 Welcome everyone. I'm gonna call this meeting to order. So the first thing is to review and approve the agenda and there was one pretty small change that I wanted to make which was reversing the order of the Old Country Club Road plan and the plan for discussing the plan for the MOAT property. So we're gonna do the discussion about the MOAT property before the Old Country Club Road. So just switching those sort of last two items. Any other additions, questions? Objections? Okay so without objection we had to consider the agenda approved and so on to general business and appearances. So this is a time for any member of the public to come address the council on any topic that is otherwise not on our agenda and if you would try to keep your comments to about two minutes you're great. Hi my name's Sandy Vitztum, 14 Loomis Street and I just submitted a letter. I've lived in Montpelier for nearly 50 years and I've watched four generations participate in civic discourse. Many large issues have faced the city over the years. Money's always been scarce with 8,000 residents, a few commercial properties, very little industry, and a beautiful state capital. What makes this precious tiny city work is the understanding that we are all in this together and that we all care and that each one of us matters. I've noticed a decline in civic discourse however. I remember careful and inclusive deliberation and focus on facts. Conflicts used to seem to develop over misunderstanding rather than party lines or special interests and they were usually solved by education. Many many of the sessions I've watched over the years and participated in that really did solve it, that in taking time. Historically Montpelier citizens reach consensus. Somehow the proposed parking garage has become a divisive issue and it's being framed as a support or lack of support of our merchants. I have attended several city meetings about the proposed parking garage and I did sign a petition a couple weeks ago. I totally support our merchants and my questions are about safety, legality, and costs. It was kind of shocking last week to read about an interview with Bill in the bridge and I want to say first of all I love Bill, I love his family, and his kids. He's played music on my porch many years. I have complete admiration for Bill so I don't want my comments to become divisive in any way. But Bill was I think representing the city when he was quoted in the bridge is saying while the petitioners are entitled to challenge the product project he believes the reasons might be more philosophical than procedural and he said sorry Bill my sense is that they just don't like the project and that they're seeking to impose their will on the will of the voters that's pretty serious accusation. I'd like to say publicly that this kind of language is divisive and it's misleading to the readers. Bill did not qualify the statement by saying that they were his personal opinion. I can't speak for the other people who signed the petition but he's dead wrong about my concerns and my motivation. I can't think of any kind of setting where this comment would actually be constructive. I'm looking to the city council and the city's representatives to be models for civic discourse and to further our common good. I'm therefore asking the city to print an apology in the bridge to at least clarify that those opinions were of an individual not of the city. Please let's move forward on the garage and other civic improvements with cooperation. Thank you. Thank you Sandy and I just want to say thank you for those sentiments and certainly love to follow up on that. So we'll talk about it. Would you like to? I can. I'm sorry if you took them that way. I had a very long conversation with the bridge and first of all I'm sorry we didn't get to talk about this in private and they choose to use what they choose to use in the context that they choose to use it and I believe I was actually asked the question do you think people are doing this and I said they may be. But maybe I didn't but I... But we can also clarify. Great. Yeah. Thank you. Cool. Any further comments from the public? Okay. Moving on then. So we have the consent agenda. I have a question about item C so I may just we can either pull it or you can come address it right now. I just wanted to know a little bit more about it. Yeah, go ahead. Just in the spirit of progress here. So in 2012 the city had signed a pledge security agreement with Merchants Bank. Merchants Bank was... Merchants Bank was subsequently purchased by Community Bank, headquartered out of New York. Because our balances frequently exceed the deposit limits and for insurance with FDIC we need some sort of collateral to secure the money that we're keeping with them. Presently under a pledge security agreement each month they have to take security whether it be bond stocks or otherwise that they own and actually identify those individual securities and place them in joint custody with the Federal Reserve Bank. From their perspective that's extremely labor intensive each month to be doing that because our balances are changing throughout the year. So what they've requested is that we get a letter of credit issued from the Federal Home Loan Bank which would guarantee our deposits up to whatever cap we decide. It'd be like a surety bond or a guarantee so that in the event the bank were to fail we wouldn't be out any of our deposits in excess of the FDIC limits and we would just have to present that letter of credit to Federal Home Loan Bank and they would cut us a check for the funds. So it's essentially going from collateralizing using specific securities that they have to pledge to essentially having an insurance policy that we could cash in with the Federal Home Loan Bank. Have we had to do this before? We've always had some form of security agreement and in years past we have had a letter of credit from Federal Home Loan Bank. The Pledge Security Agreement was something that came up in 2012. It was just at the time it was the preferred method of collateralizing large deposit accounts. Great thank you. That makes sense. Yep that's helpful. I would just point out and I realized that maybe this is not that important but the letter says gentlemen which I did not notice. I realized that it comes from a bank but it is a yes I noticed that as well and that was a sample format so we will be providing an updated one and I will pass that commentary along because that is it is a little bit 1960s. Yes I just wanted to know is this a standard approach for other municipals? Yeah yeah it's amazing. Yeah any one of the any essentially any customer that has large balances that are in excess of normal and FBIC limits we need some sort of collateralization agreement because otherwise if a bank were to fail like in the 1990s and we had to save us in loans you could be out significant amounts of money. Okay great thank you. So is there a motion regarding the Consent Agenda? Move it. Second. For the discussion on favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed. Great. So Conservation Commission appointments so we have I believe two applicants for one seat. I think that's correct right so and I don't see either Michael or Katie here so probably need to go into executive session. Would anyone like to make that motion? So moved. I move that we go into executive session pursuant to one VSA section 316 I think it is that was off to 313 to discuss the appointment of a city committee member. So I have a question yeah this is a suggestion if neither of them are here you want to take up other items that people are here for and do that. I don't think this is going to take that long. I think we should just keep moving. Okay we didn't actually vote yet. There was a second. Was there a second? Okay for the discussion all in favor please say aye. Aye. Okay we'll be right back. Okay do we have a motion to come out of executive session? So second. Okay great. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed. Great. Okay do we have a motion? I'd like to move to appoint Katie Michels to the Conservation Commission. Second. For the discussion all in favor please say aye. Not for the voting member. Okay great super and there was a second and for the discussion yes. So does this mean that we this now creates a vacancy in an alternate position that will have will be warning for a future meeting? I think that is what that means. Okay for the discussion all in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed. And regardless that neither of them are here I'm just very grateful for both of their service on this committee as they're both we're serving as alternates. Okay so the Montpelier Foundation so they have a request of us so come on up and tell us about it. I'm Ed Flanagan this is Paul Gugliani. I'm the chair of the Montpelier Foundation have been for the past couple years. I'm the longest serving trustee 24 years I believe. Founding member. Founding member. So I think you are provided with some information about the a little bit of the history a little of the the plans on us moving forward. I think there's a real excitement on the board now there's been some new members that have come on the board and some great opportunities to be able to do things in the in the city of Montpelier. It was originally designed to to do projects that may not may not happen otherwise. I mean it's sort of one of the projects that was looked at years ago was you look at Kellogg Hubbard Library and that probably wouldn't happen today under the way things are sort of set up but there were these groups these foundations or individuals that would provide this money to be able to make those types of things happen. And so that was sort of the initial impetus of having this foundation of being able to do projects that may not be able to get done otherwise. It would also be a source to maybe get it up over the top. They were close to getting everything together but they needed that extra money to get it over the top. And in the packet that was provided for you is a pamphlet that we put together that talks about some of the things we had done. Whether it was the tennis courts out by the high school that was a group in Montpelier that wanted to redo those tennis courts the surface of them were just abysmal. You really couldn't play on them and on the courts. And so this was a by using the the foundation monies could be gathered and used towards getting that done. Same with the money was donated to the bike path in other projects throughout the city of Montpelier. Things have changed a little bit. And there's other opportunities there that because of the setup of what we are today, it's not possible to be able to get certain monies because they want to donate to a nonprofit, a 501c3 nonprofit. And we're not that because of the we're under the auspices of the city. And we feel there's a lot of opportunities out there to be able to do that. But our hands are sort of tied, which sort of stymies opportunities build new projects in Montpelier that are community good. And so that's the reason for coming before you and saying it makes a lot of sense now to take this organization and break it off and let it become its own standalone 501c3 so that it can raise more funds to help projects in the city of Montpelier. I'll defer to Paul for things I missed. Good job. mentioning over the years, the foundation receives has received donations and requests gifts. Some memorials, some of the satellite gifts. Foundation last year received a very generous gift from former Councilman Alan Weiss with instructions for the foundation to use it as it sees best in the city of Montpelier to pick up on something that Ed said about the types of projects that you obviously like to do things that are visible that people can use as originally established the foundation's goal was to fund help fund capital projects that have a long useful life for the benefit of the community. And that concept is enshrined in the proposed articles of association for the new entity. It's not designed and never was intended to to subsidize any particular city operation or function. It's the foundation's goal is to create visible capital community by projects and we're convinced that with a 501C3 exemption from the Treasury Department, we're going to be able to access funding sources and just one available to us as an agency of the city. Even though gifts to the foundation under the internal revenue code are deductible because the foundation is a city agency most of which is all corporations and foundations and granting entities insist that the recipient be a 501C3 so we're kind of forced into that situation. And we're here tonight to request the city council approval of just shifting from the present format, the present entity to something brand new that we're convinced it's going to lead to a broader source of funding. Questions? Rosy, I had one question. I read through this fairly quickly, but I, I saw that the membership was elected and that the council appointed one member. And I saw that the membership or the members elected their officers, but I couldn't tell who was doing the electing of the actual members of the board. It's intended to be a self perpetuating board open to anyone expresses an interest in sitting on the board. And you know, have some on to your connection. We wanted to keep this as streamlined as simple as possible. And you know, holding elections, that just adds to the distraction, but it's a dimension that I think we'd rather concentrate on the business of the foundation. But that board in turn does elect the officers of the foundation. We try to be as inclusive as possible. Anyone who's interested in serving on the, as a trustee of the foundation, more than welcome. I guess that makes me a little uncomfortable. Just, I would prefer to have it if it's going to be that loose to have the council be appointing the full membership, or have different entities appointing members. I just, I don't really understand how a board can appoint itself. It's quite common foundations. Self perpetuating or self self perpetuating where the only qualification for membership is that it be a natural person who has, you know, do not tell your connection, want to try to think of another example. But it's not that in common. The T.W. Wood board operates that way. Just as an example. Would there be a concern if it was still appointed by the council, the members? Yeah, I mean, I think, and I can't, I'm not an attorney and not a tax attorney, but you know, but I think as it to be a standalone, you've got to have that. I don't think you can have someone else saying, Oh, well, you're, you know, but I don't think the nonprofit bylaws will allow for that. Then we get back by circular, well, the agency of the city and essentially shoot ourselves in the foot as far as the 501c3 is concerned. We recognize the city council's concern and interest in what the foundation does. That's what we provided in the articles and in the bylaws and that's official member of the council to sit as a trustee and report back to the council on what the foundation is doing. Obviously, we have to, the foundation will have to make annual reports, annual filings of the IRS. So as far as activities are concerned, it's an open book. It's totally transparent. Okay, moving on. Go ahead, Donna. That wasn't originally one of my questions, but to follow up on Rosie's point of membership, there is something you could add to your bylaws about diversity. And likewise, there is one statement about gender, but I think it has to be broader than he or she these days. So I think that some of that needs to be honed in a little bit more from editing there. My concern was that if indeed you became a nonprofit, then would you not be competing with, I was just looking to remind myself of the projects, whether it's the footbridge of the tennis courts, wood gallery, they're going after their own grants. And are you going to be going after the same grants? And are you going to be a silo or are you going to be coordinating with those entities which also are looking for the service of the same population? It really depends on what the project is. As Ed mentioned, the foundation traditionally historically in humans, we call it one of a better phrase, the last mile of the project, excuse me, has already gone through fundraising to other sources that needs $5,000 to finish the tennis court or something like that. That's when the foundation excuse me, has acted historically. I don't see competition here. It hasn't occurred so far. And it's really, the projects are to benefit the city of Montpelier. So it's like, you know, we're not in competition to say, oh, it's our dollars, they're dollars. It's like, okay, let's get these projects done, whatever they have. Well, as long as you're working as a team and coordinating an effort, I think that's true. But if you don't, I know you had in the past, but you haven't been a non-profit going out for grants on your own. By the root of the non-profit's charter, you have to continue doing that. The foundation can't branch off into some other activity. Whatever resources it has, whatever money it spends, it has to be spent for the benefit of the community. And it's, you know, there's another organization, another group focused on the same project. I don't see competition for them. It doesn't happen so far. In the 25 years it hasn't happened, so it's, I mean, and I don't think it's because it's been a, you know, under the city has had anything to do with it. It's just that the projects people would come to us with projects say, we need to get this done. And so... Well, the difference I see is you've collected money, and rather passively you've collected money, that was one of the things of enlivening the foundation and generating interest was to solicit more money. But you really have been a collector, and then you've seen projects and you have been the last mile. But I see the role change over here as a more non-profit seeking grants in a different mode. That's, I see them a little bit different roles. That's all. To be able to access funds from any business now, you need to be a, you know, so when you're sort of stuck in that in-between stage where businesses say, if you're not that, we're not going to, we're not going to be able to support you. We've lost support by virtue of being a city and agency. Yeah, I agree with that. Collin and then Ashley. So I think I'm going to kind of pile on on the same kind of narrative, but hypothetical. If in the future I am not on city council and I end up on the board of the foundation, and it also happens that a bunch of people in my street are on the board of the foundation, and we say we think it's going to be a municipal good to have a nice new park on Prospect Street, then the board of the foundation is the deciding, you know, body in that case where currently as a city agency it eventually comes down to the city council elected by the population at large, which is not to say that the new independent non-profit foundation would not be acting in the municipal good, but it's just a question of who is deciding what the municipal good is. Do you see where I'm going? And tell me whether I'm just completely off, that's fine. Yeah. The city owns the park, you can control what happens, but nothing to keep in mind is the foundation has today, and going forward, the stripping of funding agency. We're not involved in designing or permitting or constructing anything. We're the recipient of the question. You don't know what I'm looking for. Yep. So I think it'd be, I just can't see the foundation going rogue and doing something spinning away from the