so it just shows how it would lay out the impact on those projects. I think those are the kind of things we were trying to figure out in our heads last week. These are the actual numbers. If we were just taking the land purchase, if we were just to pay it this year, either add it to the budget or whatever, it would be equivalent of 1.5 cents. This is rough, this isn't with the bond bank, but we did just an Excel calculation. It would be roughly $29,000 plus if we borrowed it over five years and about $15,000 or $16,000 over 10 years. Minimal impact, if we were to do that, of course we're into paying a fair amount of interest on that. We have those calculations, but depending on whether or not we have full, if we have full control of the property, then it gives us full control over its future, whether we make it green space or whether we make it private development space or whatever. That's one of the things I don't know about. What happens if we pay this back, then the land appreciates, we sell it in a private sale, do we get the windfall? Do we split? I don't understand yet. That's all I have really on bonds, to see how they fit in there. So do we need to make a decision of this $130,000 that's related to the land for paying back the feds as we make a decision about the budget? Well, yes, I think at least how we're going to approach it, we need to pay it back by December 1 of 2020. So that would be in this current budget year or the year we're planning for FY21. And that is new information since last week. Unless they come back and say, well, you can wait till the following year. My hunch is the state is doing their budget and they can use this repayment money to match federal funds, so they could probably match about a million dollars with this money, which is good. The state transportation funds could use that and they certainly provided that to us. So my hunch is that they're doing their budget and they need it for their FY21 budget, which is why they ask. Okay, so my question comes, if we have to make a decision along with this budget, then I have a question about the option of five year and 10 year, because then you made the statement you'd have to ask the feds if they would let us pay it back at that rate? No, no, no. No, we wouldn't take a note or a bond. We'd put it on a balance. We would pay it in full. And just then repay the debt on it for the short period of time if we chose to do it that way. Okay, so then what was your comment about we'd have to ask the feds? Oh, what I'm trying to get clarity from the feds is if we do this, does that end in our restrictions? So if we were to choose to then make it a development project and sell the land, and it comes in at more than 167,000 or 134,000, do we owe, and do we have a continual obligation in that appreciation of the land value to them or is that if we've paid this off? Title free and clear, right? Right. Okay. But what we do know is we have to pay this. Yes, thank you. So just to add a little bit to the conversation, and we can talk about this more I think maybe when we get to the budget. Yeah. But without counting the CVPSA at this point we're at 4%, and if we added the 10-year option then actually let me get the exact number. It's 1571. Then that takes us to 4.2. Right. Or we could find 15,000 to take out. Which could be, you know, other capital plan, could be, okay. So any other questions about this information so far? Yes. So maybe we're going to talk about this related to, for the rec center, so if we're pushing it off till November is there still potential allocation for this year that would also be competing in terms of preparation or is there work that we would be paying for this fiscal year that somehow would play into that overall? Well, the only piece of information that would be helpful on this that I don't think we'll have but we might have by August, there is an August primary as well or the November election would be the downtown master plan. And the expansion of that master plan was actually prompted by this particular piece of property when there was a difference of opinion whether it should be remained open and green or whether it should be developed as a, you know, a private taxable development. And we had a working group talking about that and the conclusion was instead of focusing on this property, this one property, let's look at it in the whole and what the needs of the downtown are. And so that is when we expanded our downtown master plan study from just state street to state and main in the full downtown. So at some point, presumably this land will be addressed in that plan. Now, if we were to sell it, we would recoup. I'm very confident we'd recoup this money. And it's just a question of whether we would realize more appreciation. And that had been our initial plan for how to repay this was we had a deal. We were going to sell it to the Moat Trust. They were going to pay us. We were going to pay the state back with this, all said and done. That deal went apart at the closing. They chose to just sell us the land and not buy this property. So that gave us a whole new set of decisions. And the council at that point said we'd like to look at potential green space, you know, both options. And I think we made clear, and I think the sense at the time was if this were to be an expanded Confluence Park or something like that, that this is a cost that needs to be built into the creation of that park land. But I don't think we're going to have funding for that park by December. And even the funding we're talking about is on the other side of the river. It's not on this side. So I don't, you know, it just doesn't seem realistic that even if we were to purchase it now and seek to get ourselves paid back or just call this a contribution to that park land that there will be a specific direction for that from December, unless the decision is, let's put it back on the private market and see what happens and redevelop it. Can you actually go back to this slide before the rec building? This is... Oh, well, I guess it's... I'm thinking about like if, because if we put it on this... Oh. Right, yeah. Right, this one. Yeah. Yeah. 114,000. Anyway, I just wanted to have that number in my head you know, when we get to conversation about the budget maybe we can be talking about that unless we want to make decisions about this aspect of the budget right now. I'm usually inclined to like take it all together but I'm open to other things, yeah. It sounds though from your presentation that there are enough questions about that we still don't know the answers to that we're... It's not going to make sense to me to decide what to do with this $134,000 tonight and we could well decide we'll probably be deciding what to do at our next budget hearing on the 23rd. Looking at the figures that you presented it looks as though if we spread the repayment over by in debt over five years or 10 years we'd be looking at roughly $12,000 or $16,000 in interest depending on which period you go. of that payment, yeah. Yeah, I mean we just guessed at 3% we don't know what the actual rate would be but that's about what the bond bank is going right now. But so yeah, so my thinking is that this is very good information to have but we're probably... The only issue to keep in mind is if we choose to do this and use financing then if we want to do it in March we need to hold a public hearing on it we need to have a necessity resolution. So one of the reasons we suggested pulling the necessity resolution was if we wanted to... If we weren't going to do the rec center but we wanted to change it to this to at least adopt that to give us that option we could do so. If you think you're not going to deal with this until August or November then we don't have to do anything with it so it's just we do have formalities to be sure to do if we're going to even consider having this as a March item. If we're going to bond it there's no particular benefit to the city to doing it in March as opposed to August or November. No, other than the... No, not really it's the only issue for the city would be as if it didn't pass and so if we waited until November and the bills are due December 1 Can we tell them sorry? We don't have to leave that or we'd have to pay it out of other funding and that would be cutting it from some other place so that's the risk is knowing the certainty of whether we have the funds available. That's part of the questions to the state because if we don't pay them do they get the title and then they could sell it or do whatever they want with their own process which is also possible. Just to take this a little... I guess I had another question out there about whether any... do you want to decide about anything now regarding this? So one thing that I could picture doing right now is deciding do you picture doing any of this in March or do you picture doing any of this in August or November or not at all? Boy that repayment looked kind of far in the future when we first talked about it didn't it? Glen? Jack's comments persuade me that I don't think we have to do it tonight. August feels like a reasonable timeline to me and and if I were making the decision tonight I think I would be in favor of trying the five year repayment but I'm glad to have the information but yeah I don't think that we should try for it in March. Other thoughts? Yeah I'm in the same place if we could get more information to make an intelligent decision on this next week. Dona? I would tend not to push it back but it's fine. Other thoughts? Go ahead Lauren. Yeah I mean I think August makes sense to me give us time to get that full information we don't have some answers to questions. But August seems reasonable. But we otherwise don't have to decide