 connecting to property owners, renters, low income individuals, non-profit management, financing clean energy, development, housing, public health, resilience planning, experience, and other pertinent skills. And of course, we're very dedicated to involving young people and looking through the lens of diversity to make sure that we're connecting to the whole of the community and giving voice to people. So you need all of that, diversity, expertise, skilled professionals, leadership, and people with life experience that needs to be at the same table. So that's the outline. And we'd be glad to hear your thoughts about, and would it be useful if I went to the application process now or we'll do so at the end? So be glad to hear your thoughts on the way this can work. I just think that it should be taken under consideration that a member of the commission be someone with lived experience of this flood. So that whatever other qualifications they might have that it's very important to have someone on the commission who actually had, was impacted by the flood, experienced it in some substantial way. Some degree, but I think someone who actually lived what needs to be there. Thank you so much, sir. I was just curious how, when the commission was conceived, when I thought this whole forum was to actually decide and figure out what the commission was and how it was going to. Yeah, I think that as a group, the sponsoring organizations were hearing the same things over and over about the absence of leadership, the fact that leadership was discoate in the community that everyone was saying, yeah, right, have another meeting and it's just gonna stick the things on the wall and who's gonna follow up and is there gonna be any staff leadership to do this? There was also a strong sense that this shouldn't be owned by the city. There were some who thought this should be entirely separate from the city and that would be an advisory group or a political group to push against the city. And as we thought about it, we thought you wanna add up the skills and strength. There's a hundred city employees, a lot of them are working on a lot of these issues now. You don't wanna disconnect from their knowledge experience and the hard work that they're already doing and as outsiders try to duplicate all that, you wanna add to it with vision, with connections, with leadership from the community and engagement of community residents to move things forward. So all that was involved, but we also thought we couldn't wait that this process has been really fast. To put this together has been very, very intense to do all of this in a month and a couple of days. And we didn't wanna let it just slide. We felt like we should start getting organized and start putting this in. So we've already started looking for resources to make this happen because we feel like there's a great urgency to follow up on the public feelings. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. Cause, cause Sandra, thank you for being here. And you know, we gotta thank the bridge for your absolutely sterling coverage of all of this work. It's been just, it's been wonderful because you've been the cornerstone of knowledge around what's going on. And it's just so important. Thank you. Dan. Yeah, Paul. The state is kind of the largest. Oh, Dan Jones. Hi. For those. The state is the largest sort of landowner, et cetera and participant. Are they going to be involved in this and how or has that been considered yet? It seems to me like in terms of forming this that they should be a critical component. Yeah. It's important to know that this has happened so fast but we did put in a call to the state to buildings and general services. They're the biggest landowner in downtown Montpelier. They've got a lot of business buildings that are flood impacted and parking lots that could absorb water potentially. So, yeah, they're on the radar. We've had a call in to them today. We're setting up an appointment to think about their connection to this. It's possible the state could be a funding partner as well as an instrumental partner in moving things forward. Yes, ma'am. My name is Lawrence Webster. This is a small procedural suggestion idea throughout this whole process, the past month and a half. I've been wondering where's the Regional Planning Commission and why are they not here and why is their voice not loud? They know this stuff already, a lot of it I think or should and some of it's in their comp plan. I think the city manager, Executive Director of Montpelier Alive and President of the Montpelier Foundation are given as founding members add a representative of the Regional Planning Commission please. Thank you so much for that. We've connected with them, the Executive Director of the Regional Planning Commission is here tonight probably in that conversation about the watershed management. They do plans, right? We need plan political muscle and dollars that actually changes the field and changes the watershed. And so it's not just a planner, but we do have planner on the list as someone and it could be the Executive Director of the Regional Planning Commission or it could be someone else that connects directly to them. But the point is very well made, sir. My name is Mark. I have a concern about the creation of this thing being so closely tied to the existing, the city government and to Montpelier Alive. Will this body have the ability to say you're the bureaucratic roadblock to the course of action that we see as needed is not overly