city and taking on a role that it simply doesn't have the legal authority to do. Yeah, I guess, and I believe that, like I think that it doesn't seem at all likely that anything like that would happen, and I think that you're, it seems to me that you're probably completely right, that there is more, there are more funds to access as an independent non-profit. It's just a question for me of currently, there is a certain control of the whole city over this foundation, and being an independent non-profit means being an independent non-profit, and I want to know exactly, you know, how that change plays out. Historically, I see that some members of foundation boards feel like orphans, because the city council really hasn't spent a lot of time or had a lot of interest in what the foundation has been doing over the years. I remember coming into the council like four or five years ago, people didn't even know what I was talking about. So, you know, if the board is going to become deranged to do something like that, I'm probably going to tell them. Again, I mean, and to be clear, I don't think I see almost no possibility that the board would become deranged. It's just a question of exactly whose priorities are the deciding priorities, that's all. And whether it is the city as embodied by the city council or the independent foundation, that's all. Ashley and then Jack. So, I'm going to echo a similar sentiment, although to sort of directly address Glenn's point, I mean, I'm looking right now at article three, which is the purpose and describes what the foundation is there to do. And if this were to be a 501c3, you would have the authority to buy land and make a park. You know, you could buy things, you could buy property, you could buy objects, you could buy things, and those things might not be things that the city council would want to do, not saying that that would be the case right now, but we have no idea what the board would look like in three years, five years, ten years, whatever. And so for me, it's, I would rather that we keep it as a city agency. I'm also curious, I know that there was a huge piece, I want to say it was seven days maybe over the summer about nonprofits in Vermont, and I'm just curious if the plan would be, if the council were to approve this to become a 501c3, if you envisioned hiring an executive director and what that would look like, because grant writing and all of those things take a huge amount of time, I've written them for work before, and it just strikes me that, you know, one, will we have a staff? Two, I guess I'm also very concerned about some of the corporate funding sources, you know, I think as a city Montpelier tries to be very cognizant of where things come from and what they mean, and I am not comfortable sort of bowing to these, to large corporations who have money and want particular things to happen, and I appreciate that that's not always the case, but I've lived in many other places where those things have happened, and it hasn't turned out to be the sort of public-private partnership that we had envisioned, and I'm incredibly uncomfortable sort of seating that kind of control over an organization that does so much good for our city, and in essence sort of creating an entity that can operate into perpetuity even if the city council does not agree with a particular project or idea or you know, an organization wants to donate, so I'm wondering if you could respond to those points. I don't believe we've given any problems to other staff and executive directors, purely volunteers donors vision certainly in the short term that changes it all, and your other concern is a very diversified board today, I mean if there's any concern about the pedigree of a potential donor, I'm sure it would come up at an important meeting to discuss thoroughly. The mission here is not just to raise money at any cost, it would be very sensitive to the source of any funding, it's going to go into an asset that's going to be used by the community, hopefully benefit the community, so I mean I would hope the council have enough trust in this board to do the right thing, there's no, there's no percentage, there's no future of the foundation, it didn't adhere to some kind of an ethical standard as far as from whom are these CP grants requested donations, I guess it's just a question of trust, I don't know how to respond. Certainly and I in no way that was that was not an intent, my intent there was not to sort of discredit or disregard anyone on the board right now, but going forward the council wouldn't have any say in that other than an ex officio member who can't vote on anything and and simply that would be a passive role for the city to play, which would have no I think they would have a voting but I don't think that said they were a non-voting member I don't believe it. Ex officio usually means non-voting. Right, yeah that's that's at least that's how I read them. I thought ex officios could vote, no certain things, no okay um and so okay so let me write that wasn't the intent okay maybe poor choice of words but that wasn't the intent absolutely yeah um but and again I to me you know I appreciate the work that clearly went into this but but for me it doesn't make sense I think there are lots of non-profits that already exist here in Montpelier and I think as a city we can partner with them which I know the foundation has done over the years and has assisted these other these other projects in meaningful ways incredibly meaningful ways but but to me it's something that should remain in in this under the auspices of the city. Jack. To help me understand how much we should worry be worrying about a road board running amuck with this how much money are we talking about here how much does the foundation have? It's controlled. $120,000 that's invested in maple capital and they use the proceeds of the income from that money primarily to be able to fund these projects that's what the goal is. The purpose is to get this income out. If we can grow that number then we can the income would increase and there'd be more more money available for other projects. So you haven't been been invading the corpus but you use what you've been doing is just paying making these grants out of the income of the of the fund. Correct. So I'm going to jump in here and then Conor you want to go. Cool. So I am so grateful for all the work that you would all have done in recent years it seems like it's really been coming alive lately which is awesome and just so so you know where I stand on this I I'm very happy to you know endorse this idea that you know you all become an independent 501c3. I mean for me it's it's a it's a math question right if there are other pots of money that exist and it seems to me that the computer foundation is relatively unique as to what they do then that is going to be bringing in more resources to the city and that's that's something that you know we stand to benefit more from if you all are a 501c3. So that's I I mean I trust that you all would make great choices. So anyway that's that's my my hope. But we'll see so Conor what's up. Just piggybacking off Jack there. Not on average like how much money is coming in a year how much money is going out a year and I know it fluctuates probably quite a bit. It's a huge fluctuation. I mean we had that we had money from $35,000 from Allen Weiss as the state which Allen had put aside for the foundation. That was a lot of money you know for a foundation that didn't have a lot of money. Certainly they sort of cut ebbs and flows of the of the projects. We you know a lot of projects come in and they don't really have a 20-year life that's what we sort of look at is it how can I have a 20-year life for the for the city of Montpelier and a lot of projects come in that don't fit that bill. So we're not a we don't feel comfortable with those others that that have been done in the city of Montpelier. We have support. Very strong cash flow. I'm thinking of the tennis court project in the high school. The word went out. Money came in. Money went right back out. That was a thing here for the foundation. People can hear Mark Money towards that through the foundation and so that was just a pass through so they could take advantage of the tax deductions. I'm going to add one thing then Glen to a point that Ashley raised one of the things that we sort of chatted about before. The meeting was about how the foundation's money is invested now and because right now it's basically managed together with Maple Capital Investments which also manages the city's money as well and we're looking to do some kind of a revamp to our investment policy to make it more environmental, socially and governance responsible. And so I am depending like if we end up going the direction of saying yes go ahead be a 5-1-C-3 I would encourage you to consider having some kind of an ESG policy of your own because that I think that where our money is invested really actually matters so great. Glen. And thank you for backing on Connor and Jack in the how much are we talking about here. Do you have any sense of the general size of the grants that you would now have access to as an independent 5-1-C-3 as opposed to? Yes for sure. Are we talking like factors of orders of magnitude or? I mean whether it's $1,500 or $2,000 I mean if it's a business that wants to donate they want it to be a 5-0-1-C-3 so if you're the Vermont Mutual Foundation of which they have one that's one of their criteria that's what they're given their money to is 2-0-5-0-1-C-3 sure you know number one on the list are they there if not then we're not going any farther so it's it's sort of those type do we know what those are no all of them absolutely not but there are probably there's lots of opportunities out there that we have an opportunity. This state is probably fairly modest you know 2-3-4 maybe $5,000. And was there did I hear you say that there was an opportunity or a corporation that was interested in donating and did not? No. Got it yes yeah I can't there isn't one yeah okay Donna well you know this technical language of your bylaws is just that maybe being sitting with it for a while but also tweaking it to cover some of the concerns of how you all behave now and how you would want future boards to behave and definitely in there about your investment policy I think is important so I would I support the idea I just feel we need some more tweaking to ensure that it continues in the vein that you've had it. Does that make sense? So to piggyback off of that I see three possible roads going forward either the answer is no the answer is yes or we would like to see y'all make some tweaks to the document the bylaws that you have at this point what is your sense team which direction Can I just offer a technical point? Yes please. According to the Google an ex officio member the term means that they're coming from the office and they can in fact vote debate or have all rights and obligations of a board member. So in theory so the board so maybe if if you go the tweak route you might want to just write in it will be the mayor will appoint a voting member or the mayor city council an ex officio voting member so okay Conor you have something then Rosie did you have something go ahead okay no just for a direction I think I can get to a place where I would support this but some tweaks would be helpful I'm embarrassed I don't know where the money's coming from right now I mean it could be like Walmart pocket park I would never clue so having some ESG language in there I would probably make me feel comfortable I don't know about the rest of the council but otherwise I've been a fundraiser I know it's tough and you know whatever opportunities we can take advantage of me I think it's worth exploring here so Rosie so I would I would be supportive with some changes so I understand why you want to do this but I would appreciate it if you could do a little bit more work to see if it really would be prohibitive of being a 501c3 if you had more members appointed by the council perhaps a majority of members or a significant number of members would be appointed by the council if you really feel that it couldn't be all the membership and that would make me feel much more comfortable with it I don't have a problem with it being a 501c3 for incoming contributions going forward but I do feel that the council has a responsibility to the people who have contributed in the past to make sure that their funds aren't managed in a way that is different from how they envisioned and so that's why I'm concerned about giving up so much of that authority over it. Ashley why wasn't it just formed as a 501c3 in 1993 three four the sense of the council at that time was I remember correctly it was started out as a sort of experiment the foundation remaining as an agency of the city it was on Bill Corbyn's on the council and there were a couple of his Chuck comparisons there at the time and they want to do want to avoid at that time having to go through the hassle of creating a brand new standalone entity it was discussed at the time but the reason the 501c3 wasn't created in 93 or 94 to keep it simple just to bring it into the city you cannot have to go through the legal role of setting up a separate standalone was more convenient than anything else it wasn't there was no other reason for it we could have done it 501c3 but nobody really had the heart to do it. Jack I'm actually pretty comfortable with this the way it is you know I think that the suggestion of having the council appoint more than one member to the board of trustees probably a good one I'll point out that I'm not that scared about the idea that sometime in the future Glenn and his neighbors will get this entity to fund the Glenn Hutchison Memorial Park on Prospect Street and part of the reason for that is that sure this foundation by the bylaws has the power to to spend money and buy property but it's not a park until the city of Montpelier accepts it and and creates the park and and so whether it's the Glenn Hutchison Memorial Park or the Walmart Pocket Park or the Koch Brothers Pocket Park or whoever you're thinking about I don't think that that kind of thing would be free of city government input before before it's before it's made but given the fact that I'm reasonably comfortable now if it were if there were tweaks I'm sure I'll be happy with them one of the other thoughts I have is that I agree with Rosie that as a council we have a responsibility to protect the investment that contributors so far have have made in the in the fund if things go the way you expect the fund is going to get bigger and maybe it won't maybe not even a majority of that fund will be funds that were donated while it was a a city entity and it'll it will be subject to the fiduciary duties of the of the board of trustees so what I am hearing is the maybe two tweaks to be at least looked into one being around membership and the other around some kind of an investment policy do those seem like things that you all could tackle or look into absolutely I don't know how the you know there I'm not sure how we can but I there are people we can talk to you okay straight away like I don't personally make no but sure there you go um yes ash i just want to point out there that even if they present any sg policy to us right now the board would have the sole authority to change that and there there's no way for the city to to do anything about that we would have one voting member the the way that it's written so I just yep that's fair point okay um so I think we're going to move on from unless anybody wants to make a motion um all right thank you um and we'll hopefully have you back uh sometime whenever you're ready perfect okay sounds good thank you okay um housing trust fund guidelines update welcome I'm Polly nickel I'm co-chair of the can't hear you thought I was sorry um Polly nickel I'm co-chair of the housing task force and I'm also a longtime member of the housing trust fund advisory committee and I'm Mary Hooper and I'm a member of the housing task force also and the trust fund advisory committee and the trust fund advisory committee so the advisory committee met last summer to make recommendations to the city council about spending money in the trust fund and we discussed the fact that the guidelines for making such awards haven't been updated since 2010 when the trust fund was established and the city council adopted the guidelines and since that time the mission of the trust fund has expanded when it was created it was just for home ownership to help help first-time home buyers by homes in Montpelier but it's been used for a lot of rental apartment projects that have been really important to the city and the way the city council has dealt with that has been by waiving the guidelines as as things have have come up so the advisory committee decided it's time to make the guidelines conform with the actual practice and they asked the housing task force to take a look at them and recommend the changes and so the task force created a subcommittee it was myself Mary Jo Triano from the Montpelier Housing Authority and Jim Libby and then at the no our November meeting the task force voted to recommend the changes that are before you to the city council so you should have a copy of the existing guidelines drafted the proposed guidelines and then a summary of the recommended changes and I apologize for all the paper it was just because we reorganized them a little bit it was such a mess with track changes that I didn't want to subject anyone to that I'm happy to go through it section by section but in the interest of time I thought maybe I could start by summarizing the major changes for you and then you know if you if you want more we can we can talk in more detail and again this really is kind of memorializing existing practice and things that the council or previous councils have have already agreed on so I'm I'm actually going to interrupt you to say team I assume the um is it safe to assume that you have read through this okay so I don't think you need to go through all of the pieces um unless there's anything else you want to add okay do you want me to just sort of review the major changes or not even do that um yeah I mean there are sort of it's it's really it's actually quite easy to okay to read which is wonderful so you it's great um so I would just jump straight to questions from the council if that's if that's all right yeah go ahead Rosie so my big concern with this and I couldn't quite tell if this was something that was in there already or if this was something that was added but there was a prioritization for home ownership awards uh shall be made for the purchase of housing by a household that is living or working in Montpelier at the time of application or has other connections to the city and I'm sure this wasn't the intention of the committee but it that felt to me a little bit too much like you know we're protecting this homogenous community that we've got we don't want to welcome folks from outside and especially in light of Vermont's trying to attract just the right kind of um incoming uh residents and excluding others um over you know the past 100 years um I'm really uncomfortable with that um and frankly if somebody meets all our other criteria I don't know why we would particularly care that they already have a connection to the city or not um and that just makes me feel very uncomfortable I mean at the time that was important to the council um we actually made sure that it only applied to homeowners and not renters because of all the federal you know fair housing and discrimination policies but it it wasn't