tonight. Okay. Okay. Any other questions about either of these bonds at this point? Okay well we'll look forward to more information about at least the TKS property. Okay thank you. I'm not going to go too far because budget's coming right up right? Yeah right. Okay so that was the bond discussion. So on to the well what would have been the bond public hearing. But if there's no bonds being proposed we don't need one. Right we don't have any bonds at the moment. Should we take a comment on that? Sure sure yeah. Because I think it was warned for an adopted agenda. That's fine I was thinking about we should probably open the public hearing anyway. Yeah especially before you took a vote. Alright so I'm going to officially open the public hearing on this. Yes go ahead. First I want to thank you for the noise reduction of the computer room. And rhetorically ask what took you so long. But it is nice to be able to hear from the back of the room. The Rec Center what I see is us continuing to look at bonding before we've got a handle on the scale of the deferred maintenance of our sidewalks and roads. I mean we're living in a future we dream about Montpelier becoming and we're not taking care of what I would see as a decade of deferred maintenance. And I don't know if you're anticipating water main replacement that keeps blowing out you know the sidewalk repairs road repairs. Potentially fiber zone wifi zone downtown. These are things that we need now and that don't seem to be in our discussion yet. So as capital improvements I would ask us to take a slow enough approach to where we get the full I don't think that planning has been done of how many feet of sidewalk yards of sidewalk how many sections of road re sections of water main are vulnerable to blow out this winter next winter because every time that happens that totally derails the operation of our public works department and all hands on deck all other priorities diverted. So I'm I think I can be more forceful in saying that we need to put some real focus on what are the costs and the potential liabilities of the number of the dollars and the scale of dollars of deferred maintenance that we need to catch up on. I don't know how big the problem is with the water mains. I just know it keeps blowing out. So that's a caution. I don't think that B-trans is going to grab the property in November because just by fiat or foreclosure so. Thank you. I do have some comments related to that but they're more pertaining to the budget so I'm going to hold on to them until we get to the budget. Any other comments from the public about bonds or potential bonds? Okay. All right so I'm going to close the public hearing and then moving on to the the budget public hearing to open the public hearing related to the budget and Bill did you want to give a presentation on this? I'll just get an overview here. I'll just get it pulled up here. It won't take very long also. This is basically an updated version of the presentation we did when we presented the budget to you only now including the discussions that you've had. The public hearing on the proposed budget council can still make changes they preliminarily adopted this budget but have tonight and next week to make final changes before it goes on the ballot. The budget goals are to implement the strategic plan that the council goes through in the spring continue our capital and equipment funding plan for those issues such as streets and sidewalks etc to deliver our services can I actually one of my questions was related to that continuing the capital and equipment funding plan I recall at the end of last year we were still $25,000 from fully funding all of our infrastructure and does this budget include that that increase so we are increasing our capital plan by $25,000 to sufficiently maintain all of our infrastructure based on the steady state plan that did look at the segments of sidewalks and streets and then we have a separate one for sewer water and sewer that's a longer term plan but the total funding for capital plus debt payments plus equipment this year is $2.4 million out of our total budget okay so I this is just the outline of our strategic planning framework we'll go through that in detail but breaking into its capacity we take a look at how our budget relates to the items identified by the council so we have $100,000 in funding for the Mobility Development Corporation we've maintained our planning and zoning staff and we continue to implement our TIF district hopefully for environmental stewardship we have $5,000 for MIAC we've got stormwater projects included in the capital plan we've got the $40,000 for the circulator bus which could be also for microtransit instead and $35,000 in the capital plan for our energy plan for our inclusive, equitable and welcoming community we have $130,000 for our community fund we awarded that those grants at the last meeting we've included $10,000 for our social equity contract work we've got our Feast Program at the Senior we're alive again at $32,000 we have our community enhancements and at the last meeting you add $45,000 for homelessness services for sustainable infrastructure we did increase the funding for the capital and equipment plan we've continuing funding for our water and sewer plan and then we made a couple of staff changes to try to put more people where we need work thoughtfully planned built environment we continue the downtown improvement district we've continued funding for downtown projects in our capital plan and we had $20,000 for the public art commission we have retained $110,000 for the housing trust fund and again we've got our TIF plan in place for public health and safety we've added the social worker and the public works department we've anticipated a big year for public events we've continued our paramedic program and the fire department our project safe catch the police department and we actually have we'll talk about this a little bit later but some pretty great news in that department for our community this year and we now have added the CVPSA ballot item for communications in our responsive and responsible government we've continued our communications efforts our employee wellness we're keeping our service levels we haven't cut any operations and we've got a bridge article for communications stays in the budget so taking a look at our strategic plan we talked about possibly upgrading street lights to LED we have the light purchase in the capital plan the bonding would be for all the wiring and everything else and as you know we may come back with that later in the year in the ideas that would pay for itself CSO projects are in the capital plan so again I just to remind not so much the council but people watching these items were all items that in March and April the council said these are things we want to talk about this year and we'll need to address them in the budget so now we're at the budget and going we're checking ourselves so the equity consultant is in the budget the downtown master plan is being completed and the funding for coordinated signals is in the CIP the emergency management funding is increased slightly we had a plan for alternative fuels we have a police hybrid on order parking garage operations obviously we did not include that in the budget until we know when the garage is actually going to be built and opened housing trust fund we had 110,000 we increased infrastructure we have not really changed much with our personnel plan we have not got that to you yet we're still hoping to do it before March we'll see we have the social worker in the public Wi-Fi due to the cost the recreation center we're still talking about the confluence park we approved 20,000 at the last meeting and that is in the capital plan and there's no firm plan in place for savings pastures so no funding associated with it so these are things that are included since you've talked about it and then we still have those are the things that we've talked about that are not yet included anywhere just very quickly just snapshot this is where our money comes from to fund the general fund again this is not counting the water and sewer fund or funds that come from other sources this is the key government operation so about two-thirds of it is property tax and then our other funding and here's where we spend the money again more than half of it is on our people they do a lot of our work you can see 12% is our capital plan and debt and it went included the equipment at 16% and then just breaking that down by more function as opposed to the general the big categories you can see where the money goes so all in all we have a property tax rate that is 5.1 cent increase 4.5% average tax bill is $116 the water and sewer rates are being adjusted as per the long-term plan and no change is required for our sewer and CSO benefits so our process is tonight we have a public hearing next Thursday we have our final public hearing and in March we will have voting from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. with early voting to start in mid-February and that's the overview of the budget okay so I believe I've already opened the public hearing for this one topic so councillors have anything to say first and then we'll go to the public I'm still a little uncomfortable with the $100,000 to the MDC I know like the bulk of that appropriation goes towards the executive director position which I think has been vacant for probably about six months now so I think I would really like to see some numbers on that get a better handle of what the MDC is doing right now there's like a change right there I'm not comfortable voting for the $400,000 at this point I think it's worth finding out what their need is and if this is a I would