sympathized within this and say, sorry, we're going somewhere else because you can't provide the solution. I feel like it's very important that the council itself not be beholden to the city to say we have to manage up to the city's expectations or in the interest of continuing to have a voice and be part of that to please the city manager or Montpelier Alive or any government entity. I feel like it's very important that this group be able to function outside of and independently of any government by. That is a great observation and it's absolutely the intent of this. The city would be part of the committee that would select individuals to be on this. There might be one city employee on this. There's not gonna be people who have city votes versus people who have Montpelier Alive. I don't expect Montpelier Foundation or Montpelier Alive, they may have a one person on this commission, but most people are gonna be people throughout the community that apply to be part of it. So there will always be a voting majority of people who are completely independent and this group will be independent of the city in terms of its decision-making and the chair and so forth. The challenge is that you need to also build unity so you're not just a protest group and that you are using money effectively to drive things forward and connecting to existing resources to move things. So we've tried to find the right balance point and I really appreciate the question because I think that this isn't a done deal yet. It's a deal in process. What we have on paper is our best estimate of what the plan is, but we don't wanna wait. We wanna start asking people to apply immediately to participate in this process. Yes, state your name please. Certainly. Hi, I'm Kate McCarthy. Mark, thanks for your point. Everybody, thanks for your points. I like the idea of the independence of this group as well as those connections for... Sure. I like the idea of the independence of the group as well as connections for collaboration purposes. What authority does this group have? It does not, yeah, it does not have authority over the state or over state funds or over the city. It's a partnership that has the ability to raise big ideas in a way that because of the situation of it following from all this public engagement and because it's got support from Montpelier Live and the Montpelier Foundation and the city, it's gonna have a loud voice as an advocate beyond Montpelier. It's gonna have the ability to coordinate and invite people together and any number of these groups on the wall could turn into working parts of the commission immediately. So it could engage a lot of residents. There's probably a hundred people ready to be involved in this work, right? And so it's goal is to be an active facilitator of public process to drive this. And everything we hear from the city is that they want that, that it's trying to convene leadership across the watershed is beyond their scope of work and their imagination. Their sense of what they can do. And so this is gonna pick up a lot of things that are beyond, on the other hand, there are existing committees of the city that are doing great work and are going to be probably looking at some of these issues and saying, yeah, we're already doing that or we're, we could be doing that with more volunteers. And we'd like to use this as a way to add to the strength and volunteers that are working in those processes already. I'm gonna come to you and first. Okay. Don't touch the mic. Okay. I think what people are talking about is the tricky part. It's what is the relationship to the city and the state and where does this group get to have a voice? And because there's not necessarily a lot of authority here, but if you can define early on where the group and how the group gets to have a voice with the city and the city council and maybe with state committees, that would be really helpful. I also just wanted to put a plug in not to try to have so broadly representative of a group that it becomes another advocacy group, a mini legislature. I really like smaller committees like this with the idea that people are thinking strategically and not just representing something. I mean, I appreciate Andrea's point about having people with lived experience on it, but I wouldn't want it to appoint people in a way that it became an advocacy. We know and we don't wanna build a 28 or 30 person commission and there may be many people who can serve multiple roles who have resilience expertise and they're an architect and their house was flooded. So there's gonna be ways to look at this in aggregate, but we don't know who's gonna wanna be engaged in it. So we'll see. But I think all these points around its governance and how it has voice, I think right now there's a sort of seamless interconnection between this process and the city. Everyone in the city government is listening. They're dedicated to hearing from citizens right now. And this is really a strong step and this is a structure that can continue that. Does an external authority established by the three of us have any power over our elected officials? No, we elect officials who represent us legally. This is an entity that doesn't have power to tell city council what to do. On the other hand, city council is looking for advice and guidance to think big about the future. And this would be a tremendously valuable foil to set some of those directions and build big ideas like you were describing that can have transformational impact. You notice that