there from before and it for you know it was important in previous discussions. Do you have any suggestion Rosie I see how we could change it? I would just strike that one completely um all of priority number six five I think it is number five that was number five when the council adopted this way back when I think the notion was these are funds that are coming from Montpelier taxpayer pockets and so we want them to go back to Montpelier taxpayer pockets. I think our committee had a conversation about it and we're pretty ambivalent about it we've gone either way um but left it in principally because it had been important to the council over over the past. Fair enough thank you uh other comments questions go ahead. Just on that and maybe I'm not understanding it perfectly but uh if we were to strike it uh that number five the money would come from tech taxpayer pockets and go to new taxpayer pockets yes there. Other comments questions? Does anyone have a motion that you'd like to make? I move that we approve the policies with the exclusion of section 106 sub sub section five. I'll second. For the discussion. I'm just going to note that in general I'm I'm still somewhat uncomfortable as we know with the first time home buyer uh credit um however I really appreciate us making our laws and regulations and rules um fit what we actually do so I'm going to go ahead and support this because that's really critical to me to um to have that line up. I just wanted check in with Ashley how are you doing? Do you have any thoughts you would like to if not that's fine I don't want me to put you on the spot. I do I have I have thoughts and um I support I support this whole plan um I think I've that's been like one of my sort of key issues in the last few years on the council um I guess what I'm struggling with is is priority number five I mean I agree that Vermont has a really ugly history of discrimination and sort of selective uh you know selective welcoming um and I guess for me what I would rather see is is some sort of commitment rather than removing it entirely sort of I don't know what this would look like because I'm sort of shooting from the hip on this but something you know about what sort of other criteria we are going to look at I know that we um you know housing will be affordable to persons with incomes below 80 percent of county median as determined by HUD um and I just don't I don't know that that does enough to sort of diversify the population that that this would reach um and and I don't know what that would look like and I don't I don't purport to to say that I should be the one to like write that because I know that you folks are the one sort of doing all of this work um but but I don't think that striking five completely is what would be the best thing to do I think that there has to be some like I don't know I don't know what it would look like go ahead I have a thought and you know I've not been involved in administering these things but HUD has a requirement for to HUD grantees to that they will agree to affirmatively further fair housing and that includes all kinds of things from not discriminating up to doing some affirmative measures to to attract diverse residents and it might take some tweaking of the language to see exactly how it should be how it should go in there but I don't know what you think about that is a possible additional criterion much closer to what I was thinking anything I said I mean my proposal at this point would be that you know if we vote on this measure now and then just ask the committee to to chew on this sentiment and see if they can come back with the reformulated priority number five does that sound reasonable okay great um okay so I'm gonna we have a motion and a second uh further discussion all in favor please say aye aye what yeah no donna second did it um and anybody opposed great okay thank you so much okay pavement condition index oh we oh i'm sorry uh we are going to take just a really quick break yes okay we'll reconvene in just a couple minutes I don't know what I signed up for um yeah I mean I don't know okay we're coming yeah no I think that's which is real yeah yeah that's that's true okay so we do the PCI and then um okay where are we at right now so actually the master plan update is also uh just so we could move 12 and 13 up into right after be wrong no that's that's a fair really okay well I'm not sure unfortunately this is like in the wrong sink thank you that's that um I think we're gonna go ahead without Ashley what do you think she care a lot about the PCI oh she's back okay fantastic okay okay we're gonna come back from our recess uh and welcome I'm surprisingly excited to talk about this so I will turn it over to you you guys when you get to do it right you have some money to do it oh I'm sorry before we dive into it there is uh I do want to just make one quick announcement which is that I think we're gonna rearrange the schedule again um here which is to say that we're gonna bring um the discussion about uh the former moa property and the old country club road up to the next item because there I think are probably a number of people who are here for that and so to accommodate the you all who are here we'll do that next after this item okay take it away I'll through this it leaves plenty of time so my name is uh Tom McCartle the director of public works can you move the mic closer to you Tom McCartle director of public works this is Zach Lodgett staff engineers this is uh Zach's presentation tonight so I'm here in a supporting role so all right so as we go through this presentation if you guys have questions feel free to stop me it can be more interactive we don't need to wait for your questions till the end it's probably a little bit easier to keep track of anyways so first let's start with the PCI and the definition of PCI what is it it is it stands for payment condition index and it is a number um between zero and 100 which is used to indicate the general condition of the pavement it's calculated by quantifying uh distresses on the pavement um I will quickly jump ahead do a slide just to show you different types of distresses so these are the type of distresses that we are looking for when we do our pavement inspections um what you see in red alligator cracking block cracking bumps and sags uh patching and rutting L&T cracking those are all some of the most common distresses that we find in the city of Montpelier L&T longitudinal and transverse so uh cracks that are either perpendicular to the centerline or parallel so back to PCI um when we look at first of all we I would just want to talk about the history of our pavement management system from 2004 to 2011 we used a system called RSMS it's a road surface management system um that was used it was uh actually some kids from UNH would come in I'm not sure how frequent they updated their we did it with a volunteer annually with that program um so they would come in they would update their the pavement conditions um and then after 2011 we noticed some some odd problems with the RSMS they were using straight decays so um a we'll go over how a pavement um actually performs over you know a life cycle but uh their assumptions were that in year one through year 20 it was the same percent that it was dropping and what we were finding is that it wasn't really true for Montpelier and for our type of roads so between 2011 and 2014 I worked with GIS to integrate kind of something that was more uh customizable for the city of Montpelier um and then in 2015 we kind of took it a step further took that GIS and actually put it into a software called PAVR which is what we use now our PAVR system we inspect our roads every three years so in 2015 was the first inspection and then we updated our pavement condition this year in 2018 any questions before I move on the right this is a climate related structural subsurface this crashes a lot of reasons why pave pave pavements fail over time but particularly the north country and our freestyle thermal cracking yeah is this scale um something like a standard thing within the public works world or is something else about okay yeah it's fairly standard um some uh some systems categorize their conditions and but in general uh below a 40 is you know a failed road or approaching uh a very high maintenance cost in terms of either reconstruction or to rehab it is an industry standard but techniques and responses vary by region so as I told you these are the different types of distresses so I will move on from here uh just so you know that some of these distresses they all affect the condition differently so when we look at distresses on the pavement where if we have a thousand feet of roadway we're going to take probably two samples of a hundred feet so it's going to be a hundred feet in length by whatever the width of the road is that's your sample section so we're trying to get about 20 percent of your your road um that you're actually taking inventory on um each of these categories will all affect the pc i much differently alligator cracking if you have a hundred square feet of alligator cracking it's going to take a very hard hit to your pc i whereas if you had a hundred square feet of patching or um trench patching it's it's only going to deduct a very few points these these uh distress types are also very indicative of what's happening underneath so alligator cracking is probably in shoving and rutting is indicative of course sub base so those are really indicative of the top the surface the pavement we all ride on three to five six inches that's just for our riding comfort really what's important it's what's underneath so on the next slide here you see a curve from uh this is actually from the paving software uh they come out of the box with about 10 different curves this is the curve that most closely resembles what Montpelier is doing so this is the one that our data is going into with more with more time our data will actually be able to change these curves and uh be more true for solely for Montpelier right now we still need some fine tuning some more numbers that really give an accurate depiction of that so the red the upper red line is like the upper limit right for so when you do when you do a rehab when you rehab a a street whether it's overlaying or milling and filling or reclaiming you could expect to see anywhere within the range of the red so the upper limit so at year four if you reclaim a street you could have a hundred PCI or you also could have a street with a 77 PCI the green line represents kind of the average curve that you would see everything below a 40 week we really want to kind of get everything above a 40 40 is really failing it's in pretty poor condition ruin this lifestyle kind of so that's usually is in is in the reconstruction range when you're down in that 40 range it's a it's a much more aggressive more expensive treatment so the idea is to try to catch everything in the upper line um and then push those lines out so resurface at the right time preventative maintenance work at the right time and extend those curves out to extend the life of that investment in the asset all right so here are some of our goals our goals also kind of closely aligned with the state schools so one of our goals is to have an average PCI above a 70 that's something that we set back i don't know in 2011 13 type area donna do you remember somewhere in there and so our target target has always been a 70 the other one which is it's kind of a new target we had talked about it with the committee but um we have a goal to keep 25 percent of our roads less than a 40 PCI no more than ever reaching 25 percent of our roads so ideally we're much less than that but that would be the upper range and i think over time we will maybe adjust that percentage down as you know our PCI starts to go up and already has so so that funding level on the study state is a funding amount of funding that that achieves these goals so that it's we have if you think of water in a hole in a jug water draining out we're what we're putting in which represents dollars water going in it's at least equal to the water draining out water draining out is deterioration so it's uh it's equivalent of that so we're that's what we view is the study state condition where we're always making that proper investment we estimate it to be in the six hundred thousand dollar range we've achieved that now with the cip somewhere in that range prices vary with asphalt six hundred dollars a year yes approximately yep so here's a breakdown of our roadways our roadways are defined as class ones twos threes and then there's fours and some others predominantly mob pilliers made up of class three roadways which are your residential neighborhoods your class twos are your major and minor collectors such as townhill road terraced street and your class ones are your your uh state highway routes northfield street route 12 route 2 so about 50 percent of our roads are residential class ones are funded primarily 100 percent through the state yes we have some things that we need to do in conjunction with those projects but the they pay for the payment and the life cycle of the payment is really on their dollar the class twos um they are our responsibility as well however there are funds that we can apply for for grants that we would get on average between seven and ten years for about 175 thousand so class two town highway structures grant this is a this is a non sequitur but uh just putting it back on the radar i think i've said this before um as much as we can be finding roads to unpave um i'm very interested in that just put it out there um that is a something we we looked at a few years ago um we did convert some to gravel they have to be the right candidate for that to make a match with um so one of those is that it's an uncurbed street with driveway culverts so an open drainage system relatively flat less than five percent grade because of the amount of rutting that takes place raveling traffic volumes are fairly low and keep in mind that it isn't a popular method so yeah i hear that but the other thing along with that point is um now divesting the width of the road we have a lot of roads that are 32 34 30 even 36 feet wide in the residential area um allowing you know we did this complete street study and a lot in the report you're going to see a lot of them are shrink them down to 22 24 um which may be unpopular but it's also something that um needs you know needs to be weighed out because it's you know a third of the cost to do something at 20 feet then it is you know 30 feet so i would i would imagine too that um that would be some natural traffic calming for the road it's not as wide a little bit um it's your standard lane is generally 10 to 11 feet i also look at it on the storm water side of the less impervious areas too sorry we don't need to talk about this i understand realize this is a not the issue at hand no the relevant topics yep all right so here's a history uh you know from 2016 to 2018 uh with our class twos and threes our ones and then a aggregate pc i um in 2016 we had a on it was a 66 when you averaged our class ones and our class twos and threes together um at that point in time state street was not done nothing on elm street was done nothing on main street nothing on northfield street was done on 2017 you'll see that our class ones went way up and that's because we did there uh that's because we did elm street main street state street which were funded through state um in 2018 we finished uh paving those streets like northfield but in addition we also put in a little bit of funds towards uh maintaining our class ones so you may have noticed that we did an overlay by the roundabout um between granite street and uh what the roundabout and then um we also did some wheel rut patching in between uh pioneer and granite um so the city is responsible for the routine maintenance between those major projects which are on about a 14-year cycle the class one projects that are 100 so we're responsible for so bottles plowing crack sealing wheel rut paving so we need to carry that cost and there is a state aid for that based on those lane miles that we receive for doing that work in between the paving cycles here's um just the another type of graph that compares actually 2015 to 2018 when the two inspections were done so you can see how the percentages have changed uh this graph is representative of twos and threes so when the other chart this one the class ones are added in and um combined at the very end thus these numbers that you see are twos and threes only the percentages because that's what we're inspecting um the state I rely on what the state's condition that they post online um and then so I use that information um in in combination with our the information from our software which is what you see here um the low categories that failed in the serious are you see the same amount of failed uh decrease in serious or a slight decrease um but then you see good gains in the good section in the satisfactory so it's it's really what you want to see when you're looking at your pc i what's our failed I hope it's just one street yeah um so we can get well truly I don't know if it's technically failed considering every we can still pass on it I mean you can get to and from everywhere so if you look at a definition of failed in my mind that is you cannot get there you cannot yeah we call it unserviceable it's difficult so costly to maintain we have uh 10 on uh parts of coming streets so there's a there's a pretty bad one this is is in the plan then the serious section you would see stuff like blanchard picking core Scribner's a pretty low one as well all right so this graph a little hectic but it shows the state trend uh the Montpelier trend and then uh both of our goals so the dotted line that you see up top is a 70 PCI and that is our goal that's a state's goal we want to be above that line all the time down here this is the 25 percent we want to have all of our roads with a 40 PCI with less than a 40 PCI right now we're at 18 percent it'd be nice to get that down even 10 percent or lower and I think that's achievable over time but we also it's not something that can speed up too fast because we have other problems as well I need to be considered infrastructure utilities any questions here yeah one thing I wanted to mention about the bad roads was at the cpi meetings you really make it clear we have to make choices do we put money to band aid a road that's really bad when we don't have enough resources to do the utilities and everything underneath of it or do we go over here and try to maintain the ones we've got in good conditions because if we don't maintain them they'll become poor and more expensive is that part of the ones that are still under that 25 well we're linked pretty closely with the water sewer master plan as you recall we had part of that discussion involved around barry street and that was really bad and we have a 100 year old water main under there right how long do we wait so we decided to move forward with paving of that we've been able to keep the water main together if you will but east eight streets another one of those oh it's a mess we have water main that's broke again just recently so so that that is a tough choice to make I use the word unserviceable that is a point where the running becomes difficult to even to navigate with the vehicle we can't plow the street properly because of that running and so it's a we end up putting a lot of salt on these streets that we can't scrape off so those are those are the choices that we have to make sometimes we have to move forward with some sort of a