think that it is easier to take something out we did make a commitment to them for five years and if this is something that we're going to reduce I think it probably ought to go to some kind of one-time fee so that we can anticipate that we're going to honor our commitment that's just I think I'm also a little uncomfortable with making five-year commitments when it's two-year council terms good point true, true, fair what is the other thoughts on getting some information or on that item Glen I think it'd be great to get more information I spoke with the MDC director myself maybe a month back or so Lisa Maxwell am I getting that name right and it was really helpful to me just to talk to her in person I think it would be great to have her here kind of for a check-in and follow up on that I am I think relatively comfortable with the number as it is it has been kind of a question mark for me the whole time and it's true neither you nor I were there when the five-year commitment was made so I think we should and we have had gaps in staffing so it makes sense to check in general agreement over there okay let's plan on that go ahead Donna or I realize I didn't follow up because they were without staff before and we sort of wanted to see the budget so definitely I think we're overdue to hear from them yeah fair so let's see if we can get them in here next public hearing and we'll go from there any other comments Jack I feel like I should know the answer to this but I don't so I'm asking for myself and for a constituent with regard to the we're budgeting for the controls for the signals downtown and I have a constituent who lives on Barrie Street who's interested in what the timeline is for the controls and for the signal at the Barrie Street intersection I think we'll have to get back to you on that it's in the budget but we're not sure we'll hopefully be doing the work anything else okay comments from the public hi Erica rail I forget where I live now Barrie City representing Montpelier representing the homelessness task force I know there's concern in the budget about the money we're asking for and I am also a Barrie City resident and I have to say that we've been considering the money that you're giving us or thinking about giving us and it's been able to open doors and to talk to other cities which is phenomenal it's opening up doors to talk to Barrie City and saying hey Montpelier is doing this and thinking about this and why don't you guys think about this as well and so I know there is some concern and about Montpelier leveraging all this money but it's a pilot we're starting things and it's starting to move and shake and people saying oh Montpelier is doing it let's tackle Montpelier is doing and people are starting to start talking and it's talking about a very serious issue that's affecting a lot of other towns so yes it's a lot of money it's you know increasing taxes for a lot of people but it's also helping a lot of people and eventually Montpelier might not be you might be able to take this money as seed money and helping a lot more people so thank you Zach Hughes Montpelier so we started this out as a little well let's start back in I actually been doing the work for a long time around Montpelier with a bunch of people Dawn here Erica but this works been going on for a while and in July I was in Washington DC unfortunately I wish I had been up here but I wasn't and it came to my attention that there was you know some concern with business owners in the city and all this and it really turned into this task force finally I think then the task force kind of came together and we have come up with some really good ideas and I could say we're actually doing some great work in there and and I can say that there has been you know healthy criticism I get that that happens but I still think we're doing the work and but we were also very invested in what we do because we're still doing our work you know some of us still doing the work outside the task force you know so it's really cool that we're able to do that and to be able and Montpelier shares a very unique opportunity here they could be the first you know city to to do this in the area here and I agree with counselors here who think it should be a mutual effort with the other cities I agree with that and I think that you know it's money well spent I was out there the other night and I'm in fact in front of a business talking with somebody who is just transiting through the area and I was just trying to figure out where they were going and so this is kind of the thing that we would want to be able to do you know so that it doesn't cause any issues with businesses and I think that's just great just talking with the person being there is critical and I think that's what and being able to connect with the person is critical I think it's that would be the difference between the social worker the street worker the street worker is able to get in there and you know and based on lived experience in peer support the reason I'm bringing this here tonight is because the weather was preventing me from getting down here last couple of times so I just really want to lay that out and I really do appreciate the city's you know amount that they we came up with and I continue to support the community's work and the city's work and appreciate the city's willingness to really look at this issue and I can say that we to believe that we should share the burden I also like to remind the council I was just talking with my board one of the boards I'm on today about this that if it wasn't for non-profits the city would be picking up a larger portion of the cost because non-profits out there are doing a lot of the work and I think that's really important so for now I'll let this go and we'll see where this goes, thank you Thank you Hi, I'm Dawn Little again with the Montpelier Task Force I don't know if this is the appropriate time but I wanted to respond to a concern that Donna brought up briefly toward the end of the last meeting and you had said I'm trying to try to figure out how you put it but you were saying that the street outreach is good for as a band-aid and you were talking about the need to look at the long term as well as at the band-aid and I couldn't agree with you more I think that's something that all of us need to see happen and I'm hoping that we will have some time the task force will now have some time freed up to look at it but obviously that sort of thing takes longer to do but I also wanted to point out that in over the past couple of years street outreach has partnered with the Continuum of Care and the existing agencies or the experts and that there are a number of people who were out on the streets who are now permanently housed and just to point out that the outreach can be flexible depending on the specific needs of the community and that we are often the people who will get the neediest people in contact with the experts and support them through the process so in addition to being a band-aid and handing out sleeping bags we also do look at getting people into long-term housing you know we're probably not the people who are going to design that and answer the big questions but helping to facilitate it to happen so anyway thank you so Steve Whitaker I'd like to commend your willingness to put 45,000 I'd still encourage you to go to 56 and I'll tell you why but what I see is you recall I've leaned on you a long time to create the task force I resigned I feel like the task force is loaded with folks that are accepting of status quo that there's no vision there's no direction in the proposal of how to spend $50,000 I think that would be a huge missed opportunity I'd rather hold the money back and wait to use it as matching funds but the proposal to fund just street outreach porta-potties and lockers is seriously not what we need we need to put people into shelter even if it's modest very modest low-cost shelters and this is where I think the opportunity is we could a statewide model by adopting some of these the pod concept where you have privacy and an indoor you put a number of pods in a building with shared bathroom facilities or the huts the insulated huts in an outdoor facility both of those have extreme potential to break the mold of warehousing people on a common basement floor the accelerating mental illness that I see maybe I'm not qualified to call it illness but it's mental distress that I'm seeing among the folks I've been doing street outreach to a degree Don does a whole lot more Zach does his but I would hate to squander $30,000 or $50,000 maintaining it is true that it's nice to give people help but I think a halftime street outreach work would be a sufficient use of the budget you're willing to make I think you really need to commit to investing in a plant and demand a plant and a plan would explore brick and mortar housing for parents single parents with children emergency I've got my mind got my eye on two buildings that are available or that are potential uses for these I don't want to put them into the public record yet but if you're on the street a porta potty is counterproductive I mean it is not heated there's no hot water there's no wash up and when you're living in the street you need to thoroughly wash up after you use so it's this is this is a band-aid approach please do not waste $50,000 of precious money by not being very specific about what you expect back from that so we need real bathrooms you could insist on a study of all the available bathrooms that could potentially be negotiated for 24 access 24-hour access city halls bathrooms I've spoken to the police chief and he hadn't considered the fact that the back door here could be put on an electric lock you could buzz over