things like closing this school didn't end up being prioritized at the state house or moving the downtown up the hill didn't get prioritized in the last sessions. And I don't think it was because people were saying, none of that is useful. I think it was because people were saying, let's establish structural ways to move the ball that will be in a situation to evaluate those big opportunities. And be a driver for them, rather than just have a big plan that doesn't go anywhere. And this is all about, at least to my mind and I think to the organizers, it's about driving. It's not just an advisory group, it's a group to drive. Dan. Okay. I think my worry was too big and too cumbersome, echoing what Stephanie said. And I don't know if you've got any models in mind of places that have done this. The thing that came to my mind and I don't know if it's relevant but there was a whole group put together in the medical establishment during COVID and they had a tripartite leadership and they had links to all these various institutions and so on. And I think of a sort of hub and spoke idea with this so that you could get expertise but you didn't have to have a commission of 40 people. I think that would be... I think that's very wise and I think as we think about these groups, the potential for the formation of leadership teams and different aspects of this, do you have a recommendation for the number of commissioners? Between 12 and 18. Lower. We've been thinking maybe 15 but that may and some people think that's high so. One of the things I've noticed from a number of friends who live in surrounding towns is this sense that Montpelier is the downtown for central Vermont. That we don't have... The Regional Planning Commission is one focus but it is kind of diffuse and bureaucratic and I don't have a specific proposal here but rather I think there has to be a way of having the voice of our surrounding communities involved in this because I think they are part of our decision system, they're gonna be part of our support system and they're gonna be part of what's influenced by the whole thing. I think that's a wise... I mean, just I'm a facilitator so I shouldn't say that's a wise thing to say but I think usually when we've done community processes, anyone who cares about that community who goes to school there, who was a teacher there or who is in the next town and that's their downtown, anyone who has a psychological identification that wants to help, why would you turn them away from being on a committee to support resilience in this community? So I think it's inclusive that way. And then we'll go to... I know this isn't an official city committee but I'm wondering, we implemented something in the last year or so that provides stipends to folks who serve on committees in case they need to pay for childcare and it's just a wondering if that could be extended to this commission just as an equity thing that would help encourage folks to apply that might otherwise be able to afford it. It's a great idea and it's one that we're thinking about that people have brought to the table and right now we don't have a dollar. Every dollar that was raised by Montpelier Foundation, Montpelier Live, has been pledged that we're gonna keep anything for our own expenses in doing this work, we're gonna pour it all out through. So it will require us to raise a fair amount of money and as we do it, you'll see in the sheet, we're thinking, we don't wanna build something that has to be perpetuated forever. It has to demonstrate its value to be perpetuated and so we're gonna do an evaluation after two years and we would be looking to find funding for it for two years but I think it's very much on the table and probably we need to decide that early rather than late. Yeah, good, good thought. So I just wanted to share some of the conversation that's happened from the Zoom. So one person said, we need to regain our confidence in Montpelier leadership. Another said, we need to have a way for community members to invest in the resilience effort like bonds. Many of us are retired and can't give away our money but might be willing to lend it. Someone noted this group sounds like an advisory group. Someone noted folks from Waterbury spoke at the last meeting they had a very effective track record and moving forward an ambitious agenda over a 10 year period based on community commitment to preventing another Irene disaster. This seems similar. Someone asked how does a committee like this drive when it doesn't have the oomph to do it? And another one, where will the force come from to move our thoughts forward? Many times ideas go to the city and die. How do we prevent this? And someone called for new council members and somebody else said major changes require state and or federal money which people agreed with. And there was a call for student youth members of the commission. Well, some great, great thoughts and great contributions to this dialogue. Thank you. So what I think I would like to see out of this is of course coordination and cooperation with the city. Also the ability to say once the city's ability has been exhausted to be able to go to the state or the federal or any number of these ideas it seems is a subset of this committee, right? Whether it's raising funds at the federal or philanthropic level, whether it is coordinating efforts. I've poked my head into maybe a half a dozen or more small groups that are trying to do something and they all have one thing in common which is everyone has