 Are you ready, Gene? I'm here. Yep, ready. Okay. I want to get going kind of early Because Councillor Bergman has to leave us at 5 34 another city council meeting So I was hoping to amend the agenda as published to to move the item number seven to the top of the list or to move it ahead of Approval of the minutes or right after approval of the minutes and Additionally move the water resources reorganizational assessment Just after that and then public forum next if that's Acceptable to everyone It is to me. Okay. Do we need to maybe make a We just do like so move All those in favor Yes, so So we'll jump right in then First item on our agenda is the agenda. I guess we've just amended and approve that next our approval of our minutes from our Meeting on five three At second is there any discussion all those in favor All right So our meeting our minutes from last meeting are approved and we'll jump right into Then McNeil symposium update The brief update is we have Scheduled the meeting for June 13th At con toys, it'll be at 6 30. I think we're tentatively have a three-hour block 6 30 to 9 30 ish Sort of carved out. I've talked to Zack at BCA Who manages event set up there and they're apprised of our needs? And I've also traded some email with town meeting TV for coverage One question town meeting TV asked and I said I would ask this committee Is whether or not we wanted to live-stream it and I don't see why we wouldn't but I would Just wanted to make sure everybody else was on board with that In general you good with that yes, I'm fine and Hannah if you could speak much more loudly for my old ears I'd really thank you. I can do that Thanks, and so I will let them know that in addition to recording it that will also want want them to live-stream it and I'll coordinate that with With BCA and event set up in case there's anything special they need to be to know about for the town meeting TV Being there as well and then the other big I Guess Jean, did you want to update give an update on some of the responses that you've received? Yeah, yeah, so we have got two of the three outside experts these are professor mama and professor Rooney vague or at Vargas and both are like internationally renowned people in the burning of biomass and I I think and they only want to get at least so far their travel expenses compensated overnight and you know Travel and what have you so it's gonna be I think a really important Piece and then we've gotten from BED a number of folks somebody from VAC who did the the emissions report for VAC or from VAC to about McNeil and We've got a forestry professor at UVM Who is not associated with with BED but is an expert to my understanding in forestry and we have got a one of our I Think he's a planet commissioner Rowan Harris Rowan who is also a forester and was on I believe the state's biomass task force so I might be wrong and he was on one state task force on biomass, so I think it will be a really good mix of people and I have sent everybody Questions, but then I also sent us as I was like seeing how I would be Communicating about the format With a professor Mooma tomorrow because he's asked me to do that I Realized that we needed a lot more specificity and hence I had emailed to the to Maddie for posting I didn't see it posted but would hope that it would be and also the rest of the committee a My idea for an amendment to the general format that we had and included in that amendment was a Request that we not ask the questions on district energy because I did not see how That would be related as closely as we needed to the question of the burning of biomass in its relation to carbon emissions And so I had proposed and have proposed changing Eliminating that but I had a conversation with Darren today Darren Springer who Suggested that they could provide the information that we're asking in question for and then we could ask Panelists for their their comments on that and then they would be able to talk about the pros and cons or the just their reflections on On the in on that information that we were looking to get presented to us but they could do that in in a narrative form at the top of the question and He would be said he will be working to try to get that done as quickly as possible And he thought that our question five really didn't need for their purposes for us to be Asked and I just didn't see how it related to really what our focus is which is the Emissions from the the harvesting of biomass and its use in fuel generation at McNeil So I continue to think that question five Would be best asked at a different Event I think it's important and we should ask it but I just don't see how The people that we've asked to come and speak to this can speak to it. And so I think that is my update Well, you got it now Okay, I might lean the way so hopefully you got my Format question might the way that I've approached the Format just to try to integrate that and just For I guess public consumption there was a request that's reflected in the minutes of last meeting by councillor King to have a another type of a public forum question and Answer period and I tried to integrate that like she had suggested in that. I believe that is number 10 on my list And for those I maddie if you can at some point post Jean's suggested format document and and he was Jean was referencing a Set of questions and for those following along online or here in the room those those were attached to our last meeting Agenda so you can see the list of questions that we've sort of refined as prompts that we'll use to sort of Direct that discussion at the symposium So I guess we'll open it up for discussion on meeting format I Like them as well. I like the idea of trying to Stay on track, you know, we'll have two two and a half possibly three hours. It's a long time But in some ways not a not enough to accomplish everything we want to accomplish. So It's important for us to prioritize the format of the meeting and sort of stay on track and Again, like one of the main objectives of this meeting is to provide sort of a scientific underpinning to Our discussion around McNeil because there's been a lot of sort of differing points of view on this and Use that scientific underpinning to help direct policy decisions that we're going to be asked to make around McNeil in the future. So With that in mind, you know, I'd like to see I'd like to make sure that if we're asking Panelists to come and talk that we provide ample opportunity for them to You know convey that information. I did I Did agree with Jean to cut away some of the introductory stuff and one and one of the ideas that I had was like for instance If we wanted to do introductions of the panelists, we could provide in sort of Written form in terms of like a program For the evening so that we wouldn't have to spend a lot of time Going through that and I didn't know if anybody thought that might be a good idea we could actually post some of the questions and the Sort of biographies short biographies of the various panelists And so maybe we'll we'll do that and we can sort of endeavor offline to produce something like that or have something produced for us I'd be happy to make a program. Oh