surface treatment right but it's a band-aid that never makes a road really good until you get the funding together to go all the way down and redo it so that's correct that's that's a tough choice to make I give you an example walker terrace is a street that half the street is in you know around a 40 and the second the last portion of the street is very very bad so the aggregate PCI is still okay it's probably around a 37 we're in there but the last section is very poor so moving forward we're trying to have a little different approach in towards specific preventive maintenance right so we buy a little bit more time by doing this 100 foot section on walker terrace until we get the funding for the water main which is one to two years out that way the residents of that street you know they have something that's passable or more passable until we have the time to do the the money walker terrace is a 25 so it needs a water main and the sewer as well no just water okay so here is our PCI and then funding on the right it's a little hard to see over there but this is our PCI annually and then the amount of dollars that we've spent on the right hand side you'll see that in 2017 there was a spike down and also our PCI leveled off that's actually because with Northfield Street that came up we had to take some funding and move shift some funds around so that we could do Northfield Street but keep everything on track so we actually allocated about $120,000 from normally where it would just spend towards straight twos and threes to make Northfield Street happen as a result we didn't get the same gains that we did in previous years on our PCI but I think it was well worth it the improvement is on your class ones so good news on that is we we delayed Berry Street to connect it to link it up with the bike path project and we have a grant on that and that will go this summer so that will make a pretty significant change on the two so everything balances out over time exactly just as long as you go more or less have what you need to adequately maintain believe we do yeah okay all right so some of the issues that we're having now a lot of the low hanging fruit have already been done so areas where we don't have water for water mains or don't really have utility issues we've already done the reclaimed projects on those streets so now juggling the infrastructure needs with the pavement needs it gets a little bit trickier but it's your question exactly so we'll get more into that when we talk about the cip and kind of each of the different projects and how they overlap and I know what is kind of interconnected with each other another thing is that well as we're talking about right now the the underlying infrastructure can cause accelerated decay so you have a street we've done some streets where Liberty Street between next to you state next to college between college we've had I think that was done in 2012 or 13 and we've had I think three leaks four leaks there since so that those type of things are really actually affecting your PCI quite significantly we have a short history with the paving software we just need to have some more time to do some more cycles to really develop specific curves for decay curves for month failure right now we're on a three-year inspection schedule it's actually quite lengthy I think that we're going to end up doing annual inspections but splitting out the city into thirds so one year will do this third of the city one year will do this third it's a little too too much data crunching at the end right now to do kind of all three years or yeah wait three years to do your inspections the other thing that we're looking into is possibly having a vehicle come out and drive over our roads and just give us an automated report save some time does it I assume that cost money though it does cost money but time is money as well okay sure it's because the state has one oh well it's it's reliable it's not arbitrary there's no human perception involved it's you know taking points every so often and aggregating your data that way rather than having a human interpret right so our approach moving forward DPW this year supported our paving program very significantly we had about a hundred thousand dollars that we would have had additional cost if we had done structure adjustments on both college and liberty street in in return that ended up allowing us to go further on college do something that we're running over on route two so utilizing our crews for support is a is a really big item that we will continue to move forward with the some of the other things are preventative maintenance and interim maintenance is a very high priority so crack sealing crack sealing crack sealing we did $14,000 of crack sealing this year we put $5,000 towards class one roads that were crack sealed which not a lot of other communities are doing but it's very important because you they only come around every 15 to 17 years depending on the state funding so making sure that your payment is good until you get the state funds is really important in the local local streets too correct so as i said shortening the PCI inspection cycles continue to class two grants and supporting our class ones with running and leveling as needed to kind of preserve them are there any other questions or that little paver you see in this picture is uh when we bought a few years ago it was a great investment maybe six feet wide it's a sidewalk paper but we run it on the street frequently so you know this first avenue this year we and we reconstructed one full side so it's a great little investment does take a full crew to run it with truck drivers and screeds and everything but we also did some paving of the sidewalks on north field street so it's it's come in really really nice with that where there are pavement okay actually i live on east state streets oh i know how rough it is um just a couple of quick things one i assume that the amount of snow removal in any given year would have a pretty significant impact on the the road conditions in other seasons like i mean we we've had a lot of early snow this year so clouds have already been out and so um do you anticipate that being an increase to to maintenance in the upcoming years given the significant amount of snow we've had already uh it's more to do with moisture and freeze thaw cycles last year was an awful year we had very wet season and we had a number of freeze thaw cycles so that um frozen surfaces the water is entering the pavement and then it freezes expands pops it out and it's a vicious cycle so crack sealing is uh is important um what's that science jokes science jokes yes um level and then the only other uh this is just more this is um maybe more of a bit of an observation i know we had a few early storms that actually produced a surprising amount of snow but i was in town i'd gone to a yoga class early in the morning and the snow banks from the sidewalk to the parking on state street were really high and there was actually no way other than walking in the travel portion of the lane to safely get to car so i just went through the snow banks but there were a number of folks who were not um as as able bodied as i who who had to walk in traffic to to get into their car and so i just i know you guys have so much on your plates and it was a lot of snow that happened quickly but i just i wanted i meant to send an email and i didn't but um i just wanted to share that experience because it was i mean things could have gone really wrong like slipping in traffic uh you know falling in a snow bank and but we are not even out of november and you're asking and you're asking about snowbank i know i know well the absurdity right but it just it struck me as a as a as a potential significant point now to um that we do need to plan a couple of nights that there's um the cruise work along usually two or three day lag between the snow operations active operations and a planned night snow it begins at about one in the morning the only time we can do the night the downtown area so in the meantime um we start to poke some holes around the meters for people to walk between uh we have drainage issues as well all that water sitting along the gutters is walking our drainage um to the catch basis it's flatter than a pancake downtown so it doesn't take much to create fun so no a lot of reasons to remove the snow in november further questions great wealth i'm sure i mean i've said this before but i just love graphs and so this presentation would be very happy um i think there's a proportional relationship there at the more graphs the happier i am and that was this is wonderful you know what he grabbed that and we could i think you could graph that um comment over there well i i realized i had one other question and that was in in in all the uh graphs about the percentage of different classes of road or those based on miles of road it's based on area um it's the most accurate way to put it into the system so it's true area that that the percentages are being based off of so mile on a narrower road is less than mile on a wide road yeah it's all but yeah exactly um i just want to add i'm really excited to have some of those graphs go up on the city website once we are ready to do um you know um what are we calling it performance measures something like that um okay great this is wonderful so thank you so much okay so we are skipping a couple items here and jumping to the discussion around the former moat property and the future plans of what we want to do with that space so i'm going to turn it over to you bill really this is the beginning i think of a discussion we've had we've had some issues and questions come up about are there possibilities to do more things around the riverbank and open up more spaces and and what could we do with this um with this former lot it's actually i call it the moat lot and jay from moat trust is here but it's really combination of the moat vermont association for the blind and tks property so three three lots of the city now owns and um i think my answer has to everybody when they've asked us that we we have a plan and that's what's been bid and that's what's being constructed and the bike path goes through there it's going to create a roadway through it's going to create parking uh about 28 parking spaces and leave a space for a new building absent any change of direction that's what we are going to continue to do so one of the so i you know we're at a point where we probably have a couple month window at the most where before we you know if you back into when the work might start and if there were any permit change requirements and those kind of things to consider other choices so it's come up from council members it's come up from the council and it seemed appropriate to put this on the agenda and see what people at least on the big picture level wanted to do for direction and i think uh i think the questions we have are you know do you want to stay with the current plan do you want to change the current plan if the current plan changes do you still want to include a private building or not um do you use people want more green space do we still want to include parking how much parking those are the kinds of things we need to work through as we were going through so that prompted this agenda item so uh just to add on to that a little bit i think the biggest thing that we need to figure out i would like to be figuring this out tonight uh is right so as you said just to highlight do we want to keep like option one is keep the same basic plan move forward with the construction of a building on that property option two uh is would you do we want to try to keep the building um but there may be some possibilities for just what's behind that property um and in terms of it's planned to be parking now but maybe we can uh rejigger that now since we you know have this parking garage that will be very near that um and that's a technical term rejiggering yeah okay and option three um is maybe we don't want a building on that site and that's sort of up that what we do with that space is is up for um more options as well so um and then from there whatever we decide if we don't want to go with plan a of uh you know continuing to move forward um then uh you know we may try to talk a little bit about a process moving forward um from whatever we decide we want to do um does that make sense team does that any questions about that okay so the way i pictured this conversation going is um i know there's a lot of folks here who have thoughts about this issue and so i would um i think i would like to unless you all have things that you want to say right now i think i would start with the public well what are the what are the thoughts um people who would like to weigh out on this and then we can continue to have a conversation um up here yes so if you have yes question if you would come up to the the mic here it's possible to put a image on the screen of what is proposed the current plan moment hmm i bet you can figure that out it's on it's attached on the agenda the agenda so you could have not not that if if you have access to the internet um go to the agenda on the website or anyone else from staff here that can i have faith i have faith that you can figure out um yes donna just before people come up i did distribute a map that had one option of more green space and i put new copies over there but i think both connor and glenn got them last week at the meeting we had the special council meeting so i just wanted to have that vision in front of you when we're talking there is a proposal about making it green um shillen did you have a question i was just wondering if you could repeat your name for the record i'm sorry thank you okay uh go ahead john john snill thank you very much and thanks for bumping this up on the agenda a little bit i think that the the first thing that i would ask of the council is to not keep going with the current plan until you look at other options and then if you have decided that this is really the plan that needs to happen go for it i don't think it is but i think we have a real opportunity now that sort of the the scene has changed and that it's very important to stick the stick in the spokes and stop it um that's harsh stick in the spokes well we've got an opportunity two months you think yeah i mean right so we've i mean that's roughly but i i i'm just trying to we we issued a contract based on the initial plan and at the time that what design was done parking garage wasn't really part of the program so they're proceeding along and so if we're gonna give that a change order and a new design we need to do that before they start work and there would be permit changes and it would have to be designed and engineered and all those kinds of things so you know that's the the window we're talking about and i will note that that from the council's perspective that that and i'm not saying we shouldn't do this but just so people are clear that's budget time and holiday time so um and this is an opportunity that only comes once in a great while that's right i i had been on the original car lot committee and then the tailored street committee i followed this now for not quite as long as bill has but a long time and uh i would love to see something different than is proposed currently i was really disappointed with with it when it came out i think that we need to look at what kinds of parking we need and if it's appropriate to put parking there then let's supply that kind of parking is it 10 minutes to go into the drawing board is it you know glenn drives these big cars downtown all the time is he just gonna wear warehouse his car there all day long i i don't know but i think that's an important question what kind of parking is needed and i would advocate that almost any kind of parking can be provided elsewhere or already is um and that then would suggest that we minimize or eliminate parking all together on this lot parcel and the associated roadways going in and out it's a lot of pavement the way it's planned right now of course would advocate for more green space i know that that doesn't come freely we we need to as a city support that but i think if you look at that that key entrance way across the river and into this new development the impact is huge if we have more green space there and under the current plan there's precious little green space i know because i've reviewed the existing plan for trees and shrubbery and it is painful painful i'm fine with a building if that's what you know the council thinks needs to happen and the and the citizens of Montpelier i think a well-designed building could go a long way towards spreading some of the costs of providing more green space then i think also you're going to be hearing more and more about the confluence park on the other side of the north branch that these two could tie together beautifully so please do stick that stick in there let's talk about all kinds of options and before we have more comments bill do you want to just explain the right i thought it might help everyone unless people really disagree if i just explain how we got to where we are and what everything is i'm not going to have a mic can people hear me okay um this is Shaw's this is where Montpelier beverage used to be the association for the blind used to be this is the drawing board building so the proposal initially the what was really the works was the city took the three lots some is recreated to two lots and one of them is sort of like this and the other is the remainder this was all going to be sold and the the owner was going to build a new building and this parking was going to be associated with the building this before the garage over here was contemplated um at the near the end of the deal the owner opted not to do that and we simply purchased the property so now the city owns all three but this design was intended to incorporate the access to the back lot this is the bike path coming over with the bridge the new building and associated parking so questions that could be and and all of this is bed permitted this all this project has a local permit we're not currently what was it me because i didn't touch a computer so we're not currently marketing this but the thought was if we did it would all be you know it's a permitted project so it would be of interest so you know what does this mean and as we have this conversation i think issues to think about are how much parking is needed to support a building if we chose to have one there and how much could be accommodated um not really part of this but as we talk about a potential bike path connection some of the options include taking out parking on berry street and would sub would proximate parking be of importance and so we want to think a little bit holistically but you know could a road be recurved and create more space would you the proposal adonages showed shows no building the road and a whole lot of green space not much parking and you know i think those are the kinds of decisions i hope that helps orient everybody so and to be clear this is what this is what the bid spec this is the project that's being built right now unless we tell it along with this unless we tell them otherwise question bill that that parcel is in the designated downtown district right which has no parking requirement for dwellings correct in fact i'm not sure about the what the zoning requirement is the biggest issue we've just we've discovered and there are private real estate people here can speak to this more eloquently than i but we've discovered with trying to do the housing at one tailor we're trying to do this project is that the