to the dispatcher the dispatcher could buzz you in if there's no motion on the motion sensor that's a question for your electrician do the motion sensors that turn off the lights in these bathrooms could they be triggered so that you know whether a person is still in there or not a trigger for I think the real fear of making bathrooms available and supervised is of an overdose just let's acknowledge that and just put in protections but allowing these city hall bathrooms which are accessible hot water etc they're an ideal solution and we haven't explored it letting people in without and nowhere beyond is possible camping I've suggested in some of the other things I've written that Peace Park is one option but again we could commission the plan to require a study of alternatives based bathrooms that do have included plumbing I know some communities have built buses where people can shower I know I'm not the only one that went over two minutes I'm not worried about it I may cut you off at five but my point is we need to be building privacy and dignity and I am somewhat sobered by the homelessness events in the state house today it's y'all aren't the only ones lacking vision so if that's any comfort there's a lot of folks that are shooting for the stars we want full private apartments for folks and we won't do anything else and that is just too far of a reach for the immediate need on the street today we have people that need shelter that don't fit into the basement of Bethany and they really need some modest shelter rooms and we could do that and the pods yesterday we were willing to cooperate this spring on pods and huts we could do set a model that actually creates a business here home farm road as well home farm road and you're at about five minutes just so you know if you have any final thoughts no they're not final home farm road is also an ideal possibility an idea that could be fleshed out they've already got jobs available for Agway and Dog River and there's water and sewer there you don't need a certificate of occupancy in the building to allow people to camp there so thank you Stephen why am I the only one to get cut off just because you're tired of you know there's lots of folks that would like to say something yes hello hi I'm sure a lot of you guys know my face my name is Karen Asensio I started working with the Good Samaritan Haven down at the Bethany church two months ago now and I just wanted to bring you guys awareness that we've been past the capacity at the church we hold 20 beds and we've been past that limit since the beginning since it opened up November so my idea honestly I really shouldn't have to bring this up because I think it's ridiculous at this point but I think that there should be emergency vouchers, hotel vouchers in this local area we have five hotels in this town there's no reason why these hotels can't help people that's homeless because 211 is not really useful at this point they've been the client, most of the clients has been trying to stay at the Bethany church I know that because I talked to them personally and even when it gets vouchers it's only reliable in Barrie which nobody has the transportation needs to get there so most of the time these people don't get to go to these vouchers these hotels so I'm really hoping that you guys considered collaborating I don't know how the money works here honestly I don't know how any of this works but I really believe that we could have at least emergency housing vouchers with the shelters that's all I have to say thank you so you were saying that the vouchers are available for hotels in Barrie 211 does not support Montpelier vouchers well I will confess that that is a part of the law that I don't know either how that voucher money works but it's an interesting question and I think worth looking into well I just want to let you know that this has been coming to the Bettany Church over here that has not been able to stay because we've been past the capacity and most of them get stranded because there's no other solutions and I feel like there's a lot of hotels in this area that have empty beds that are just collecting dust and there's no reason why people can't be staying in these beds so I just feel like we should be able to work together and figure this out thank you for bringing this up can I ask a question can you give us an idea of how many people are turned away because there's not a bed of people right now at least over 15 people thank you that's a lot thank you hi my name is Dan Richardson I'm President Montpelier in the third district and I just had a couple of questions and maybe some comments I'll try to keep my time brief first of all Bill I had a question for you we were mentioning in the Green Mountain Transportation budget that that could be moved to microtransportation if you could just define what microtransportation is and is there a time frame in which that decision would have to be made I will try and we have two council members who are actually more informed than I am but microtrans it is basically I think of it kind of almost like as a public Uber you can call on demand a vehicle comes and takes you to your place there's an app that you use maybe you'll double up or triple up rides a circulator that just rides around town to be more targeted service and I know V-Trans is studying it pretty carefully along with GMT and they are talking about rolling it out this year I think and I believe that in any of their funding conversations they've known that the city has put up 40,000 for the circulator and would be willing to convert it to this transit if that's what they wish so that's what I know they actually have put a grant in to help fund the microtransit so they could really do a broad scope outreach education and branding but they also have made a plan to integrate Hospital Hill and the circulator and the capital shuttle those funding and those services and those service hours together to really make a much more solid system there that's on demand response instead of a fixed route and so I think one way or another whether it's with the grant or combining all the past funding for these other routes they're going to try to start the microtransit we are going to try to start the microtransit in July I just wanted to make sure it wasn't an either or type of situation because I think there is an essential function that the Green Mountain Transport provides in making sure that these key circulator points are hit and there's a number of people on them but as the last speaker indicated this sort of micro on-demand transportation if they need to get to bury to seek shelter or housing can be equally important as well and so I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't something that was either or I'll offer one comment about the homelessness task force funding which is that I've done a lot of work with non-profit grant funding in the legal sector and this is very common in the first year where you have money available task forces or groups that aren't used to having this funding often need a little bit of creative room to develop but I think you know the council is correct in looking going forward what are the results what are the uses of this money what are the the productiveness results and I think that's second year is when you really have to start to measure it and say what are we putting this money towards the other question about the master plan funding did that include both the budgeting for the consultant as well as public outreach or is that is that going to phase in talking about the energy plan that was for the consultant to develop the plan of how we will reach our net zero goals and then I'm sure we'll recommend more funding and more process after that sure okay thank you Laura rose I had a question about the management of the debt service maturity and this is really directed to Bill and his counselors who should be looking at this because right now I only have audited statements for the year ending June 30th 2018 but in there it was mentioned that in the year ending 2019 the debt for government and business would be 2.3 million but when you look just five years away 2024 to 2028 was jumping to 7 million 600,000 so in five years we're going to need in our budget an additional $5.3 million to service debt that we already have and I don't see any planning for this this is a huge in our debt payments and it's only five years away Bill yeah most of that has to do with the wastewater plant which is a huge increase and is being offset by fees that are coming in from out from new sources so it has actually been planned we're going to be doing organic standard and selling as this will be able to take food waste and things as the state demands to mandate that and in fact next meeting we'll be hearing a presentation about the phase 2 converting to energy which so these will be the payments we're going out but they'll be offsetting revenues coming in to cover them $5 million in revenues okay I've requested the financial statements they're still in the box there at the clerk so I'm just hoping to get some of those before next week discussion because I'm really concerned I want to see what happened in the year ending 2019 about all the accruals in the budget for paying down principal that weren't made and this is you know in 2018 I think it's like over $5 million that you allocated but didn't pay like you're making allocations to pay principal which will reduce the cost on the long run by lowering your interest payments and you're not making those payments the money is on the budget and the money going out is zero so I'm piling information about that I'm not sure that's the correct interpretation of those financial statements we're paying the principal