great like make a draft and then send it around awesome And then the other thing that I had questions about were On the questions we're having submitted ahead of time and which I think we we ought to do because I think there's an opportunity for us to Solicit questions and then sort of curate them into sort of thematic groups And then we could at the I think it's being asked after The prompted questions that we'll have we would entertain those questions and if we had those We could as a committee, you know in the midst of facilitating the meeting decide what had been answered What might not have been answered and have an opportunity to sort of fill in some gaps with those questions So I'm still keen to do that as part of our our format And I guess is 30 minutes the amount that we would want to have for that. Is that seems still seem like a good amount for those I Mean, I think that these These suggested times are reasonable on one hand, it's a short Period of time and requires Scientific answers to be spoken in English in a concise way But I think that Having it be more open-ended Leads to people being able to talk as if they're giving a lecture and The ability of folks to comprehend it decreases the longer and more complicated that that that discussion happens, so I I think these make sense, but I also And so I think 30 minutes is Correct on on that amount What we did again because we've got all of two and a half hours and even with cutting these down and keeping these limits We're at an hour and 40 minutes. Yeah, well, we're 20 minutes short of three hours is whatever 240 so I think it makes sense and then if we go over or we can go over we can lead to a little bit more time and That's good. So I'm in favor of keeping it at 30 and I Happen to think that this is a this is a good schedule myself Okay, at least right now. I would you know, I want to test this with one of the panelists tomorrow Okay We know we're also going to reincorporate Question for some variation on question for so we'll have to have some time for that as well I have a question about And I'm not against it I just I wanted to understand how the public group discussion Question time would work and and how it how it fits into the sequencing And I didn't know if you could fill in what you were sort of thinking about that Last time I was thinking that it would just Almost lessen the need to have a really long public forum because then it would just give the opportunity for people to talk amongst one another and give that You know output Method there and so that was my thought process Okay, I I'm I still support it I just I want to understand whether or not we do what we do in breakout groups, maybe or are we trying to do Just talk to your neighbor or if it's I don't think it needs to be super formal I think you can just be like talk to the folks around you Okay And so there's that and then and I think we had allowed 20 minutes, I think 20 minutes. I think is what I have down And we had and lastly we had a 60 minute Public forum and I liked your idea up around trying to break that into Segments so that we could have public forum and then allow responses and in like I think you said Ten minutes public forum ten minutes of response and then and then repeat that For up to three times for a 60-minute max The only thing I note about that is it will be hard to sort of keep us focused We'll have to try to stay focused on the key questions So I Mean I think that ultimately this is an opportunity for people to ask questions and for the panelists to not be overwhelmed by 30 minutes of Questions or ten minutes. It's a lot fewer questions that you get or comments So I think we'll be able to handle that and I think at this stage of the the meeting that You know, we don't necessarily have to wrangle Yet and people can comment. I mean, this is an opportunity. I think for folks to say what they need to say for other people to comment whether they agree or disagree or want to amplify and Just sort of let it be in that regard Additional changes to it I guess that we'll you'll you'll test it with One of the panel And if he says this is this will not give me enough time to do what I need to do And I'll come back to us and go We still have some time to sort of work work it out Look good Is there more we want to talk about in terms of Planning for the symposium If this is the format that we agree on I think it would be best for us to at least Tonight Approve it so that we've got it clear and it's in the in the minutes that we did that With the with an amendment to the number eight where it's it's it's basically eliminating question five but altering Question for For them to be able to Relate to so I can amend that I can I can fix that and and send that out but And I'd move that just so that we've got a record of our action. I think that's fine Okay, so all those in favor of this format Hi. Hi meeting. Okay So we have a format and we have our updates and so I think that concludes Our McNeil symposium update. Thanks and thanks for Being flexible tonight and trying to move this thing around so we could get Gene about Well, thank you Here Okay Next on our amended agenda is the water resources Organizational assessment We have division director Megan moyer is going to leave the presentation. I will just say that this is an important part of our Proactive work to plan for our future and that we Deserve a water system and wastewater systems resilient and can stay on the test of time for all of Burlington's residents and businesses and I'm pleased that we've done this third-party review Megan's going to hit the highlights here I am fully supportive of this recommendation and happy to talk through Any of the details about how we can implement this in a way? I think our FY 24 budget will show that we've been thoughtful about how to implement it in a way that's Easiest on the rate pairs. So keep talking for one more minute. I'm still have to get on here There are a number of macro issues that we are working on and Megan's pulling up the PowerPoint one is increasing regulation a second is an aging plant Infrastructure all three of our wastewater plants have not been substantially upgraded in 30 years and We are also Analyzing staff capacity on what we need to do the proactive work not just the band-aid work So as a result, we have a proposal here that we'll run through Yeah, so thanks Chippin As we discussed in our budget presentation, although I was last one so I know everybody was tired So maybe there'll be more questions tonight broke out the increases to our expenses with the pie chart and You know a significant portion are these proposed staffing additions So we thought it would make sense to spend a little more time answering people's questions and diving into What those are and why they're proposed and what the third-party? Firm, you know thought about those there are lots of other pressures the little side Pie chart is a lot of the things that we just simply can't control whether it's the cost of biosolids disposal or the very escalated cost of the treatment chemicals that we need to use at both the water plant and the wastewater plant So Chippin mentioned we brought in Raft