heard of some other small group trying to do something and it's a diluted sort of energy of a lot of people who have a lot of willingness and a lot of intelligence and passion about it but it's uncoordinated. But forgot my other point, so. Yeah, it's a great perspective that as a convening center for the future of Montpelier it can convene and support any number of these groups. I mean, one thing that someone said Montpelier's the place where good ideas go to die, it's because we organize in opposition to each other around ideas and we start to split them off and this is a way to have a convening entity that pays attention and provides mutual support between different groups that are working on this long-term recovery and the resilience agenda and drives for results, pushes the city, pushes its committees and also raises funds to have some resources to help move pieces of it forward. Kate, did you have your hand up and then I'll go to you Lauren and then you, sir. Thanks, Paul, Kate McCarthy. I'm curious, Paul, what do you think, wrote it down, what do you think is the best way for a group like this to maintain its focus and avoid mission creep? By definition, a convener is going to be broad, it's going to be plugged into a lot of different topics and people and ideas and help to bring those together. The risk of the flip side of that can be inaction or mission creep. So based on what you've seen, what do you think? You know, I've built like 15 policy councils and I've run processes like this in communities all across the state. The first answer is it's all about leadership and it's the same question about how do you drive the agenda in a consistent way? It's like you need to have a really vigorous, clear chair that facilitates and pulls people together with very different ideas, but finds the common ground in common direction and helps them be effective. And that's going to be essential. And then a really strong membership of strong will, sharp people who want to drive change and every seat's going to be super important on this working group. But beyond that, I think you have to convene and pay attention to the needs of people and you have to keep a laser-like focus that just as this ending hunger, which is really crucial to us and we care about, that we keep to the parts that are going to drive recovery and resilience in a consistent way. And I think people understand that and I think you can test ideas and go back to the people to renew yourself regularly. So this is more of an ask. Andrea alluded to it earlier that this is a huge lift and nobody can do it by themselves. So before everybody goes, ask for a show of hands who's willing to put time in and help with this. Right now we're putting out to put in an application. So you know, to be members of the commission. Yeah, we're going to have this process. I think that we're going to need volunteers for all of this stuff. My problem is I'm like, I'm a volunteer and I'm not going to do it. I know I'm not going to continue to coordinate this. There needs to be an executive director that drives this work and there needs to be a commission. Right now I'm making a lot too many decisions about what's the next agenda, how does this work? It's got to be led by a determined group of people who are thinking together in a diligent way regularly. It can't be done by an individual. And so this takes it to that other level and a level where you hire an executive director and that should happen very, very quickly. We're really interested in that. I would say that makes it more important to me that the makeup of the commission be more focused on representing the community. I know there's a need for expertise and all that stuff but somehow people have to be vetted based on their ability to provide a perspective for different parts of the community because we know that the experiences of the flood have been really different. Sorry, I thought it was loud enough. No, that we need, just like I said, it needs to be someone who's lived, got lived experience with this flood. We also need people who have lived experience with the different aspects of the community if the expectation is to come up with something that the community is gonna get behind. Thank you. I think that goes from the commission to the committees and task forces that may form around all of this. So, yeah. So in the submission, I think they will be for the audience to whatever the situation is. Jackie Dagger, yeah, I completely agree with that being able to represent lived experience. I think when I'm reading about this group and listening to all of the great comments here, I'm thinking about the value of bringing together a group like this with these different experiences and what that could lend to the city and other decision makers. And in my mind, like having these different perspectives together in this group is an opportunity to think about where things might be, where timelines might be conflicting, where prioritization is important because this is like the things we were talking about here, they're all gonna have competing timelines. And with experience like this from these different experts, that's really valuable in helping prioritize certain actions or even convening groups to educate this commission about the issues. And it seems that one of the outcomes of something like that could be recommendations on how to approach some of these larger projects. And that could be a great way for this group to work with the city and other decision makers. Great, thank