and interest payments as due by the bond bank which is who we borrow our money from I'm just looking at the accredited statements I'm sorry do you have a request into me I do well mainly to finance I know you've been in meetings the finance department there was a request for you in there too could you tell me what that is I would like to know it was a packet for the meeting but I was able to get it myself I want to look at that though with you are you making your principal payments as you're putting them on the budget because I don't think you are thank you other comments more a proposal than a proposal you know as I'm looking at the homelessness task force allocation I'm definitely comfortable with the amount we're funding there I'm still a little unclear about the pure outreach position again who are they employed by sort of what these specific duties are I think I get the sense that it's a little more meaningful coming from somebody who might have been in this position before but I keep thinking like anything worth doing is worth doing right and I'm worried about like Barry funding their side of the social worker position I'm worried about state money coming down for that I just want to throw it out there like what if we just put the same social worker position under the MPD I'm seeing Zach shake his head here that we knew exactly what they were doing who they were reporting to we would do it right the first year right off the bat and there would be some accountability and reporting back to the council on that I wouldn't see it as a sworn position with a badge or anything which might make people feel a bit more comfortable I'm just throwing that out there I can answer that yeah I'm not proposing it necessarily no I mean so again Erica rail the reason why we proposed a peer support person rather than a social worker is or an outreach person is because a lot of people relate to somebody who has had lived experience and not a social worker or letters after their names a lot of people that have chronic homelessness or have a disability or maybe even a mental health diagnosis would relate to somebody who has had the same experiences rather than a social worker who's been to college, studied not exactly had the same lived experience for example somebody like Don or myself who have have a lived experience of homelessness or a mental health diagnosis we might have relate to somebody who's been out there on the streets a person might have trust issues with a social worker or a mandated reporter and we might be able to make a peer worker or a street outreach person might make a connection whereas a social worker might not make that connection we are currently researching job descriptions of peer outreach workers talking to other organizations who have hired outreach workers we know there's been outreach workers hired in Burlington, Brattleboro Bennington so we haven't really narrowed down a job description who they'd fall under etc some people have done it under from non psychiatric survivors some have done it under Howard Center so we haven't narrowed the focus down yet but we are working on it does that answer your question yeah I guess like what do you think we'll have a little more clarity on this we will have more clarity on this this is brand new it's a Burlington did it as a pilot project four years ago and they're still working on getting out the kinks so I'm not a big fan of reinventing wheels so we're looking at what different things happen every town in Vermont is different we're trying to see what works Don's been doing in a long time so we're trying to take her lived experience of doing this pro bono and what works for Montpelier Don, did you have something to add? Don little again I'd like to say first that it is entirely possible to build accountability into a street outreach position that really shouldn't be a problem the reason we haven't given you the details we don't know who would be hosting the program and the focus may depend on well more thorough assessment of exactly who is out there and of what the for instance what Bethany what the overflow looks like in the future what changes are made in the 211 system so that our responsiveness fund may be able to be used to match that that might affect things but it can be tailored pretty much to the needs of this community and I would also like to say that in the past I have brought in to fill out the forms to go through the process to get housing and have subsequently gotten housing have specifically in fact many of them have specifically said to me we don't think this is going to work we have no faith in this this is garbage we are doing this because you want us to do it and so a lot of this is about relationship and about going out and finding the people because if you wait for them to come to you it's not going to happen it's already not happened for these people for years I mean the existing system has not worked or they wouldn't have been out there for years so it's sort of I guess part of the position is facilitating the access to the existing systems in whatever way it needs to happen and I don't know I think a social worker is a great link in that especially when people come in contact with the police but I do think in terms of going out and finding people and gaining their trust I think you need an outreach worker of some kind and I think people who have had bad experiences with the system are a lot more likely to trust someone they consider to be a peer but the accountability can be tailored to the situation Donna I remember making that motion and the idea was the $45,000 and no specific line items and then we were going to work with the homeless task force give them more time to form everything out so I just want to go back to that so I may put them in a place where they didn't expect to present more detail because I'm not expecting it now I think part of it is that since we don't know who's going to host the program we don't know what type of administrative structure is going to be we do need to find someone who's willing to host it or it needs to be subcontracted which is also a viable possibility which might actually reduce administrative costs if you've subcontracted it and you could also build accountability into that but depending on the host the structure will vary in terms of the accountability and the breakdown of the hours probably but it's adaptable Thank you Forgive me can I What you're saying What Dan is saying You want to introduce yourself? I live in District 1 and my streets are nice the winter parking man hasn't affected me no no seriously though we're talking to a lot of people understanding the lay of the land the continuum of care run through capstone Tony Grout was at that meeting the other day they're talking very much the same language very much the same things statewide level we're at the state house today they're talking this is not just pulling something out of midair this is the zeitgeist this is what people are thinking about as Don said there are structures of accountability we'll come back to you soon and yes we heard Councillor Bates say come back and I checked in with people we had a little bit of time but we're not slouching on this having a good solid professional program that really makes a difference is something we're very interested in so thanks Steve would agree again the you hear these words continuum of care and homeless management information system I had encouraged before the task force first met I sent a memo out saying we really need to focus on the privacy intentions of these services we're trying to learn to provide the state has not done that the state has a task force that's supposed to coordinate the homeless management information system and deal with privacy policies that board has fallen apart hasn't met in a year or two and here we are like sure let's jump in and give everybody's personal information to this you know system we're all on board and speaking the same language we need to pause and step back and decide whether we're encouraging folks to put data in unsecure hands where you it may come back to haunt you independent contractor is a proper low overhead way to handle the street outreach I think a halftime person I think somebody like Don could work three hours a day and save up book the extra hour for the on-call emergencies you know that's about the level of service that we need right now we need to fund you y'all need to decide whether you want to fundamentally begin now to intercept the OEO money I'm hoping that Bill has made efforts I've asked to talk to Bill before he talked to Sarah Phillips at OEO but it's important that we keep our options open in case Bethany is not an option for next winter that we have control over our share of that 100,000 at Good Sam currently takes it doesn't mean we couldn't contract with Good Sam to run a shelter if another church opens up but it means we need to keep our options open we need to focus one of the tasks you should give your task force and or the outreach worker it's important they be independent is accountability we've got drug dealing going on right outside of another way currently we've got people tweaking it at other centers too that are managed that there are problems that need oversight and I know you want to argue that they're just fine and Good Sam in another way can do no wrong but that's just not true we've got real problems there and we need to decouple and take a real strong look at how much more we invest in that how much money is in the budget for public for public works investments catching up 2.4 million total is a farce compared to what I'm seeing going to Helen in this town so we need to think about I know it's late in the budget process but I'm asking you to