Ellis They they performed a staffing assessment for us in 2019 Which was shortly after we'd had a number of challenges Finding some meter meter issues that we had to pay for and then also That was a little bit after the 2018 issues with the wastewater plant So that was sort of the first bite at the apple with me at the new helm Really trying to figure out What kind of team do we have and are we missing some players in order to be able to play the game? And so they came back and their major observations as Chippin alluded to sort of in four buckets I don't think it's surprised to anybody that we have aging infrastructure things are old And they are starting to break and this is compounded by The fact that and they don't have the rate history, but I'd be happy to share it with you There was an extended period in the 1990s when there was no rate increase for a 10-year period Had we been having small rate increases and started investing in our infrastructure at that time I think we would still have a challenge on our hand today But we would not have the challenge that we currently face with the water mains and the plant infrastructure that needs to be replaced They found in many areas that there is a lack of staff capacity to conduct needed tasks So we're able to keep up with the reactive maintenance when things break. We take care of it, but Constantly we're trying to get to this level of preventative maintenance which does have the potential to save the city money and to You know reduce a lot of the disruptions that happen when our infrastructure breaks Beach closures water main breaks things like that if we can just get on top of it and take care of it in advance a really salient example that I've been using was the The sinkhole that formed on North Ave off of the belt line So that was a stormwater outfall a corrugated metal pipe stormwater outfall had we got into that outfall and Relyne that pipe probably five years ago. It would have been about twenty thousand dollars And instead it broke created a giant hole that started to threaten somebody's Property and ended up costing us about three hundred fifty thousand dollars. You multiply that times all of the outfalls We have all of the pipes in the city and if we could ever get in this other mode I think we would be in a different place Another thing that they had said which I thought was you know, it was great for my staff to hear was that We have amazing staff people know what to do. They just can't get to doing it, you know, which does cause this frustration cycle They also found that when you look at When you account for labor yield that means that if you have four people For a crew four people are not always there. There's sick time. There's training time. There's Family leave time and that you need to start thinking about how many people do you need in order to ensure that you have that minimum Number of four and when they looked at the wastewater plant and when they looked at our water construction crew They were able to quickly see that they're always sort of short a crew member and thus not able to perform the work that we need them to do and then the last piece that Chapin had said was In addition to all the old stuff we have to deal with and the day-to-day stuff There's a whole slew of additional new regulations that we're having to deal with at the same time Whether it's the Lake Champlain phosphorus reduction plan. So reducing the amount of phosphorus It's coming out of the wastewater plants or stormwater runoff the combined sewer policy revision We've done a lot of combined sewer Mitigation work, but we're not done. We have to keep going. We have to put in a giant tank under Callahan Park We have to find every other place in the city where we can reduce stormwater runoff We need to figure out what to do with the sewage that's still backing up into people's basements It's a pretty complex detailed problem problem There's the small streams throughout the city Inglesby, Centennial and Potash Which have excessive stormwater runoff and erosion and thus don't have the characteristics of the stream that Regulations require that we have to implement retrofits for On the water side, they have implemented a new boil water procedure Whereas before we could address a water main break and you know do it carefully so that we're ensuring we're not Contaminating the water, but now they're very strict procedures about what we have to do and deciding whether or not we have to implement boil water Notices for a larger portion of the city when those happen and then even as recently as last year EPA came out with new regulations the lead and copper rule was revised We still believe and we have no evidence that there are lead service lines anywhere in Burlington. However This requires us to actually go through our entire Inventory all of those service lines and verify what the material is when we've calculated Sort of what we have in GIS We're still looking I think on the order of having to verify about 6000 services, which We're going to look through our existing records But if we don't have a piece of paper that says that service is copper or a certain material type We're literally going to have to get into people's homes and look at the pipe type and determine and record it So a lot going on This this is the current org chart just to kind of orient you to the different groups Over here is the wastewater treatment plant operation. So we have three wastewater treatment plants Main plant the big one down on the waterfront one at the very end of North Ave and then one on Riverside We have the drinking water treatment system So that's a crew of people who work to operate that plant 24-7. It is always staffed typically by two people Over here on this side is the meter group So they're the ones who are going in and making sure those meters are working replacing them figuring out when they stop How to replace them? There's customer care. So there's three people Oops, I can't use my thing three three people there who Are responsible for sending out the 10,000 bills monthly to the city And that we did increase their capacity a little bit after the original staffing assessment Because we were realizing that, you know, some of the mistakes that had happened We're also just really purely because people didn't have enough time to check everything Uh, we've recently added some financial staffing capacity as financial assistance capacity with all of the loans and frankly the budgets that we're managing It was sort of being juggled between me and the director of finance not administration And we would like to put more effort to that What I've shown in green are the proposed additions. Um, so over on the wastewater side Ref tell us did recommend that we uh look at adding another wastewater plant operator That's likely not a forever thing. We anticipate with the upgrades We are looking at potentially consolidating one of our smaller plants with the larger plant And I think there will be some opportunities in the future to reassess But the plant the plants and the report goes into this the plants themselves are a very high touch system There while there is automation because they're old because