financing of projects regardless of our zoning depends on the parking so um people can't get loans to build buildings unless they can demonstrate that they have sufficient parking for their customers or residents etc so new developments come come with that so i think one really important thing for for me and understanding this was understanding that we can keep this lot for public use or if we sell the lot as we're you know we've kind of planned through this the money goes back to the state and to the feds so if we were to sell the lot we will lose we will gain some potential tax revenue for whatever is built on that that private piece of property but we won't actually gain them the value of the lot and so that's a different kind of math than we would normally be doing in a situation and i want to explain that for people just to understand that these properties were purchased with federal and state money as part of a grant project and so they were purchased by basically the federal government on our i mean by us with money from the federal for public purposes so as long as we use them for public purposes that's fine if we sell them to convert them solely to private purposes those portions of the lots that are now in a private interest need to be refunded and we learned that all along that that was the case so it's not like we can sell these and just pocket the value of the the lot and put into the cities before we go with further public comment is are there any other clarifying questions from the council no okay back to the public a visual up on the board if i can do you want to also do you want a minute like should dan talk while you find your image okay go ahead can we stop thank you hi dan jones on northfield street executive director of the sustainable montpellier coalition six weeks ago we held a roundtable of various interests in what we'll call the lower north branch neighborhood bill was there rosie was there it was a discussion of how to begin to think about tying together the various we'll call them silos of projects that were going on it was the taylor street project the parking garage the bike bridge which seemed to be the possibility of having a once in a generation opportunity to rethink that whole area into something that was a hallmark or a gem of the city not just a place to pass through i guess donna had passed out a preliminary drawing that uh elizabeth courtney had done all i was going to have elizabeth up here too uh she's being demore demure back there uh the idea was that by opening up what you call the moat property at least a portion of it into public space at the end of the bike bridge so it becomes more of a park now that you're developing we're seeing a neighborhood develop both with the french block with taylor street hopefully with the christ church development we're having a place where we're actually having people in fair quantity living there and so some kind of public space for them to occupy along with the other people who would be coming through on the bike bridge etc is a we think a crucial way of thinking about every smart city in the country basically opens up some portion of its waterfront even more than the confluence park but you know the idea where people want to get to the water is john experienced back when we're having the discussions on the taylor street development uh there's a great yearning in montpellier to be have access to the water and more of it the better so what we're trying to suggest to you is this is a great time to change your priority move away for having to sell that because there's actually no economic benefit and start making a gem that is the center a central feature of the city thank you dan meanwhile i'm getting there okay let us know when you're ready for some reason do you want to unplug the um the the projector so we don't read all your emails that's that's all right you're gonna get there very quickly i don't know how to unpurchase it it's not that hard see you and see you and help me with that thank you it's just it's just my personal drive what can i say except it's up down uh elizabeth go ahead uh i i just want to say a couple of things um yes do you identify yourself please what could you identify yourself for yes i'm uh elizabeth courtney i live on clarence an avenue and i am a consultant to not-for-profits um ms smc being one of them so um i i just want to say that what you're contemplating is a difficult thing we're very good at building stuff we love to build stuff from you know the day we're born almost and it's really hard to give that up in order to not build on a piece of land to keep space open is not something that really comes natural to us somehow and uh it's important to do this because open space they're not making it anymore and if we don't seize the moment and use the space that presents itself when it presents itself of course we won't probably have another chance because once it's developed it's hard to let go yeah so um this is part of a drawing is that the right angle yeah um it's an axonometric projection which there we go and flip uh easily but this this sketch is just to show that there uh that confluence park doesn't need to be a postage stamp um down by the by the water we can uh start at state street and bring uh some um symbol of access through the the narrow spaces around the parking garage onto the south side of the parking garage and have public space there have public space along the uh the bike path as it crosses the bridge and into the area i'm sorry i don't have the little red flashing thing but you can see just across the railroad tracks from Shaw's uh is the so-called moet property shown as an open space so here there you go so that's all i have to say thank you thank you uh connor go ahead sorry Elizabeth is it so is that still a bit of a road that would have an exit there by the drawing board yeah do you see do you see these little cars here okay okay right along there that's when when um our group met at the uh open space uh meeting that dan referred to um i think tim heaney was in our small breakout group and so is bill and others in the room um and bill took the blue magic marker and swooped a road in that i um that is that road that um that little arrow is on thank you madam mayor um that leads into the obishan and jacob's parking lots and there's incredible opportunity to expand the park up um up the north branch to uh the backside of the realto um there are opportunities perhaps with willing landowners to um access the stream up there and uh the river conservancy is exploring those options um and um you wish them well you wish them success great thank you um while we're pointing out things on the drawing i just want to uh bring attention to the to the person in that park flying a kite that is because i like that i think that's an i think that's an important part of it we have our theme song you know let's go fly anyway can we get the lights again thank you all right further comments can you ask a question yes um bill do we do we need to continue to maintain an access to that parking lot does the city need to maintain that or does this that parking lot have it does have two other access points yeah we we believe we do we think just for public access circulation there's a couple of narrow access the only other one is the one out here on in that's trafficking there's some delivery trucks that come alleyway permanently closed at this point or is that coming that was closed for construction but um but it's not a good yeah it's not we would just assume keep it permanently closed it's not good for vehicles no we think it's we think access and one other this is pretty minor but just to be clear to one thing that can't change in the design is the actual layout of the bike path itself that's been finally approved by vitrean so just so we're clear of that that we're talking about other than the bike path okay further comments didi brush again um i have a question about uh i had heard that there was some concept drawing about a building that would be market price housing with parking underneath uh where where i think in the drawing it showed nothing but parking um and i wonder whether that's still even being discussed um and then whether that would allow for additional green space where i think the drawing showed a building next to the drawing board so rather than a building there could could there be housing adjacent to the river uh with parking underneath for that and then increase that the uh green space rather than an either or of all green space or all parking and building i think there's a lot of options um so that we did get that concept design there was no i mean it was an idea there wasn't really anyone ready to do it um the actual uh agreement that didn't end up happening with the people that were going to buy the property included the city's right to build above the parking lot for housing or to then sell that right to somebody else so this the council did preserve the right to build that concept that you're talking about in in those agreements as it turns out we now own the property so we can do that if we wish so that would be a possibility um and i i guess another question is just how is this i feel like we're sort of hopscotching with many of our decisions rather than there being any kind of i could be wrong because i'm not at all the meetings but it doesn't feel like we're following any kind of master plan or design um rather we are making a decision by parcel and i just wonder if this does fit into anything that has been thought through as a larger design for the city i'm not aware of it i'd love to hear hear from you do you want to yeah so the original concept again prior to the the hotel and parking garage proposal was there was a desire for additional commercial space on um main street the bike path has been a long design and that was where it needs to come out in the real lining of that intersection as well as access to the parking behind as far as and and we did have some concepts for that new building in some of the master planning and they also became this particular design came about as a as a result of a negotiation with the people that owned my pillar beverage as part of our land sale so um and then we just changed the terms of that sale at the at the end but at that point this was the construction design so again that's why i think that's where we're having the conversation and if i can add to that i'm i uh would say that uh you know as as far as the city's master plan i don't think it calls for a park in this space um nonetheless we have this opportunity so um you know it's a an opportunity worth considering and uh so but the one of the um other pieces of context is that we have actually set as a council goal the desire to have more parks uh in in the city in general so it's not uh necessary so i mean your observation is as well as well taken um but uh you know it does fit with the the kind of thing that we have been looking to do um and having said that i mean we have this opportunity now to slow down a little bit not not terribly long but i think um we have the opportunity to slow down long enough to consider the the greater picture and see how does this space fit into the larger picture of what we want for Montpelier i mean we are such a unique place with uh you know the confluence of uh two rivers i mean we even have more rivers than that but uh but particularly right in our downtown that's that's pretty interesting and special so um any case uh you raise a good point and i would as a part of the process moving forward love to take into consideration what is the the greater uh like how does this fit into the greater plan so thank you only one other on point and that is um i know there's there's development for a number of new housing units uh in town i think am i right in saying that the french block is is it all affordable housing i believe uh it's mostly yeah no it's mostly and then taylor street is that some market and most and also affordable yes so if it oops um i didn't count their time if um if there's an opportunity to have both some green space and some market housing for people who might want to be near the river and and uh can afford some housing that might be worth considering thank you thank you for their comments hi um i'm richard i live on uh my senior crossbee wasn't going to say anything because i don't really have any questions i just have a comment uh i'm a remote worker i work online just moved here a couple of weeks ago and um i bought my first car four months ago and i just turned 30 and that's been pretty awesome for me and there's going to be a lot more people in my generation hopefully moving to places like montpellier and so the need for more parking lots to me just sounds kind of ridiculous um i would encourage that we look at degrowth instead i know that's already something you're interested in as a council having more parks that sounds wonderful to me i've actually been wanting to go swimming in the river in the past couple of weeks i need to buy a wetsuit but i don't know where to do that at the moment park would be great so thank you sorry richard could you say your last name please yeah lit tower thank you thank you hello uh so my name is larga part i'm the executive director of the montpellier development corporation um so i submitted some comments to you all uh but i just want to make some additional comments um that while it's a city council goal to increase parks which i think is awesome um i do want to remind you that within the master plan and state code for planning um is the goal to you know channel growth into our growth areas and our designated downtowns and i think this lot is a keen opportunity for that um so i just want you to keep that in mind that this is an opportunity to grow the grand list if we put development on this site i think there's an opportunity to do that in a meaningful way that incorporates um green space um and the shared use path and other amenities nearby um so i think there's an opportunity to do some great things with it um but i think there needs to be input from a whole lot of other people that aren't in this room who are affected by this um so i would encourage the council to you know reach out or have a platform for people to express some of those um ideas um in different settings because i think there's a lot of people that weren't able to make it here tonight that have some really important input thanks thank you further comments and i trust please do come on up sure well my name is jay white and i'm a trustee of the moet troughs that formerly owned 12 main street and for some of the new faces um i think when bill and i first started this project we both had brown here so you can see how long it's working on it i'm going to try to be as brief as i can um i want to explain a little bit how we got to where we got and i think for some of you uh on may 15th of this year uh a transaction was supposed to happen between the city of mont pair and the moet trust that owned 12 main street and the plan that we had worked out which we spent years doing uh was a plan where the city would acquire 12 main it had acquired the property immediately behind this it required the property on the side of it a newly configured lot would be created and on the day that we sold the property to the city the city would sell back the moet trust this newly configured lot 16 we had uh worked extremely hard to meet a deadline of may 15th which is very important for the city to move forward with this plan and even though an issue came up which was concerning for us we made the decision to move forward and sell the property to the city so that they could move forward with a bike path plan the issue in the only issue that i feel that we didn't move forward with the purchase of 16 main was the fact that there was an unspecified amount of time that it was going to take for the city to do what they needed to do on this property and in a nutshell the simplest thing i can say to each one of you think about if you're asked to buy something and then be told you will not be able to do anything for a period of time and that period of time nobody knew now bill and i spent quite a bit of time trying to figure out a plan but as it is may 15th came close and closer we hadn't determined exactly what that plan would be so we did move forward with the sale of the property to the city and i've been asked many times why didn't you ask for some type of option well in order to negotiate the option it would have probably been more weeks of delay and we didn't want the project delayed any more than it had been so the decision was made to do what we did our interest in the project as proposed still exists now most of you probably do read a local paper and to my annoyance twice i've read in this paper that the issue of the reason we didn't move forward was because of funding for the project never made that statement i believe that statement to be untrue so for any of you that read that maybe that's why you thought why we didn't move forward so you are now in a position because of what we didn't do in may to make this decision of what maybe you would want to do but i'm here tonight to to make it very clear to all of you that we still have an interest in the project and that the decision we made was simply to allow you to move forward with a bike path plan if there's any other questions i can answer for you i do have one question your plan for the building there would also require on-site parking or would parking at the parking garage be sufficient we believe in order to make this project possible in the city commission to report this that it's not that the parking is imperative that it be behind this building okay without the parking you probably will never see a building okay thank you yes i would just like to flag this parking issue i i think i i wrote i raised this issue when we were doing the original zoning so the fact that basically every project that's contemplating putting housing in these development areas that we've designated has to have parking but yet the council last year removed the parking requirement from those areas particularly the ones closest to downtown um you know where i also live uh you know that the sort of answer was well that's too bad but now if we can't do development because there's no parking requirement for these new proposed housing projects i think that's something as a council we need to address through the zoning and not sort of make exceptions for particular projects because that's going to advantage those folks who can move into those new buildings and continue to disadvantage those who have no other choice but to remain in in the the lesser rent areas of those districts i'm we should we should talk more about that we can do that offline though uh okay thank you any other further questions for jay okay thank you other comments from the public and yeah i'm tim haney i live on main street and uh just kind of watching this evolve i do think having um it is a great opportunity that's before us or before you now and thanks to a lot of energy and a lot of public funds that have gone into creating where you're at today my my reaction at this point would be to pursue the plan you have and at least build the building i think there are very few opportunities downtown where this will happen in foreseeable future one thing to remember about this site elevation wise is it's fairly high it's roughly 10 feet higher in elevation than intersection of main and state and with the new zoning regs and the new floodplain regs that go with it a new building needs to be two feet above 100-year floodplain which we haven't seen one of