really consider whether we might need twice that amount how much is in the budget for garage appeals let's say it's very likely that the opponents could prevail are we prepared to take it is the city prepared to take it to the Supreme Court I suspect they are have you budgeted several hundred thousand dollars for appeals on that garage how much is it worth and when do you start making a contingency plan the state house today took up parking and there was great interest in the senate among a number of parties in the senate co-ops to pursuing the pit as an alternative Chief Facoce was there for part of that and I think we're we're remiss in not exploring our other options and creating a contingency plan rather than dumping good money after bad on a poorly planned and poorly processed garage design thank you Zach do you have something I want to say while we're setting Zach up I just wanted to add a comment for cotton and others just to be clear the social worker that we're proposing actually will not be a MPD employee they will be an employee of Washington County mental health we'll have an arrangement with the two police departments and just see you now so I will say this again I want to answer these questions so this has actually been done before the street our age was done under another way through Good Samaritan several years ago it was done under a very small grant so there was accountability done I was on that team along with Rick DeAngelis and we had to submit data and hours every week so we were very accountable to what we do I still have that data in my system in my house so I mean the accountability goes with any profession I have accountability at my work I'm peer worker there and I'm supposed to submit logs when I work and hours so it doesn't go away we don't know who would host that because we don't know if this has been approved yet so once that happens we would be able to figure out who's going to host this and I think that everybody could work together but I don't think it sounds like great idea on paper Connor social workers full time we got this in the bag and that's all good but it really doesn't really pan out that way I wish it did we could make it simple it just doesn't fact I understand that we were sharing the social worker unless you guys were looking to hire another social worker on top of that but in any case I kind of want to stay away from the social worker except the link up maybe and so I just wanted to let you know that and I want to answer a quick question about the hotels we acknowledge that this is an issue about getting people to the hotels I can tell you that it depends on who the hotels contract with they do work through ESD the funding streams to the hotels depends who ESD is doing work with most of the hotels are in so at one time we had one in Montpellier I don't know if we're still doing that one and also people going into the overflow have been determined maybe may have been determined or may not have been depending the situation they may have been determined not eligible for the hotel because there's a maybe a bed at overflow it's possible but if overflow turned away theoretically yeah they call 211 there's always a chance of a glitch there and you know the 15 people would definitely go without one of those 15 would you know something like that would go without it is possible but I just want to answer about the hotels because that's done through you know contract with ESD or agency human services I believe the Econologic one time or the old Econologic here used to be one of the hotels but I don't think that's the case right now I just want to say we'll continue this work you guys send us on and we appreciate the extra time and we'll keep you guys updated thank you Hi my name is Nancy Smith I live in district one and the homelessness problem around here it really concerns me on a daily basis I sleep over it and I'm just trying to figure out what's going on so I really don't know a lot about what's going on but as an employee of Washington County mental health I have to say that as soon as I became an employee of Washington County mental health my friends who live closer to the street immediately started to say things like oh you've gone to work for the enemy or things like that they're definitely afraid of Washington mental health and so I still think that when they're talking about some sort of a liaison that is a peer that's very important there's got to be somebody approachable somebody from Washington County mental health so I think you should be aware of that thank you Yeah again I just want to kind of forward what Steve Woelker was kind of saying in Zachary I just want to make it clear how many of you guys know that the nest is a subsidized housing on Berry Street it is owned by Good Samaritan Haven and I think it's about I think 10 beds available at that place now the issue with the nest what I want to bring up is that you're not qualified to be at the nest unless you have stayed at the Good Samaritan Haven for 60 days at least and remind you that the Good Samaritan Haven is at past capacity about 25 beds and anybody that's staying at the Bedton E. Church is not qualified to stay at the Good Samaritan Haven because it's already past capacity so and the mission statement of the nest is for people to like get a job you know save money get housing in the future so I just want to bring that awareness that the system is kind of has a lot of flaws behind it and I'm hoping that you guys could help fix that in the future I don't know so that's all I want to say thank you Do you know who actually operates the nest? Who operates the nest? Good Samaritan Is it owned by the Good Samaritan? Yeah that's all I know Thank you Okay all right well thank you all and so I'll close the public hearing on that Any further comments from council? Fair enough so we will have another public hearing on this on the 23rd Do you need a motion for that? I'm looking at you It's me too unless you're changing the budget number but you didn't sound like you were Okay all right thank you all I'm going to move on to the warning of the annual meeting so for this we have the attached potential draft of the the warning so is there anything I mean I have some assumptions about this but there's anything you want to either of you want to start out with for this we get last-minute changes we get last-minute money information in there so this is more of a as much of anything as a legal formality to make sure it's correct it's also a chance for our citizens to ask about anything that's on it if they didn't understand Oh thank you yeah so I'm going to open the public hearing on the warning Thank you One question I have is based on our conversation previously I wonder if we would be removing article 12 Yes well assuming that's the decision yes that's what I took away I feel like I heard that earlier is that fair? I didn't hear a motion to put it on so I guess that's because it's not in there so we didn't need to take a motion to take it It is on the draft warning article 12 for I think it was in our budget number It's not So do you need a motion to remove it? I moved to delete article 12 from the proposed warning I'll make a motion to remove article 12 from the current You want to second Jack's? Fine, second Jack Alright for the discussion on that part of it One question I have about that I think it goes without saying that all the other articles would move up a number Let's put in a new article 12 A replacement article 12 Any further conversation about article 12 All in favor please say aye I opposed Just along those lines though would we have this article if we did the loan to pay back the state That could go in there Okay Anything else on here Well I actually do have another question So this is about article 14 CBPSA So I'm going to direct this at you Donna I hope that's okay My understanding of the MOU with Barry currently is that we have this split between cost that's 47.53 Yeah right and so it would reduce the city's portion I had it here 23 would make Montpelier 23,500 instead of 25,000 even I hesitated to bring it up earlier because the Public Safety Authority Board meets tomorrow evening and will modify its own warning notice at its public hearing on its warning notice is tomorrow night so that's what it's likely to be because the current MOU Memo of Understanding on the share costing formula is the 53.47 So I have a question about that Do we need to have another public hearing on the warning Next week So we could change it We could propose a change tonight and then you'll have your meeting and we can revisit it next week Okay 23 Yeah it's next week it's boom boom so you'd like me to make the motion tonight I just feel hesitant because the board itself hasn't changed its initial warning it will do so tomorrow night I think we should knowing that we could change back if we needed to but fine fine we recognize the MOU as having a different percentage absolutely okay so before you do that Stephen do you have something to say I want to just call to your attention that they're also trying to make progress on a contract to get something that's credible as a plan that will attract new members and other funding sources and you're missing a delegate since Ashley's resignation so it's important I don't know the process of whether you have to advertise that or you can appoint somebody in the interim but you need another vote my appeal you need another vote on that board potentially as early as tomorrow night so there is a lot at stake because there's things are moving at the state level on dispatch arrangements and if we're not going to lose our entire investment in CVPSA we need to be riding on top of it as I've been saying for a year and a half or so so if