I think there was some value engineering that was done In the last upgrade they require a lot of care and feeding in order to make sure that those are running well That is going to have to keep happening while we upgrade the plant We you know, it's not like you can decommission the existing plant and build a new one because everybody is going to be Flushing the toilet 24 7 we can't ever get everybody to stop doing that And so we have to maintain this very old system while also bringing an entirely new system up to speed And I am particularly concerned about the stresses that are going to be on our team During that time period as we as we you know tackle that challenge um Heading over to the distribution You want to point it out Sorry, there we go. Yeah So that is the one of the places in addition to the wastewater uh plant where when you take into account labor yield We really need a minimum of four people to Do our excavation jobs safely um Five would he be even better if everybody's there, but at a minimum we need four and what we're finding time and time again is Somebody's out somebody's sick somebody's training somebody's new and we don't have those two full crews of four And so by adding two additional staff members We're hoping that we can always ensure that there's those true crews of four and when on those days everybody is there We'll have additional capacity to tackle some of the things that we can't get to such as exercising Oh water valves. There's I forget how many water valves in the city. I think it's 900 and For the most part when we go to exercise them and operate them I think when we recently did that on mainstream street about 30 to 40 of them weren't holding That means when we have a water main break instead of being able to isolate a block Or a very narrow area. We have to keep going out until we can find a valve that's going to hold and stay shut So from a customer disruption standpoint being able to get out there and exercise those valves make sure they're working Identify the ones that aren't working replace them That is something we have not been able to do and something that we need to do Um On the storm water side So in the report they talk a lot about you know the storm water tasks that are not getting done Our storm water program manager was positioned. I held when I came to the city The program has grown since you know its inception in 2009 But my biggest concern with this is that we have extremely robust very strong I think they're touted in vermont as being some of the most stringent storm water regulations for development and redevelopment People are building storm water practices. We are building storm water practices but the Cycle of checking on those practices and making sure they're being maintained whether it's by our own crews or By private properties is not happening in the way that it needs to To make sure that the investments that people are making are you know actually Coming to fruition out there in the field This is particularly important financially in that we've had conversations with the state all those regulations that I mentioned whether it's the combined sewer reduction projects or the Lake Champlain phosphorus reduction There is a willingness they see what we're doing and there's a willingness for us to be able to take credit For some of the stuff that we have required people to do on private properties If we can ensure that those things are being properly maintained Otherwise, you know, they're not going to give us credit for something unless we have it sort of in the books That it's being maintained and therefore is doing something And then lastly in the what I would call sort of the engineering asset management group We went back and forth a lot with the amount of work that is coming down the pike whether or not we would need another engineer Where we ultimately landed was More of a project manager Not necessarily needing somebody with a pe but needing somebody who is able to really work on project delivery Likely on their own project delivery for some smaller type projects But we'll be able to be a force multiplier for the engineers themselves Instead of the engineers having to deal with contracts and schedules and all these other things Being able to partner with them and make sure that they're kind of carrying the ball of making sure those projects are getting done on time and then the last one is uh Still haven't settled on the title, but sort of a utilities inspector slash coordinator In DPW we do have an excavation inspector who Does get some eyes on what's going on in the subsurface, but you know, I think their main charge is Is thinking about the paving pavement surface And we are we're finding and this is historical for many many years We need somebody who is literally out there and when somebody else is digging is Looking at where they're digging figuring out is our infrastructure close and does that thing need to be moved Because when we go to fix a break half the time, there's a gas line A Comcast line a something on top of our water line or underneath or around and if we can It's we can't deal so much about the past, but we need to make sure that moving forward. We're not making it even harder on ourselves Um There's also uh by by creating that position. It does take some pressure off of the distribution Group who right now have to get pulled from a job and go inspect something Instead of just being able to stay and focus on their preventative maintenance tasks um So what what we did hopefully this is a helpful visual is those four four sort of Observations that ref tell us made are across the top and with each of these position types kind of checking off The the where what what goals we're meeting? And then this is the may slash june 2 meeting that we're at to answer questions and I think with that I will I will stop You know, even though it is a increase to the The expense side of our budget through a number of different measures. We were able to keep The rate increase Overall to 6.5 percent There's been a couple of years particularly due to covet and then also do it our rate change where we did have no rate increase I would be remiss and I've talked about this with councillor borough. There is a very Tough conversation coming for all of us For probably town meeting 2024 about what sort of bonding we're gonna have to do and what that is going to do to our rates so I don't want to hide the football that there are future rate increases and that they will be Haven't figured out exactly what the plan is but they're going to be Larger probably than we have seen for some number of years Thank you. Um, is was that that's a that there's no there are no changes from the budget presentation The only thing no the only thing was that I popped this org chart and just so that you Both could continue to learn about all of our different areas that we we work on but yeah for you to be able to see that Visually, well, thank you. It's good to actually get to see the second time. You know, like you mentioned you were you were tired For questions I don't think I have anything specific right now I'm really appreciative of how comprehensive it is and the work that