you. Yes. I'm definitely, oh you, I'm definitely wanna be sure that the feelings and experiences of the city are represented. But I see this group as a steering committee. When I think of a commission, I think of a lot of people sitting and listening, but not necessarily being in a position to start implementing. And to me, people in this group are gonna need to have some ability to either do it or influence it getting done and recruiting people to flesh out whatever is starting to emerge as important priorities and not just make recommendations to who. Those recommendations need to be things that they begin to say, yeah, this could work. How do we test the waters so that we're not missing something that's important to some part of the city? I totally get with that. But this idea that they're alone gonna sit on the mountaintop and try to figure this all out themselves or something. I think we need to think of them as active doers and coordinators and schedulers and kind of a little less lofty. Thank you. Yeah, we'll go online and then we'll just... I'm gonna speak to the mountaintop. Yeah, so a couple additional online comments. One person noted, this group needs to be driven with a passion of an effort to preserve our town in the midst of climate change. It can't get lost in process. And when there are roadblocks, it needs to be able to re-raise the critical goal. It isn't about official authority to get things done. It's about the collective commitment to achieve important things. Someone's already asking how to apply, which I think you're gonna talk about at the end and that's exciting. Yes, I can... Because you should post it and it will show them how to apply it properly. Great. It'll also be press release going up today or tomorrow, night or tomorrow. Perfect. So it'll be posted and press release. Decisions will be made by individual, commercial, property owners, business owners and homeowners. Decisions are being made now, underscoring the urgency. And I was just gonna note too, we've talked a lot about kind of limitations of the city or how does this group push the city? And I just wanna note, like I hope this group is thinking beyond the city, the city government, the certain things, the state does some things, nonprofits in our community do some things. So I would hope it would come in with a much more broad vision, which I think is what's reflected on the wall and look at what does the city do well and then what needs to not be the city or needs to be a partnership of the city and other actors. Thank you. So if I'd like to tag on to the idea of the doers and to share a little bit about how management works and where I work, all of our so-called middle management is volunteer force. No one is paid for those positions. No one really has bosses. But what we do have is a regional leader and then below that person, there are leaders that cover specific areas. In the case of business, it's things like growth and performance, diversity, equity, inclusion, et cetera. And then each of those leaders is free to form their own team to make sure that many voices is heard and then that leader comes back to the group. So it keeps the main group somewhat lean and small. I think there are about five or six of us, but the entire leadership team is somewhat large. There are maybe 30 or 40 people, but it doesn't get bogged down. And then each one of those leaders is tasked with either their task for that week, month, whatever it is, or delegating that task to someone else on their team, whether that be the watershed person or the raising money person or the shouting upstream at the state and federal government person, et cetera, they have deliverables that is their responsibility to deliver. We have to close up. And, hey, Ben, Ben, can you run down and tell everyone to come back? Thanks, not two minutes, 30 seconds. As you could anticipate, I'm a little disappointed about the results. You could have anticipated those five two weeks ago, even before you wrote them coming up. There's nothing exciting here. There's nothing that's going to engage anybody, not because it's becoming out out there because there's no room in this process for those kinds of ideas. We need to find a way to get those ideas into this process. I suspect that people will bring these ideas into these committees and things will be driven forward. So I'm optimistic, but thanks so much. Sarah, is everybody coming back in? Okay, we're going to shift in just a second here and start talking about points of vision, but we also want to hear from our facilitators. So we got to move fast. Any volunteers to help rally people down the hall? I can do it. Sure, thank you so much. Any other things online or we all set? There's a question online. Does the city have a capital needs assessment? And the answer is yes, they do. And I think obviously all of this is going to enter the capital needs assessment as work goes forward. Okay, well, we're taking a short break. We're coming. Just start, huh? Yeah. Got anything there so I can send you this. Could I ask, let's just do a rapid fire from facilitators. And I'm going to ask the facilitators to just be ready, share one or two things from your group. Could I ask people to quietly move their way in and facilitators to get ready to just say one or two things in 30 seconds? I'm going to call on Ben Doyle to start and tell us what group you were in and what some of the discussion was, Ben. Great. Thanks, everybody. We had a really lively and I think productive conversation on.