you're at Liberty to appoint somebody you should do that thank you did you want to make a motion it's going to make a motion to change article 14 now on the existing warning that the amount would be 23,500 from Peir and 26,500 from Berry City the total 50,000 remains the same there's a second further discussion on this particular item there is actually going to be some additional warning because for studies we can name it that's a telecommunication study plan and so I've offered some warning and we'll finalize it tomorrow night again so this won't be the exact warning but the numbers I'm supplying is the 23,47 okay thank you thanks for that clarification and thanks for looking out for us okay further discussion all in favor please say aye opposed okay great thank you for that and are there any of the other numbers that we need to change anything else that needs to be revisited here we don't have the final school numbers yet either I mean this well we've got to change this by $1,500 now which one? oh never mind no because that's not the debt okay anything else we should flag for this okay any further comments from the public on the morning okay so I'm going to close the public hearing and based on that because there were some changes I think we probably should have a motion to set the next hearing for the next week I think it's already been warned anyway but yes okay we schedule a second public hearing on the proposed city meeting warning incorporating the changes we made tonight second okay further discussion all in favor please say aye aye opposed okay great thank you and alright so we have one more regular business item this evening which is the first public hearing on proposed amendments to the dog ordinance so I'm going to open the public hearing killing it tonight with the opening public meetings remembering yeah okay so for this either Bill or Donna would you like to explain these changes probably Donna or Cameron the wording that was now being proposed is reflected exactly what's stated in the noise and Cameron did the research to show that indeed other towns in their dog ordinances keeps this broad instead of 20 minutes or 30 minutes and it works very well add your comments well that's really the whole and some of my comments is that this really does realign our language that's consistent throughout all of our ordinances and in all the study that I did do other organizations really don't put time limits and it allows a certain amount of flexibility within the ordinance and the league also does not really recommend putting time limits in there as well so if it helps I can read it allowed the proposed changes again if you'd like I think would sure let's just for clarity okay so we only edited one section in article 2 dog and animal control ordinance it's section 8 202 definitions number 8 so it says nuisance shall mean any dog or domestic pet that chronically disturbs the quiet, comfort and repose of others by frequent or continued barking howling, yelping or screaming this definition shall not apply to dogs in a kennel or boarding facility which has received a zoning permit under the city's zoning regulations or working farm dogs that are barking in order to herd or protect livestock or poultry or to protect crops this also nuisance dogs also mean anyone that causes damage to property any comments I did hear from some of the neighbors that had talked from Elm Street and they couldn't be here tonight but they wanted to say they really were in favor of this ordinance and hope that it passes any other comments Connor? Yeah, I'd support this I had a few emails on it I think what I have intelligent constituencies I don't see this as being draconian or any more strict than the pre-existing language I think it's just a matter of clarity in realigning as Cameron says with some of the other cities Jack, did you have something? I favor this I think this is a good idea as it happened I circulated the video of the first meeting in which we discussed this to everybody in my family because that was the night we also had the presentation on the Emerald Ash borer and every time I talk to my sister who lives in New Jersey since then she says, did those poor people ever get help with their dogs? So I'm certainly going to be supporting this Lauren I just I didn't really hear the background from November as to why this is on the table now Donna We received some complaints from some neighbors and when they went to try to enforce a chronic barking, howling dog the police found this discrepancy between what it said about a dog nuisance under the dog ordinances and what we said about dogs in the noise ordinance so we were just trying to make them mirror one another I guess my concern is that it could open up neighbors holding other neighbors accountable in a way that could just be really bad like the neighbor across the streets cat runs across the yard and that makes the other neighbors dog bark but the people who own the cat call the police that kind of thing the difference for me with the dog versus people playing their music too loud or things like that is that a dog often vocalizes maybe when they're happy or they're bored or a dog is on their property or something like that when you just say frequent or continued there's no it's like saying like okay well this dog is loud it's like saying well the neighbors downstairs have kids and I don't want to hear them dogs should be allowed to vocalize somewhat and I'm just afraid this district and some of the research was like Cambridge, Massachusetts I looked at the packet for the research but some of it was really urban with much larger populations higher density than what we experience in a town of only you know 8,000 people so maybe you could speak to that I don't have my packet in front of me but my research tried to be regional other cities there are some comparable benchmark communities in there as well and I used the Vermont League of Cities and Towns recommendation as well okay any other comments okay since you're still here can anybody speak to the neighbor versus neighbor and how the police are going to deal with it maybe how is it going to affect the police I think I'll let the police the answer to this but we have a lot of situations where there's neighbor disputes and certainly if a dog is a one-off barking because they're tangled or something they're not going to get sighted under the ordinance I mean this is really intended to be night after night after night type thing which is what the neighbors were experiencing but they weren't actually barking for 20 minutes straight so that was the conflict with the ordinance I guess my concern is we were talking about preserving kind of the intent of the law when it was written and this really doesn't do it it was really that it was going on and on and now there's no allowance for that it does say frequent and continued it says chronically it says or chronically disturbing and continued barking I do want to also point out that the penalties for a lot of this is restorative process with our community justice center so we do have people other than just finding people you can get a fine or you can go through a restorative process where our community justice center really sits down with neighbors and tries to get to the core of the dispute because I think you're drawing a point of a lot of times if disputes get to this level it's because of something other than a dog sometimes and so sometimes this we really try to help people sit down and talk about it and so that it doesn't get to this level or result in a call to the police department so we don't involve them so we try I think we try to address that in this ordinance as well thank you Cameron in fact that's a great point because that's what the neighbors tried to do but they had no muscle to make the people come to the justice center and sit down for mediation and so this gets that step in place so people talk but you're right it is or okay alright any further comments yes okay I'm going to close the public hearing and yeah Donna make a motion for the second hearing on the dog ordinance changes to be the next meeting which is January 23rd yes second for the discussion all in favor please say aye opposed okay so that is all of our regular business for this evening so no we're going to go to council reports Donna I'm just used to starting with you okay well I had a lot of regional planning commission meetings and the Clean Basin made a petition to the Clean Basin plan is a subcommittee out of the Central Vermont Regional Basin Regional Planning Commission and the report was done and the Basin plan was approved very first of 2019 it was some concerns not addressed and so indeed we're doing this letter and I realize I've been on the Clean Water Basin plan really more as a citizen so if indeed I shouldn't use my title Montpellier City Council I'd like to know that before we send this letter so I maybe should have put that on the agenda I was doing this report and realized oh we are sending this letter they are putting our sort of our associated groups and so maybe I shouldn't be saying I'm from Montpellier City Council so what's your time letter? oh it's not till next month so we can talk about it next meeting but I thought I'd put it out there and I can send you a copy of the letter and give you more about it but it's just saying we like these concerns that we're missing in the final plan the other thing is Central Vermont Regional Planning Commission now I got into this group late and I was really concerned that it's doing its thing and we had this microtransit group and then you had this wonderful meeting of a lot of regional transportation so we are trying to get what's one of the things they're trying to do is pull all