went into it I did have a question you you partially answered I think already which was are there any of these positions that we're adding that are sort of a result of our current sort of the state of the system that As we made These improvements capital improvements. We would lose besides the wastewater operator system that you already mentioned I mean potentially the project manager If we somehow got through this bubble And we're able to slim down That's the only one that I can sort of think of the one piece with that if you read through the report They make recommendations like official recommendations and they sort of have like future considerations and one of the things that we're not specifically Addressing that has been a long-term need is that we have we have many facilities many building envelopes We have plants. We have roofs and we don't We uh the city general fund has a facilities management program And we don't benefit from that. So when I need to do a roofing project or replace the I don't even know how many windows are at the water plant that are all failed It's like a project that I have to divert a water resources engineer to do Which is not the best use of their zone of genius time. And so It'll be interesting to see whether that need falls away or not But something certainly we would keep an eye on the yeah, and then the other one would be the plant operator The interesting part is with both of those and in the probably even as recently as last year You know, there was a limited service option where if you didn't know if you needed something for a long time You could hire somebody For a limited service that was like a three-year duration My understanding is with the current contract that's dropped down to two And with both of those I'm going to need them for at least the next two years as fast as time is passing by Probably more on the order of four to five But the wastewater operator is the one that I could see the most likely shuffle if we consolidate and if things truly are more straightforward Moving some people around The old report the 2019 report Did talk about potential changes that we could make in the water plant operations If you read that old report Right now we have two people on all of the time I think With some modernization of the plants to make sure that things are safe I and they all know it I would like to see Moving around of people so we're not having Multiple people on at night because you're not going to get extra work done In the middle of the night and so if you could Have single operator shifts at certain times and enable at a minimum to get all of those people on during the day And just kick and booty on projects That would make me super happy. There might be an opportunity through attrition If everything got dialed in that you could peel back on some of those fte's But it would not be safe to do that right now given the quirkiness of the water plant and the power outages And the equipment things that happen you you want two people there when it happens so that you can react Well, thank you again for that Um, I guess are there any other questions? I don't know if gene's with us right now. So he had to pop off I think he is He's totally gone Yeah, I thought he was going to multitask a little bit, but that's fine. He was there for the budget presentation. So yes And he knows where to find me as do hopefully all the counselors if you know as we get closer to the um As we get closer to the budget approval and if stuff comes up or if you're getting questions from your Constituents, you know, it's it's a little bit of a benchmark for me. We're not apples to apples I do like to point out, you know our Sister brother utility bed their overall number of staffing I believe is on the order of 110 115 people This this protocol or this uh approach I think brings us up to 60 To manage three things and a lot of which is underground So it's not the it's not the reason for for doing it But I think it it makes me feel okay as a person who pays Water resources bills and lives in the city and has to answer to my neighbors That I feel justified both with a third-party review and also with kind of looking at at that balance of of resources So I notice there's no action asked of the no, this is going to come to This will be part of the budget approval process And then after that then we bring these staffing recommendations through That said we know these recommendations are significant. We want to have you You have a chance to really kick the tires on this Read the raftel's report if there are things that you have questions or concerns about please let us know Um, we just know this was significant enough to give an opportunity for the public and you all to have an additional Whack at it. Thanks. Appreciate it. And thanks for being flexible with my timing Um, and then I have to say that I made a boo boo when I amended our agenda because there was one other amendment that I didn't mention Which was to postpone The ordinance on carbon fee it's something that Councillor Bergman wanted to participate in so We we're going to move that to our to our June meeting And so Since I didn't I didn't amend it at the beginning of the meeting to be proper. I guess I would entertain Um, a motion to postpone this item until our June meeting Do I have to make it or do I second it? Um You you would make it and I would second it So I would move that we postpone the discussion on ordinance on carbon fee until our next meeting There is somebody raising their hand that right and I'll oh Public forum, yes, it's going to happen next So and I'll second that All those in favor of postponing this item Hi, and so that is postponed I apologize for not doing that when we amended. So next is public forum So I know we have a couple folks here who want to speak I'm guessing And and we made do we have anybody online as well? Okay So I'm not sure who was here first Come on up to the microphone so that we get a good audio for the record So I don't have the benefit of the revised I can give it to you. You'd like to look at format Thank you Could you also just state your name for the ton meeting to you? Pardon me. It's Ashley Adams And I'm here to speak about the McNeil symposium I just printed my own, but this is actually the second page of that Oh, thank you Okay, I hate to take everyone's time reviewing it. So let me just give you a brief Couple of comments. I did submit last week an email to counselors With recommendations for that format because I had concerns that the The academics had no time to actually Present their material. They were responding to questions based on the previous format Between sandwiched between Burlington electrics Responses and And then responding to the Academics and in any case it was just heavily biased. So it sounds like you may have addressed that I believe that there is There's so we want we want to be respectful of Those panelists that we're inviting here to share their expertise with we're also trying to answer sort of a narrow sort of a more narrow question about biomass burning with respect to McNeil and the practices that are Used here for McNeil not necessarily some of the other cases of