those built here yet but if you were to try to build one maybe on the lot where where joys has his park i think you'd find the building would have to start about two and a half feet above the sidewalk and on a narrow limited site like that it's really really difficult to get the ramping and the access it's virtually impossible um whereas this site you've already designed and permitted a building that will meet that code and i think that code is going to be a big challenge for the future of what might happen in this downtown and this is at least one opportunity where something positive can thank you all right further comments from the public okay go ahead jack under under this plan uh that the city has now is the idea that the city would sell the lot to someone who would then build the building according to these specifications and do we have is there a market for it and so do we have people want to do it so the the plan was somewhat as is jay white just described but initially the buyer was going to be the moat trust and i believe they may have had a development partner and they were going by the building in the lot so we've actually done the subdivision already and taken the three lots and created them into two and there's a permitted building and the building permit shows these parking spaces once the decision was made not to go forward with that sale and simply have it we haven't marketed it now we for us to do this now because it was federal funds and we need to go through a public process to solicit proposals for these sites we we were allowed to sell it directly because it was part of the the real estate transaction and i i know that jay knows this this is a surprise and we would have to put it out to proposals but you've got at least one developer or a person here saying that they're willing to pursue it and we've heard informally from others that they're interested um so there there could be interest but i don't know i i don't know yet i think depending on what we choose to do what the interest would be if say we said all right we'll do it but there's going to be less parking on site you're gonna have to use the garage instead i don't know how that plays into the financing and those kinds of things it may it may be fine it may not be i don't know okay thanks so uh what i anticipate we should probably do at this point is uh just go around and say where we're at and then from that i think it'll become clear what if any motion needs to happen at that point does that sound okay team and i'm gonna take you know mayor's privilege to go first which is to say that i mean this is really strictly a you know really pure sort of sense of policy decision what would you prefer here on this site would we prefer a a building with parking behind it a building with no parking green space potentially behind it or no building at all and i i would say uh my inclination here is to actually opt to not build the building at this point because we could always change our minds later if we want to build a building there it's much easier to to go in that direction to wait have some green space and then should we decide later that we would like to build a building we can always do that but it's i think going to be basically impossible to go in the other direction and i also um uh from from um you know jay's testimony earlier as well as other conversations i've had um i don't anticipate that it would be very realistic to have a building there without parking directly behind it unfortunately um so i i don't really see option be as it were as a as a legitimate option you know with a building but no parking um behind it and so it's either we're going the direction we're going or uh or there's uh no building there and that's what i i would uh i would prefer i think it's going to be great to have space on the east side of the north branch there for people to access the river i mean it is a pretty unique spot um and i think it would stand to benefit all of downtown uh to have as a part of our entry way into the city to have space that is green and welcoming uh to folks in a place that it's going to be pretty obvious for like um that would that would be attractive for people to come visit and uh i think it also you know for people who live right downtown it'll be uh a park that is within walking distance which is um important so that's it for me um who else would like to go should we just start over there and just work our way around okay i i think do you all know where i stand but before i want to thank elizabeth and sustainable month your coalition for this drawing because i think it helps to visualize it doesn't mean it has to be this but i think we should go for the green and we should go to expand it as much as we can up and down the river all right i wouldn't say i'm sold on this particular plan at the moment um but i'm curious enough that i think i'd like to see plan b here understand the stats under a tremendous amount of pressure the next two months um part of my rationale for as a part of the parking garage was we would increase the quality of life i think around the city by maybe eliminating some spaces um and honestly i'm not interested in more parklets at this point like i'd like something that's real uh seeing that on paper there that's a little more real to me than building a building at this point um so i'd be in the category of worth exploring it's um i see the good of having a building there i see the good of having parking there uh i would say my priority is open space um for sure i think that uh i'm trying to think about it as if uh suddenly i had more land than i did um by my house and do i build uh an adu and rent it out and get really good rental income or do i you know make it into a parking space and have another spot to park or do i you know build raised beds or or or have a garden or or uh a place for my dog to play in and and in that situation i would pick that ladder direction uh open space i think that that's uh the best highest use of of this space that i can see in the future and i hope to to see it happen i also favor the green space option every city uh that i've been to and enjoyed actually and i i don't appreciate being outside that much since i got Lyme disease because ticks are everywhere um but uh every major city that i've gone to i've actually spent most of my time looking at stuff and things uh walking through green spaces the uh the where i think it's the greenway in boston um you know in in new york you've got central park uh and um even uh in oakland there are beautiful parks on the water uh and and to me um you know don't love being outside but uh appreciate having a place to go have lunch um and also just sort of having a place to let go and take in the sunshine that seems to only live here three months a year lately but um to me uh i'm not um all that interested in in another building i think that that i'm not not sold on the fact that the only option that we have is a building i think it is certainly an option but with all of the development projects in the works um i i don't want to lose sight of the importance that public open spaces uh that really focus on all of the attributes that we have and we all love um can really bring when when people are trying to decide where they want to go and hang out for 36 hours i think we're presented with a choice of a couple of options that are have both have the possibility of being significant public goods um i'm i'm new to this discussion i don't know what uh the potential uh use of the building would be um attractive market rate housing downtown seems like a great thing uh some commercial development potentially seems like a great thing and i love this picture of the uh of the park and the green space too i think i'm concerned that we really don't have that much public input at this point and uh and so i think the most important thing for me is to get more public input input before we before we make a decision i have a lot of different thoughts so i'm gonna try and make them cohesive um overall i think there are enough intriguing possibilities with this that i would take john snales advice and put a wheel in the spokes for a month or two to kind of take that public input spend some time brainstorming and figure out what do we really want here um and maybe after all that it does end up being a building um but i i do think that there are some really interesting possibilities including a few that haven't been brought up so far um one that bill alluded to a little bit that i'm really intrigued by is um we're still missing a link on this recreation path and that link is between the rec center on berry street where the recreation path technically ends and the the edge of of this property when it hits main street and so in order for us to make that to complete that link we're likely going to need to take some parking spaces off berry street so we got i got some numbers from the city staff and it looks like it would be i'm missing it 16 16 i think is what i have 17 spaces if we took parking off one side of berry street um or 32 if we took it off both sides of berry street i'm cautious about taking it off both sides of berry street in there knowing that there are you know residents and businesses along berry street who do need that immediate parking space but i'm really intrigued by the idea of taking it off one side of berry street if we're going to do that the parking garage may be a little far to replace that parking but this lot might be just close enough to do it so i'd really like to explore that further you know and that maybe gives us the ability to do a protected multi-use lane along that one side of the street and really complete that link and so yes that would mean parking on this spot but it would also give us more of that pedestrian and bike friendly infrastructure that we've been really looking for so that's one option i would love to explore other potentials are potential if we did this is a green space a potential home for the farmers market a permanent home for the farmers market there or potentially if you took the whole lot could we think about putting i'm i'm not 100 supporting the idea of building a new rec center but maybe if we did end up going that route this is the spot for it um it is central walkable um and a city-owned property that needs to be used for the public good otherwise we forgo the revenue from the sale of the spot so those are some interesting ideas um another thing i've been thinking about is the fact that we because we have to send the money back to the feds we don't need to make this this if we were to sell the lot for a building we don't need to maximize our return on it we don't need to make this a primo building lot because we're never going to see that return so maybe we take the public good stuff from it maybe we put some restrictions on the deed and say we want to see it used for housing or whatever um and we get less money back on the sale but it means that the the piece of property serves our public interest better going forward maybe we try putting it out to bid without those parking spaces and see what happens um to see if there's interest out there in buying it without parking um i'm intrigued by this this design from the sustainable mont pelier coalition and i i so appreciate their work on it i'm really disconcerted by the idea of putting parking right up against the street um and when i think about other um other cities particularly barry where i work one of the things that really rubbed me the wrong way about burry all those parking lots right up against the street and not buildings up against the street um and so i personally rather see a building up against the street or a green space up against the street i do not want to put parking right up against the street if we can help it now of course there might be other decisions such as um you know making that trade-off in order to put that bike lane on barry street uh that would make me change my mind on that but my my strong preference would be to either face the street with a building or with a green space and not with a parking lot um you know and thinking about that that uh uh design competition and how folks had hoped to maybe someday in a a faraway future uh have the the shaw's move to the front of the lot there um it would be kind of sad if we ever got there to still have this be a parking lot so um those are some thoughts i want to make sure that i got everything i think i did um so generally my opinion is that let's take a month or two to think about our options make sure that we've we've looked at everything thoroughly as much as we can in a couple months um and then decide where to go from there thank you for bringing up all of the the other options i think that's um important to keep in mind that there are there are actually a lot of things that we could do with that space um so one hypothesis is that we could have some kind of emotion that would indefinitely postpone the sale uh and which you know could be taken up at some better point yes rosie sorry i just remembered one more thing which is that i was thinking about how over the next year we are going to have a real lack of parking downtown as we do this work on the parking garage um and you know a potential advantage is that can we maybe do a temporary parking lot here to alleviate some of that pain while we decide what to do and then um once that garage is built and we've we've eased that issue um that we then are able to move on to do something more exciting with the space that's a great question okay so i i would i mean i can't make a motion but one hypothesis is that we might indefinitely postpone on the sale of that property uh so that we can pursue further public input uh and take a holistic view of the needs in that space um yes donna did you have something well uh so it's framing emotion that's good yep and um one of the other things that i would just put out there is that uh i mean i've had lots of conversations about this site and um i know that there are a lot of interested parties in what happens there and so i would actually i think one path forward it would actually be to ask bill or city staff to convene a group of stakeholders including the public to work through the questions of what we should be doing on this site and i mean that in my mind that includes the mobular development corporation the the parks commission the conservation commission i mean if a council person wants to be involved in that this a sustainable mobular coalition the river conservancy uh as well as um if we wanted is it's a dewboys and king that's doing this the bery main no was dw thank you oh no the people doing the bery main study yeah that's different i was dw is a construction yes yeah right so um the people who are basically looking at the the connection uh what should be done in bery main as well as the connection of the bike path i think that's a concern that we should be including in this discussion as well um having said all that um can i just add one comment to that um just to be clear as far as what's driving this there is no active sale right now so we're not i mean we're not postponing something that we're in the midst of doing i think the the timing driver just so that everyone's clear is we've got a we've got a construction contract and right now they're on this side of the river but at some point they're going to come over to the other side of the river and start building what they've been told to build and so we need to give them different marching orders before they do that or else we're going to be undoing something that we do so and and then so and i'm just backing up from that and then if we're going to have it to change because because what's there is what's permitted and i'm sorry to interrupt if you have different language suggestions no i just so i would i mean i think what you're saying if that's what you folks want to do is fine i think just to be clear that there's no sale that needs to be stopped if any it would just be to try to to make whatever decisions we're going to make in time to you know in a timely manner to inform our contractor of any potential changes and what is that is that two months i you know we're guessing about two months and i say that because you know we're in november maybe you know at the outset three months but you have to back up if they we think they probably will be starting over there about may so if we're going to have to change change permits you've got to allow for that and something new unless we you know i'd have to talk to our dbw folks but what a temporary parking would look like but if there's going to be a new mode of some you know you have to have design designs you have to make sure that the turning radius matches and that the right surface underneath is all designed in the drainage and all those kind of things they've all that's all been reviewed by the state and by the drb and everything else so we have to allow the time to prep for an application for a change and in a design to give the contest you know we can't just tell them no okay do this there's there's a lot of lead time so one because we don't want to pay for them to sit around and wait for us to make up our mind either i i think it would be i mean i i like the idea of having a couple of months of discussion i i don't i don't mostly because i like to do things right like i don't want to drag it out very long but have enough time for you know for a good public process but um in my mind uh december is already gone and to be fair a lot of the public may not be available in december anyway and so if we can have uh january and february if we could at least that would be my goal i mean i know that might push it out a little bit but if we can have something by the end of february i think that would be uh reasonable um yes well just looking at the agenda format here that i guess i'm leaning towards a motion yeah directing the city manager to establish a process with a lot of stakeholders involved as you name and scheduling for addressing the questions and making recommendations so that we could spend the next month setting everything up and have some real thorough discussions in january and february is that a clear motion are you good are you good with that maybe no clear it's right there in the format of the thing is direct city manager to establish a process and a schedule for addressing questions and making any recommendations great great thank you and that is a motion that's a second okay further discussion yes so i understand that we have a few months but i mean supplies need to be purchased labor needs to be scheduled all of that and so that is is not something that they do like the day before or the week before i mean those orders have to be placed well in advance you know prices need to be locked in subcontractor you know all of those things so i'm just not sure how practical it is to sort of say like well we're just going to take a little time right now well i think that's why the motion said to establish the schedule because we need to we need to tie all those dates down okay that that will drive a lot of it because we don't we don't want to pay for something we're not going to do so we need to talk to experts about you know what what our options are okay further discussion okay uh all in favor please say aye opposed great thank you all i'm very excited about this process i think it's going to be very interesting and i'm going to go right from here into the discussion of old country club road that property bill do you want to take a minute sure for those interested in riverfront development don't leave because this is actually bigger the city recently purchased a