these groups together and look beyond Montpellier and to help communities that can't think of putting transit on the bus but could do some of the other ideas so I would like to join this group too and decide whether I'm there on your behalf I can just keep you posted they're trying to create a new name for itself but it'll be meeting and trying to destroy silos basically on transportation Keetune I had a good meeting yesterday with the Vermont River Conservancy they did some questions it actually scared the hell out of me the prospect of taking out some of the three dams there you know and telling us all in Montpellier so I had a lot of questions about what's one sort of Fisher price run down of it you know and just really looking at what these dams were initially intended for whether it be hydropower or flood mitigation the three ones they're talking about the Pioneer Dam, the Bailey Dam and the Red Dam over there really haven't been maintained they're not really serving any functional purpose anymore and actually they could be a real liability for us if one of them pops there I think in the next coming couple meetings they might be asking us for a letter of support to pull down some DEC funding to actually do a feasibility study of these dams and see do we do nothing, do we take them out is it something in between but I think there's enormous potential just looking at Confluence Park and sort of the river axis we have over by Bar Hill now to put in some high-acting other recreational activities in addition to I guess if you one of these dams like some of the fish population jumps up some of these wildlife habitats are restored and if you're not going to a straight line you can really sort of slow down the flow of the river naturally by letting a river be a river so anyways if anybody wants to sit down with them I'm sure Ricardo and Steve would be more than happy too but it was a real eye-opener for me and I'd be happy to introduce that letter of support in a couple meetings there that's it for now, thanks yeah keep us posted on that damn I think it was initially intended to cover a big sewage pipe back in the day there but now that we have a wastewater treatment plant that's not the case anymore it's on the north branch you can see it from the new pedestrian bridge or actually you might not be able to it might be directly over it or it's just barely upstream of it I'm not sure it's right there though I'm looking forward to Martin Luther King Day weekend coming up it's a significant holiday for my family I kind of use that as the chance to go down and visit my folks because it's hard to get away at Christmas so just wanted to mention that and use it to make my excuse to Bill I'm not going to see you next week I suppose we'll be closed anyway I will be at Baguitos tomorrow morning of course 30 to 930 I also want to mention Ken Russell referenced it briefly there was a a vigil and a rally at the state house today that I got to see just a little bit of around homelessness statewide and possible solutions for it it was as these things are affecting depressing and invigorating kind of all at once and I was glad I was there I was sorry I couldn't be there for the whole thing and I feel like there was something else but I can't remember it now so I'll pass I'll pass Just one quick update from the social and economic justice advisory committee that there continues to be progress on fleshing out and refining in request for proposal for that so thank you all again for the allocation and the budget and shout out to Cameron who's been working really hard and doing some great work pulling that together so thank you to Cameron for that and look forward to sharing with you when we get to a final version of that Okay so I have a couple of things here so one is I'm going to be hosting some office hours right next door here in City Hall Tuesday 21st 3.30 to 4.30 I'm going to try to make that regular I know I've said that in the past but I'm going to be there next Tuesday that's going to happen that is my plan so I'll be there next Tuesday 21st 3.30 to 4.30 taking a cue from Glenn here it's a good practice just a reminder to the council if you would please remind or please remember to fill out bill's evaluation form I think we have that review coming up I forget what day we said it would be on but I think before this meeting I was the only one who had yet filled it out so I think it was a deadline I'll send an e-mail of a deadline look at when it makes sense didn't you say the 12th you wanted to do it by the 12th so we needed it before again we're going to do the meeting of the 12th that's when we were going to do the review so it should probably be done by the Friday before but one of the problems with it you have to fill it all out at once because I started it and realized I couldn't save it so I'm doing it offline fair enough thank you awesome so that is second thing and then just a third thing just a heads up about the energy efficiency, home energy labeling ordinance coming up we were aiming to have the language done by the 12th for the 12th to have some preliminary information where potentially even like a first reading potentially on that date and so we'll have the language available potentially before that so if anyone would like to see it for that we're going to finalize that language probably in the next week or so so yeah it's exciting to see that moving forward or getting to be at least clearer which is great alright that's it for me John just a reminder that if you have ballot questions to get them to me by five o'clock next Thursday that is not the candidate filing deadline the candidate filing deadline is five o'clock the following Monday so we will need to set up a civil authority meeting for that day to draw will not have to be a formal action so we won't need a quorum also I just received notification today that the non-citizen voting charter change proposal was actually released by senate rules committee and gov ops is going to take it up next Tuesday at 3.15 the senate gov ops I'm sorry senate gov ops is going to take it up okay wow sorry what time is that again it's at 3.15 Tuesday the 21st yes yeah I have office hours going to the office hours oh gosh yeah exactly well I will be tested you'll be able to go and John you're going to go yeah I'm on the list to test and I just want to remind folks to the way it went last year was that senate gov ops assumed as per normal procedure that they were going to get this last the last session so they preemptively held hearings for it so that's when we called out everybody you know we can attorneys we'd spoken to the city clerks in other you know cities in the country who had done this so I try to gently remind them but this is a smaller list that they've set up and I'm not inclined to necessarily go and shake the bushes and the trees given that is that it for you yeah that's it I'm done good Bill no we've been you know needy with all sorts of things I mean specific new other than in addition to the candidate filing remind people that the deadline for appointment for the interim position is this Friday at the end of the day we to my knowledge we have two people that have submitted applicants so far there may be more but I am sure of two so that will be on the agenda I don't know if we want to talk about early start to get that done before we do everything else next week welcome now I'm trying to think of like how busy the 23rd agenda so we have well finalizing the budget and the warning because we don't have bought well make a decision perhaps about the the land repayment we were going to have a presentation on the wastewater plant the phase two dog ordinance second reading budget second hearing budget second hearing trying to think what else was on that list I mean it's nothing are people available to be here at six o'clock I wonder if we should make the appointment at six o'clock and because some of these things are public hearings people might not expect to I don't know how fast that conversation will be and so if it is well yeah I meant to start to do the appointment the very first right exactly we did the appointment first at six but then not start other business until at least six thirty correct and I was basing this on at least prior times when the applicants have come in and made a presentation sometimes people have spoken on their behalf the council has gone into executive session sometimes it takes longer than others so I'm thinking it's going to be at least a half an hour before we get into the regular business so but then again take five minutes for all I know so so I'm okay with that how do you all feel well I feel if we allow just that much time and we need more we can move it we can extend it to another part of the meeting if we have to you can although I think well it's your call I think the intent was to appoint the person at the beginning I'm just saying if we got suddenly we end up with four people it might be more complicated that's all that we could extend it I might be a minute or two late for a six o'clock meeting but I'll make it as soon as I can wouldn't be more than you know 605 you can start without me any thoughts we'll let the we'll let the applicants know as well so do you do you know motion to that effect we've never we're just setting the meeting setting this okay and I think it would probably be important to not take up any other business prior to 630 so that anybody who shows up for these other items is not what's that except approving the agenda sure none of the yeah yeah yeah okay okay in fact to that end we might want to put the consent agenda after yeah business right so okay and that is that it for you okay alright so that's everything so without objection we will adjourn 838