biomass burning in other places There's some things that are probably Germain to the discussion and other things that may be More specific to what we're doing in Burlington So I think that there's an attempt to sort of shape the conversation and sort of try to get as much Accomplished in the amount of time that we have So that's where the the questions come in the questions right the questions that we had discussed at our last meeting will shape that Okay So will there Will there be an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the format after we've had a chance to review The latest iteration post it to be meeting material for tonight And certainly be able to I think that we agreed on this format tonight So I think there may still be some tweaks, but But one of the other challenges is trying to keep this to Three hours or less Right, right indeed I'm I'm just I'm particularly mindful of the state that we are in in terms of The lost time in addressing global warming in part The media played an enormous role in creating this false equivalency between The 99 percent of climate scientists out in the world with peer reviewed Articles in research and so forth and then the climate deniers and giving equal credence to both You know quote unquote both sides the idea of fair and balanced reporting when you have the science versus The denial of the science. I'm just I'm particularly mindful of that and that's why I'm kind of Pushing back especially on giving Plenty of voice to Conveying that science. So I just want to be sure that that that happens And then I also think it would be really important I'm hoping that you will consider requiring citations for any assertions during the course of the meeting You know I as a burlington resident I am Really particularly mindful of the greenwashing On the part of burlington electric you look at their website. There was recently a there was a new podcast out and it was Rife with unfounded assertions and the public deserves to know Where that information comes from so during the course of the symposium if If all parties could be required to provide citations that are then publicly accessible After the meeting that would be really really helpful And then and then we really have a clear picture As as a member of the public I would appreciate that And And I think that's all I wanted to share. I'm sorry to take up so much time But I am really grateful that you're doing this and I I came here, you know sounding critical But I want you to know how grateful I am that you're doing it. I just think it's wonderful So thank you very much. I appreciate your engagement on this one. Of course And then I know Steve if you wanted to see Basically here supporting Ashley Sure, come I know Ashley has a copy. I haven't seen your latest Steve good time from burl. Anybody doesn't know Burlington remand just for curiosity who Chairs the symposium or who is the person that's going to be the traffic Directors of what happens and in what order the Duke committee will we haven't assigned that role? But essentially we'll facilitate the meeting but one of you three will be selected or All of us will I suggest one person, okay, that's I certainly will be involved and Ashley has the you have the new Okay, we'll have to look at that. It'll also be posted in our meeting. Good. Thanks Yeah, let's hear it for public forum You could just maybe go over to this other chair that's mic'd I can also move this mic over to is needed But either way I wanted to speak on the I'm nick persampieri and I live in ward two And I want to address the Renewable primary heating system ordinance. Is it okay if I talk about that today? You're welcome to speak to it tonight. We'll be taking it up. Okay, great Um, as I think, you know the current Renewable primary heating system ordinance Requires that renewable heating be used in new construction And it defines renewable to include electricity Which I think is great. I fully support the city's push towards electrification As a way to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions But it also includes within the definition of renewables Heating with wood pellets and wood chips heating with renewable natural gas heating with so-called renewable district heating Which includes the proposed steam pipe heating from the mcneal plant As well as heating with renewable gas And none of those are climate solutions That will result in greenhouse gas emission reductions So I hope as you work on the ordinance that you will seriously consider striking those From the definition of renewable And I can address these issues further at the next meeting when you take this up Thank you. How are you so sure Hi, I'm connor warts. I'm a community organizer for 350 vermont and it's my first time here. So it's great um, I wanted to back up what what nick is saying and and just um Add on to it and in the idea. I think that striking these the kind of biofuels shouldn't be That big of a deal. I don't think that it it constitutes like a large percentage of the new building heating systems that are That have been coming up, but they could in the future Because I think that's like in the future horizon of what utilities companies might be doing So now could be a good time to do that. I guess is what I'm saying before It's like before the companies start coming to you and you're like, oh, we had all these plans to do it Um, so That's that yeah And if I could have one other thing telep stoves in particular have become very popular In certain parts of the country and in fact across the world I read an article Talking about how they've become a middle class status symbol in london And london is having horrible air pollution problems as a result In addition to not being a climate solution They're awful for people's health The the american lung association recommends that you not use wood to heat your home The department of our our own department of health here in vermont Has acknowledged that eliminating Wood heat from homes Results in improvement in people's health. So that's another reason. We just don't want these to proliferate And I think they could catch on In construction of new single family homes They might harder to They might not be feasible in multifamily construction I think it's something we need to be concerned about Thank you. And just just so you know, we're taking up this ordinance at our meeting, but there'll also be opportunities to Comment on the ordinance in the ordinance committee And then during the various hearings we'll have at the at the council level full council level as well So there's going to be plenty of opportunity to weigh in Well, thank you. Thank you. And uh, do we have someone online as well? Go ahead and peter Hello, i'm peter duvall. I live in under no And uh, thank you for the opportunity to comment I uh, I want to mention that I really appreciate the layout of the tokes web page and how convenient it is to keep up with the progress of the two meetings I'm commenting on two issues uh first, uh, of course, um I'd like to talk about mcneil but also the bike share And e-bikes in general So I'll get that out of the way The u.s. Is a wild west for e-bikes And there aren't many