property the the last remaining again i'm going to get up and if people can hear see me just recently purchased the last remaining residential property on old country club road which if you're not familiar where that is if you cross the pioneer street bridge you come left you're going down berry street into town you take a right and it's the dirt road that comes down eventually hits to a dead end city's bike path is coming down this road actually yeah and this was a residential property now there's with no other residents there we no longer have to maintain this as a public road which actually one of the reasons we purchased the property because of the cost of maintaining the road but we are also the property owner of all the riverfront property over the years right of waste with old country club road so it's it will already have a bike path it's already got access there's a few parking areas already established so one of the ideas is this is a huge open undeveloped area for river access which you know is not competing with downtown interests and i think tonight's conversation was simply uh how do we kick off a process to look at what can and can't happen there because this is a chance where you know there's no preconceived plan there's no you know there's nothing competing with it so what would people like to see what works best what doesn't work best we're not on a time frame we're way ahead of this what will be happening there in the next year is the bike path will be constructed and and and quite possibly that residential lot will be used as a staging area by the construction company but in but that gives us time to say all right what happens after when that's all done um so i think the council has been excited about this prospect we just closed on the property a month and a half ago and um and wanted to discuss how we would move this forward so again i know there's a lot of folks here that talked about river access and this is this is really a great opportunity um this at the risk of short changing some discussion this seems pretty obvious to me that we would roll this into the previous conversation in that um you know bill's going to be convening a group of stakeholders uh to figure out how to move forward and i think that's really what we should be doing here as well i mean what do we do with this site how do we want to um design it it's very exciting full of possibilities and we're going to need a lot of input on that and so i think as as we're setting up that the previous schedule and and process we can do the same with this and just to have everybody all excited oh Tampa expectations just a little bit i would point out that this is any flood plane and so anything we do cannot raise um the level of land up at all it's been actually looked at very carefully with the bike path project it's got act 250 permit so anything that's done would require act 250 amendment uh i think it's part of our project we have to remove invasive species so there's a lot of opportunity but it isn't necessarily a blank slate and but nonetheless it would have it still is open open river land that could be used Rosie um i would just it's probably a similar process but i would keep it separate from the other process because there's not a time limit on this and it's a somewhat different group of stakeholders yeah that's her and i think we'd be interested in those who are interested in working on this is it some of the same people or not um right oh feels like it might be a similar motion though to the previous one establish it we want to take some public oh yeah but any public i was ready to just jump right to a motion uh public comment come on up i don't really need to come up because i just want to say this is wonderful news if you would introduce yourself this is great news i'm delighted to hear this and i just want to support the work that went into making this happen and i'm sure we can figure out exactly how it pans out in the long run i would caution that i'm still looking for a canoe that i lost right about that spot so it's not great canoeing right there i'm still flowing down the river so i think this is a great idea and i support hi riccarda erickson and um i also think this is a great idea i'm really excited about it and i would actually love to see a similar group as you mentioned working on the moat lot visioning as with this and primarily to encourage a level of continuity with projects along the river and maybe even this is a group that works on other projects but so that there's a little more consistency from point a to point b and um somebody mentioned tonight not so much hopscotching and piecing together parts but to have a real flow no pun intended along the river of um space for people to use and so when they're on the multi-use path they're really seeing some consistency in design language all along the river super thank you further comments okay uh i think we actually i was just gonna say uh there may be a need for some ski trails and so i mean i know i've already sort of opened ski season quite early this year but i think that should be part of the conversation given the yeah well it's going to be right on the bike path there which could be great i'm not sure how it connects together yeah right uh okay look ready for motion i'm looking for a motion so to direct the city manager to establish a process and a schedule for addressing the questions for making a recommendation using the old country club road second further discussion all right all in favor please say aye aye opposed great super thank you okay moving on how are you doing team do we need a break are you okay i think we should keep moving okay my guess is that we are not going to be done by 10 oh sure you think that would be a great goal just putting that out there to the staff for the upcoming items would love to be done by 10 okay uh number one the i think we're up to the master plan and zoning fixes well mic will be quick okay the evening mic miller uh planning director so um this should be relatively quick because i just i'm here to kind of give some updates on two on your agenda but i'll actually just touch on a third issue which is supposed to come up next in two weeks um so tonight some updates on the zoning fixes the city plan and uh the official map so the planning commission had two major projects for 2018 um we were going to do the zoning fixes as you know we adopted the new zoning in january and shortly thereafter a couple of issues came up that we found and the more we used it the more we find little things many just little corrections that needed to be made and a couple of larger ones uh the two bigger ones were issues that we have um the slope rules are very difficult and prohibit a lot of development that otherwise shouldn't be an issue so we needed some fixes for that and landscaping rules were overly burdensome and so those two sections really needed to get fixed um staff put together a set of proposals they've gone to the planning commission and they've been working through that list and we're hoping on monday to have wrapped up the critical list and they have one more piece left so i do not have that list for you and i will hopefully get that to you after their meeting on the 10th um so the they've been reviewing those list of about a hundred changes uh they broke them into two sets the critical changes um that need to get adopted quickly which they'll get to you and i will at that time explain to you interim zoning and get those passed into effect relatively quickly what's your time on that we're hoping to get that to you for january and they'll be in effect great by the end of january because they're relatively quick to adopt um the second set of clarifications would go through the full adoption and just because the full adoption takes long that probably won't get to you until april just with the required hearings and notifications that go out so i just wanted to kind of get to you right now just to give you an update that's where the zoning fixes are you should expect a quick fix document to address slopes and landscaping in december and the full set of changes would go through the warrant hearings and get to you in april so but while that's getting adopted the zoning is getting adopted they can start working on the next set which is not only what you all have been very interested in and the public has been very interested in but the planning commission has also been very interested in which is the city plan update that was started uh this year as well it was a well they had well attended kickoff meeting in august followed by a lot of behind the seams work on the google drive and setting up a bunch of things since that time the planning commission for a million and one little reasons just missed a lot of meetings along so they had one in august one in september one in october one in november because of snow and they'll only have one in december because of where christmas falls so they just had a bad run of luck setting up their meetings and so they really haven't worked on the city plan but that's really where they want to start in january um and so that is their goal is to really put a lot of effort they have nothing else scheduled for being on their plate next year um sorry can i go back a topic um and thinking about the changes that we might be seeing in january um i mean i just want you to know that i um i have some worries about trying to make changes to the steep slopes zoning and i'm not opposed to um considering that but i want to make sure that whatever changes we make uh do you have some kind of environmental protections built into them i mean in my head it's it's something like uh you can build on a steep slope if it meets certain criteria that show that the detriment is minimized and or you know having some kind of an environmental engineer sign off on it that kind of thing um so the requirement right now says that if you are have slopes more than 30 you cannot develop on them period there is no exception there are no waivers there's no nothing and what we have are people who come in and have i need to put a culvert in to put in a driveway the culvert ditches on the sides of the roads are three to one slopes which are 30 slopes i can't put a culvert in to build my driveway that's it and so we have no way of working around that the rules are crystal clear black and white you can't do it and so what the rules now would say is any impact to slopes over 30 percent require engineering and will require a hearing okay and so we're not we're not just letting people go it's it really is the changes are just minor to the effect of taking out prohibition and saying you need an engineer and you need a hearing if you're going to impact 30 percent slopes great thank you we can talk more about that then i just wanted to get the early warning on that one thanks so the the really quick for the for the the city plan is to what you should expect is to hear a lot more in 2019 about the plan in the outreach you will be getting a lot more because they plan to have that as their primary focus there will be the adoption of this these zoning fixes but that really is going to probably be a minor piece it's something that they could take out a piece of their day it's not the zoning we went through last year it's it's not that all over again these are many many small corrections and a number of pieces that really just needed to be clarified or talked about so those were the two quick updates the official map was supposed to be on the next agenda but while i'm here while we're doing updates i thought i would just kind of go through that now because the next next one is pretty your next agenda is pretty busy too so i met earlier this summer with a conservation commission and a parks commission rep and we had a lot of discussion what we found was that what the parks community really bless you really what the parks commission was really looking looking for was a way to make their green print plan which is a specific document that had been developed in like 2011 they really wanted to make that official and give it some standing and it was adopted after the last master plan so it wasn't included in the last master plan they wanted it inserted in the zoning we couldn't do that but i really kind of misunderstood where they were trying to go with it they just wanted to make that document official and what they didn't realize was that in the end they could the council can just adopt that they really want to have the green print as the official parks plan for the city of Montpelier and we don't need to make an official map to do that and in fact the official map is not what they wanted to because they didn't want to take property the official map gives you the power to take property and that's not what they wanted to do they just wanted to make that the official plan so we informed them that they didn't need to go through this uh they didn't need to go through the planning commission so you should expect to hear from the parks commission on a review and adoption of the green print not dissimilar to what we did to adopt the stormwater master plan the edsp the complete streets plan these are all plans that we develop that we kind of want to put our stamp on that says that's our official plan going forward the green print should go through that same process we should review it and see if it's still meet what our goals and objectives are and if it is then we can get that adopted and they can start moving forward on implementing it in the way they want which is to go to various property owners and say hey your property is identified on the green print we'd really love to see if you're interested in selling it to us and by the way this document has been blessed by city council so um so the expectation there is you'll probably hear from the parks commission and hopefully i don't know what their timeline is for that but we'd probably reach out to them and and remind them that that was something they were going to follow up on questions awesome yes donna you you mentioned there was going to be some follow-up to the meetings dealing with the city plan they had the pavilion of all the committees has there been anything written about that meeting or any summation we compiled all the notes all the things that had been written down i think barb conre was the the kind of the scribe up on the state we've transcribed all of those notes and we've started to pull things together the easiest place where this is going to start to come together is when we start to get the the google driver putting together and start to make that give it a public face to it because i hope is we'll start being able to collect from each committee their their individual pieces and having a place where people can see what's going on and then the planning commission will start to pull those pieces into documents that we can put on the drive and try to put all that together elements of that then will become part of the city plan yes okay yep don't want to lose it no we definitely don't want to okay for other questions okay oh yeah please go ahead i was just wondering about the critical changes when they go to the council will that it's saying it's not going to have the full review process will it still have a public hearing process yes certainly thank you for the for the interim interim there's two different processes is one for interim zoning and one for the full hearing might explain the difference between the two thank you for that clarification and i'm sorry would you mind repeating your name thank you so you want me to explain that just quick okay yeah so the interim zoning will have a process full full zoning adoption has a public hearing by the planning commission and then there's 30 day time windows and then the city council has one or two it's always confusing because they make them slightly different between the adoption of a plan and adoption of regulations but i believe two hearings you would have in an interim um you would go through and have a meeting and then you'd have one hearing on it and the reason why the shorter window is allowed is because it's it is an interim which means it's a temporary so all of those temporary changes would also be included in this permanent update that's going through the full process so usually go through you make an interim change because boy we've got to fix these rules because it's making a mess of the zoning process so we'll make an interim fix while we go through the permanent adoption so the january um proposals will be for interim for the interim yeah just to make those changes to the to the slope rules and to the landscaping rules in the first meeting we would have would be to discuss do you want to adopt them and you may decide we're willing to adopt the landscaping but not the slopes because i don't think the slopes are ready we want that to go through a full process whatever that's that's what the first meeting is in the second meeting would be basically like a first reading in the second reading type okay but there will be public plenty of public comment yeah definitely there's public comment for the interim but there's a lot of public comment for the full full adoption as you guys have experienced okay thank you great okay any further questions okay thank you very much okay next up is the budget discussion well Todd's setting up i'll just uh teed this up uh we had a discussion with you folks uh saying that you wanted to be looped in early in the budget process so we have a not hand um we don't have our full budget compilation yet we had a preliminary meeting yesterday our full team effort is next week and we'll be really putting the the pen to paper and and all that but what i think i hope Todd has come up with is is uh basically it outlined the four major categories of our budget what what doing same thing next year looks you know this year to next year looks like and then what on the table for possible changes the things that you've suggested things that others have suggested and it's really just to give you a chance to have an early way in about what's important or if you want to prioritize things these are a lot of the stuff that stuff you've heard before either from staff or from yourselves but anyway i'll turn it over to Todd yeah so this wasn't an attachment this was not an attachment this is a working process that has uh that bill has not even had the privilege of seeing this sometimes we get it in a separate evening i wonder yeah no i haven't even seen this this has uh been a working process and we've we've discussed it and there is no decision making that needs to happen tonight so keep in mind that this is the end of the evening i realize that i'm not putting anyone on the spot um and i will send distribute copies to everybody what i am trying to present to you here is just a baseline um kind of budget discussion preliminary budget discussion before we have a our final um sit down with the permanent heads will work on this for a couple of days and go through and hash out um different items but essentially what we're looking at here is the first highlighted item which is the core government services here um that is essentially maintaining a baseline no let's not do anything make any changes let's just continue our operations in the next year we're looking at plus or minus you know just a little over three hundred thousand dollars of an increase that is you know increases for health insurance that's increases for wages for contractual union contract issues that's presuming you know a two percent increase for personnel plan employees those types of baseline fundamentals um what that number does not include is new requests