e-bikes in the u.s Europe on the other hand has a mature e-bike market and to match its mature human-powered cycle market There's no effective regulation of e-bike mechanical safety or operational performance in the u.s While a long-standing european union regulation en one five one nine four ensures that e-bikes pedal x as they are called in europe Uh are safe to operate And perform similarly to human powered bicycles Europe's regulatory experience matters and it's developed over over decades All major bike manufacturers produce e-bikes that conform to this en one five one nine four standard including bird in burlington should require that all the bike share bikes and rental bikes conform to en one five one nine four Also The ed should pay incentives only for e-bikes that meet en one five one nine four I'm just moving to comment on McNeil New york and new hampshire Are two very different Governments And both have moved to shut down Woodchip power plants fairly new ones And for fair for apparently different reasons economics in new hampshire And emissions in new york Uh free energy black river at fort drum new york Is uh it's just recently been shut down And after quite a quite a fight by opponents as I understand it Keep it open um And Burgess bio power has Long missed its economic targets and and it's struggling to to gain more subsidies from new hampshire legislature Meanwhile McNeil's sister plant dow corning midlands in michigan closed decades ago So I have two questions that I think you might want to add to the symposium And they're these are questions that BED officials should be answering What it what does BED know about wood chip power plants that Regulators in new york and new hampshire And massachusetts by the way don't know Why Should McNeil stay open when all of these other plants have closed The other question is about fuel supply for McNeil Which as we know is mostly from out of state How does new york feel about McNeil's fuel harvest And the attendant lulu cf emissions occurring occurring in new york Or put another way so you don't have to speculate about Sentiment What is the risk that new york will take an interest in being burdened with biogenic emissions On its landscape That it does that it would not allow power plants in its own regulatory jurisdiction to Effect So thank you for my A little time to comment really appreciate it Do we Go ahead pike Hi, i'm pike porter burlington resident. Thanks for taking my questions The first one Is regarding the btb Slide show regarding airport emissions Last month, I believe maybe two months ago The airport I believe was representing emissions from 2019 Including vtang emissions from 2019 however With a public records request I asked to see the actual data behind those emissions and burlington Airport was unable to provide me with those. They said they didn't have any records Which leads me to and I hope leads to to some Questions about how the airport um came up with these numbers if vtang didn't supply them with any information for 2019 Along those lines back in november of last year the city council sent a vtang climate resolution to tube for tube to take up um And it's been pinging holes uh since november and i'm just Seeing when that might be come up for discussion in in the tube We'd have to ask um director along all about that. I just that's the first time i've heard of that so um and on the other than the resolution i'm i'll have to look at our agenda and see Okay, thank you Is there anyone else in the queue? No Okay, well then i'll go ahead and close public comment and next I think we're revving up FY 24 fleet purchase and dissolution discussion Thanks Just to set this up. I know we have a couple other media items You know you've heard through the budget process that we're in a bit of a tight position You've got the memo in your packet. I think we the Key piece and I think we have ashley online. Do we have ashley? She? Unable to stick around So we really wanted to get your input on this fleet f y 24 recommendation But understanding that we all are going to need to work together to solve the long-term issue Yeah, so as you can see the memo It's a lot shorter vehicle list than we've had in previous years. There's seven vehicles total I'm sorry ashley is online 200 Can you vote her to a panelist? Yes Thank you. Absolutely of those seven vehicles Six of them are enterprise and special revenue vehicles one The seventh being the recycling which each have their own source of funding There will be as you saw in the memo and what chaven spoke to no general fund vehicles purchase this year Of the seven three of them are electric vehicles to our hybrid and to our internal combustion engines One being the recycling truck and the other being a one ton utility truck or water distribution We have met the BED to have them review our vehicle replacement list and see what expected rebates we can get The the smaller EV vehicles I did include a cost sheet as an attachment With the memo We will be getting rebates for you know the chevy bowl The transit van we have they do have a stipulation that if it exceeds the $60,000 Limit that there will be no rebates So we have an estimated at 60 so we'll have to see when we do go out for actual quotes If we will qualify for that rebate as well as the gem car, which is It's like a mid-size it's smaller than like the chevy bowls Not quite like a utv vehicle parts and wreck currently has one That's one of the planned vehicles for water distribution to do their hydrant flushing that will We are currently working with BED to get a custom rebate for that one because there's not a similar vehicle out there So they're kind of working off of the previous one we did for parks making sure nothing's changed in that scenario So that that's really the the short of it for vehicle replacement. We aren't replacing any heavy equipment And we've got actually here who has her hand up. She might have a few things to add Oh No, I'm sorry. I'm sorry powders for the technical difficulties. I'm not really sure I must be logged on as dpw and I think that's causing problems I I don't have anything else to add. I'm here to help answer questions if there are any concerns about any the financing information in the memo that you've been provided today or um Yeah, anything else that you might need That's actually Okay, so thank you Um, do you have questions? I don't think so Um, I guess I have I just a couple so this this is much a much smaller list than what we've had in the past Yeah, and I understand the reason for that is the sort of capital constraints that we're under right now Yeah, um, well during the budget presentations We we saw that we have a we have a short we have a shortfall basically on how you know how we're going to manage Um lease payments going forward. Um, and this is included in that, correct? Okay, so this that was inclusive of this edition correct. Okay, good. Yeah um yes, it's And you were in The vehicle deferred list was also included which in previous years we've had deferred vehicles They may not have been high priority vehicles that you know, their life expectancy is going longer than what we suggested certain pieces of equipment, but That that deferred vehicle list is really increased with The lack of funding for the general fund and a majority are those that are you know Police vehicles emergency response vehicles um Some plow trucks So that deferred list is up over three million million dollars as of f y 24 and going forward and Fy 25 we will have some leases dropping off and correct me if i'm wrong actually, but we're still going to have that gap in funding We don't have sustainable funding plan going forward that we need to address Yeah, i'll just leave you're correct. Um right now we're projecting to have another million dollar need to have release payments alone in fiscal years 25 and 26 and then it drops down um And so that is something that we're working to find a solution for some of which I think you stand in your packets um some ideas to try to create a sustainable funding source for fleet um so that we can build up to be able to purchase um purchase vehicles again um And I think you're all aware that we have a hold this year. I couldn't hear everything Lee was saying but that we have a hold on f y 24 for buying buying a new thing so Yeah There should have been an ambulance this year which they uh fire is going after some grant funding for that so We are allowed or we have talked about with ct office that if General fund departments can find alternate funding or grants then with uh conversation with the cao and you know Give them permission they can pursue Replacing a vehicle We really don't want to add to the vehicle List but if there's a replacement out there and they have alternative funding Then then we'll look into that option, but there will be no general fund purchases I guess just to add to what um Lee was saying You know, we are projecting At least a two million dollar need for purchase of new vehicles annually regardless of what the vehicle types are so that is the you know Without thinking of how how big our deferred list is now as a result of the decisions we've had to make If we could get to a point of replacing vehicles two million dollars would be um a good target for the city She said what I need to say. Great. Perfect. Thanks. Actually And in the one of the things that's going to be undertaken and is um mentioned in the memo is and Is an effort to try to figure out what a sustainable funding source is and that'll that work is I'm sure it's already begun. Yeah, that's where we formed a like a subcommittee of our fleet committee and that with Uh CT office team to discuss Options and that's where you see a lot of the options in the memo came from it's almost, you know Starting from scratch Well, um, you're not looking for action or you are looking for action. Yes, we are looking for action To recommend the approval of the fleet purchase list for 24 and the fleet dissolution list Um, so I move that we approve the Fleet purchase list for fy 24 and the What was the second one dissolution in the dissolution? Is there language lee and there is a suggestion other is in the memo Because it adds in the auctioning of the vehicles as well. Yeah So if friendly that that's just a motion could just be moved in seconds um, so I Recommend the board of finance and city council approved the proposed fy 24 fleet purchasing list and authorized the department of public works fleet maintenance to auction the fy 24 Replaced vehicles equipment through various online public auctions are traded in to vendor where Vehicle slash equipment is purchased if there is no public interest or the vehicle is of no value to the vendor Fleet maintenance will have the vehicle slash equipment hauled away for scrap at the current market price And I'll second that I've got all those in favor. I Thank you And so we'll look for that at the board of finance and the full council. Yes. Thank you Um Next we have if See if I've gotten everything else straight here with our changes tonight. I think next is our expected executive session Yeah, I think the only question would be whether or not you want to hit any of the perfunctory items at the end before we go That's a good idea. So why don't we do that? I guess the next item then would be the director's report I'll keep it short I think the big news here was you probably saw the release from From the mayor's office that the court case The litigation on the Champlain Parkway was decided in the city's favor This is the seventh consecutive positive legal ruling that we've had Against the same two litigants For the Champlain Parkway project And this means that the project is cleared to complete its Initial construction contract, which is the middle section of the project from home avenue to Kilburn street Which means lakeside and pine street the two streets right outside our window will be under construction later this year Excellent. It's good news. Yeah Um, are there any Councilor updates Um, I just want to express my appreciation for some of the patching That's been going on the new north end. I know I've been a nuisance to Those who do paving um, asking for asking for these things, but um, I've heard I've heard positive feedback on that and I appreciate it. So Thank you Pleasure, you do know we're going to the ward 4 7 npa tomorrow night They've been asked to give a report so we're happy to talk to the public and hear their concerns at that meeting Excellent. I'll see you there for that as well. Great Our next meeting is scheduled for the 27th tuesday the 27th of this of uh, june Excuse me That works for everybody We'll assume it works. Yeah, it's already on my calendar. It works. Um And uh, now we'll go to our executive session Got it. You have the motion. Okay, uh move to enter executives Sorry, that just became like jumbled in my head move to enter executive session pursuant to one Do I have to read the one vsa 3 1 3 a 2 to discuss the negotiating and and or securing of the purchase and sale of 195 through 201 flin av avenue parcels Um, and I will second that and before we Vote on it I'll give Use some an opportunity to sort of set it up so the public knows why we're going into executive session Sure, I could give a quick overview and let's hailey. You'd like to do that Go ahead. I can chime in if anything's Uh, generally as we've presented to the ward 5 npa that there uh is an option that the city has to purchase 195 201 flin avenue For the purposes of establishing Either a cswd drop-off center and or soil management facility for the city of berlington We have generally discussed the project at the ward 5 npa talked about what we'd like to do and The process and timeline, but as it relates to the negotiations with cswd around purchase price in terms We recommend that that conversation happen in executive session And then we'll uh a vote to go into Executive session. We will come out of executive session to adjourn the meeting. Um, I don't know Town meeting tv wants to stick around for that or they could sign up now if they'd like so, um, we will uh We'll um all those in favor of going into executive session. Hi. Hi So we will be an executive session Maybe it'll be friendly for us to meet in another room to allow cctv to break down Yeah, if because there will be no action. Thank you for coming today. Appreciate it