so what i have tried to do on the right hand side is just give to you an idea and a scope of what we're looking at for new items um and can everyone see that okay i'm also i'm just 25 part nine now in my eyesight seems to have gotten exponentially worse so um in addition to you know maintaining our baseline what we're looking at for various requests and requests that we've discussed here at the council level um our items that enhance our existing services adding a new police officer there's been discussion of a facilities manager there's discussion of an energy manager um i put an asterix next to facility and energy manager because there seems to be some synergy between those two positions potentially and maybe we have an opportunity to uh to merge that into one um there's a request for an additional part staff person there's also a request for a tree staff person that would be dedicated more to the emerald ash borough problem um going forward there's been discussion of fuel alternatives and seeking out um different options for uh fleet fuels so at present we don't have a really good option but there is a renewable diesel option that is coming to the market and we're not going to say it's available to us now but in f y 20 it's a it's a real possibility so there would be potentially some premium but that is a developing story um we also have to look at our network security issues our data storage i think we've all come to the realization me begrudgingly at least that um cloud-based solutions for a lot of our data is becoming more and more of a necessity individually maintaining networks and servers and the infrastructure cost that goes along with that comes at cost both in maintaining the equipment and the staff to and contractual obligations to maintain it in warranty services so that's you know a potentially wide open item that could you know really really jump the cost dramatically but there are some offsets as well there's also data requirements that are statutory in nature police department for instance um you know as we're currently using uh cursor video cameras and and those that video data needs to be backed up currently we do some of that onsite and some of the offsite but moving more of that to a cloud based solution is something that we should be addressing in f y 20 new building maintenance there's going to be some maintenance requirements associated with buildings such as one taylor street we're in the process of building it now but setting creating a reserve or creating some sort of set aside for the future repairs and maintenance that need to happen on those buildings i mentioned crew or cameras body cameras is kind of a policy issue that's been discussed and i know tony was here recently i'm talking about that that's a discussion item that we're going to be going through as well is there sorry yeah is there a request right now to upgrade cruiser cams as well as okay so it's just about body cams it's just the storage piece it's the storage component of that yep um and then from the city manager's office and i think council is expressing interest in doing a citizen survey as well um some cost in hiring that out so those are some of the um items that we'll be discussing next week and what i'm looking not so much for answers from council this evening but um just to get feedback if you have any that is going to direct our conversations um as we go through this because we don't want to miss something that's a major concern for you can you tell us that three hundred thousand dollar baseline change what is that in a percent increase that is just about three percent depending on how you play the grand list it's over here i've um indicated that you know one for discussion purposes at least and rounding purposes one percent is about one cent which equals about a hundred thousand dollars just for for round uh numbers uh debt and capital projects um we have planned on increasing uh the capital projects budget by about fifty thousand dollars uh this year um that is always i've got asterix here as well that number fluctuates a little bit because if we fund a capital project with that once that final debt is issued that offsets the amount that's available for capital projects some of the big items that are on the list for this year are um street lights there's been an ongoing um need to upgrade some of the street lights downtown into led but there's wiring that goes along with that which is a fairly significant project portions of the roof of this building um are if not an immediate need in the very near term um there's need for replacement there uh fire equipment continues to be on the radar every single year and the reason it's on the radar every year is because it's so expensive um so even if we're not purchasing anything we need to be talking and planning for uh future purchases because you know a new tower truck might be eight hundred thousand dollars um energy improvements uh kind of goes along with energy manager facility manager and how much do we want to dedicate to weatherization of city owned buildings and improving the energy uh efficiency of of each building that we have whether it be lights or heating supplies or uh water and sewer moving down and bill feel free to cut in at any time uh if you if i have miscategorized anything um memberships that we currently have you know we are members of vlct i think we've uh get a tremendous value for our membership there we also vlct also provides our property and liability insurance and workers compensation insurance um so and they have been a great partner that's money well spent uh central Vermont regional planning commission um we use tremendously for gis and mapping and planning related resources uh outside entities are things that are on or included in our budget that we raise essentially raise money for but we don't necessarily have direct control over them as agencies so these are the various agencies within that subset um that are autonomous to our operation that not under direct uh city council control but that we raise funding for i thought our green mountain transit was like 40 000 so green mountain transit has there's a uh per capita uh component of 30 ish and then 40 for the circulator service or just the circulator that's yeah okay and the cvpsa i know that that's historically been included in the budget but net with the impending resignation of the executive director i i guess and i missed the last meeting so i was not not feeling well but that it you don't have a formal request so this is where we're at right now so we're anticipating things that have been in the budget and just trying to break out for you folks the buckets that they kind of go in that we think about them as the request comes from these agency including right i guess it's just it would i mean if this is being sort of included in that there's been no formal request it doesn't seem as though so to your to your point actually though the um that that 28 000 that's included there is not included in this baseline it is broken out separately okay um so if that were to go away it would be a direct reduction if it were to increase it would be a direct increase to the overall um package i just want to be clear that i would not support paying that right now community enhancements are uh you know mostly Montpelier alive and those related fundamental um things that we participate in you know the 4th of july celebration the welcome legislators dinner um holiday lights we make a contribution each year to the uss Montpelier to help assist in the housing costs for this for the sailors when they come to visit for the 4th of july um so that's kind of those small but just to be clear the top line comes from the downtown improvement district tax so it's it's that is a separate tax and that's a dirt essentially a direct pass through um and then we get into policies and relationships and things that council has taken um a stance on uh in years past um and i'm presuming will continue to do so uh the Montpelier Development Corp there was uh for economic development within town there was a a commitment for a hundred thousand dollars a year the Montpelier Community Fund uh slightly lower last year because we had some changes in one of the underlying recipients but has historically been a hundred twenty thousand dollars uh meek in years past has been five thousand i'm holding the line on that their request primarily has been not so much in the operating expenses but in in moving forward with an energy manager type position that could see some of these projects through uh the housing trust fund again last two years has been at or last year was at sixty thousand i'm holding that at sixty but the request was four hundred and fifty thousand and i think that happened a couple months ago um so that would be a projected increase of ninety thousand dollars uh there was recently a request for from art synergy and paul gamble at a prior meeting uh for fifty thousand dollars in funding for our related projects in the downtown uh invasive invasive species uh that is um of the plant nature so poison ivy and goats and those types of uh treatments and then invasive insects and this would be in addition to uh staffing for treatment of ash borers and and the related um operating side of that uh that gives you a very quick synopsis what i wanted to do as well though was kind of come back here um and when i was when i met with you about a month ago um we had gone through and a person by person and just made a bulleted list of you know what's important to you um before as we start this this process and all i did here was just kind of color code things that um were mentioned by multiple people so i don't need to belabor this and i will send this to you in a summary but you know energy and facility manager came up housing trust fund came up more than once police officer came up more than once ash borer came up more than once um so those are the kind of the highlights that i'm looking at going into our discussions uh as it as a management group and again i'm just looking to get feedback from any of you if you have it with regard to are we going off the rails here going in the wrong direction or is there anything you want to um was that at the meeting that i missed may have been okay no actually no you weren't you weren't uh because you're on the bottom here wait hold on hold on oh so you had brought up us the amount whether we could oh you're right yep i remember someone in house to um to address the cost of studies and then clearly identifying the outcomes thank you and ash borer was also on your list i get one sort of question that i have i know uh chief came and talked sort of generally about body cams i know state police are also trying to figure out what that would look like it's certainly something you know i am in favor of but i'm wondering if it seems realistic that that if we were to allocate those funds for this year if all of those sort of issues would be able to be addressed in this this fiscal year this upcoming fiscal year or if that's something where you know we engage in the policy planning process because that takes a long time given the myriad of concerns um and i was just curious if there had been yeah so i think you know tony you know that that's a decision obviously for counsel and for police um it's a no i we haven't you know i have some estimates of what it would cost right you know initial investment in body cams six thousand dollars for discussion purposes uh annual fees for storage of all that data after you get it fifteen thousand so you know we're right about it's a twenty thousand dollar year commitment but beyond that you know it really is policy and all the other issues that go along with having that that data um that is at the bigger return and then also you know here we are it's november 28th is it realistic that we're going to want to do it in you know before that's a conversation we're having to 20 so those are the types of like we said we we haven't made any decisions either this is kind of the you know we've consolidated a lot of the information and the requests that we're about to go into our you know closed door locked knock down drag out meeting to decide all this stuff but we wanted to run the decisions we're going to be looking at to get um feedback from any of you as we and i mean i know i know this is always a little strange but to me and i know that we as a council right now can't find the next council into things but you know i would i would certainly i am in favor of you know mpd adopting body cams as a sort of standard practice but you know the policy planning and coordination piece of that needs to be not just with mpd but it's on a much larger scale especially since the legislature may be taking the issue up and so i i am supportive of that although it strikes me as someone who's you know sort of been doing law enforcement policy development over the years that that's something that's going to happen in in a very quick fashion and so i i wonder if it might make sense for us to um as a council if everyone is willing to commit to that like you know sort of adding that to the next fiscal year's budget plan rather than i mean earmarking funds now and then not using sure that um and i know that you can't sort of marry the next council to that but it just seems like there are other ways that we could be using some of those dollars now rather than just as a as a placeholder and allocating them absolutely um and that's those are the types of discussions that we'll have in our and some of those newer positions like a facilities manager and things like that like really drilling down with city staff what that job description would look like rather than sort of you know allocating something then realizing it's not enough money that we've allocated to get the the person with the skills that we need you know and so maybe prioritizing those things you know in terms of what is feasible right now right we could hire a police officer right now all of the things exist for the training you know the academy attendance all of that stuff um the emerald ash borer you know we have the resources to tackle all of that and and then sort of spend the next year making sure that we're putting plans in place to do the these other things that are really important things but right can you go back to that uh the spreadsheet uh with the the different categories okay um so i there are some things on this list that uh i really want to push for and there are some things that i want but don't cost very much and so like for example like i love the goats right like but that's two thousand four four thousand dollars like that's not very much money um so i'm gonna leave that on side so but the things that that are rather big that i want to push for i just want to tell you like i have a list of priorities for like things if i had to choose an order for things on this list what would my the my priorities be number one is the police officer the extra police officer number two is some kind of a combined facilities director and sustainability coordinator um number three is taking care of money for the emerald ash borer which i think maybe that i don't know how the parks fits in for that for me but emerald ash borer is right up there um number four for me is the housing trust fund and number five is art synergy money there we go i challenge you all do you have a priorities list i would agree for me the police officer is probably one of the highest priorities i mean you've got officers who are working a lot right now um yeah having oh sorry um and and i guess the the facilities manager piece is really important to me but i want to make sure that we actually put together a comprehensive job description and make sure that our salary you know our salary matches like what we're looking for because i don't want to set this position up for failure because i think it is an integral part of how we move forward um i also agree with the emerald ash borer um and the art synergy plan i'm assuming that's the $50,000 ask um yeah that's on my list too so i don't think our list or two for our part great i also want to uh echo what you were saying ashley about the um we just figured it out right right before sorry before before we get too much further and then i do want to hear other people um i i also have hesitations about the body camps for this fiscal year like i think that is a worthwhile goal but let's do some more research sure that's that's where i'm at with the i think tony's in the of the same opinion okay sorry other though other thoughts so i i guess this is a little late in a like this is we're almost at 10 o'clock at night and the staff haven't done their work yet so i don't want to say this is my absolute priority um and i don't know that that's appropriate right now this way um but one of the things i did want to point out on that list that we kind of assume is this $1,000 for the USS Montpelier for their hotel rooms for the crew to come and it's fine but i'm also not sure that i would spend that on them rather than spending it on say the teen center or some of the other you know um opiate addiction work or you know there's there's we have to make choices every time we decide to spend money here and i don't know that that one's a priority for me so very good thousand dollars okay and in all fairness the the bfw does support the ball yeah i actually had a discussion with bill about this all right perfect uh done there is a committee very much involved in that group so i think you would need to hear from this senior group of our community that's involved with that i'm really relieved that you're willing to put the body cams off i think that's a huge discussion that'll be put off for many many years uh just uh it's terrible uh for us to leap there just i mean if tony's there too all the issues the policy issues let alone the mindset it just drives one thing i don't support uh but within this there are a couple of things of which like we can talk about housing and i assume that if we're going to put facility manager just like housing that will get numbers from the staff and they will tell us what they need and what the cost will be so it'll be appropriate you know for what you want to do uh the housing has given us a number the arts have i really appreciate that i don't know we really have a number for the police officer i mean i want that position but i don't think we have a number yet so that would be good to see yeah yeah okay well i didn't see one up there no we yeah i don't but whereas the housing so yeah i and honestly i purposely didn't um assign specific numbers or costs to positions i mean i have some very reasonably good rough ideas um but at the same time i also don't want to be in a position where i scare everybody out of the room because i throw a number at every single position that's proposed before we've even made the decision so i think if you're if the consensus is that you know police officer is important to the bulk of this council then that's something that we're going to firm up well i don't know that everyone i didn't see it doubled in your list but i'm really interested the one thing i'd add here is park staff we have two people uh one who has so much comp time he doesn't have to work for months on end if he doesn't want to um and rightfully so because they've been so overworked that we really need a third person in our parks it's just and they double dip with their job with the tree board so in both of those sort of arenas parks and trees we need a third full-time staff but i'd like to see some numbers on that if you're going to look at facility and police officer costs and they are that isn't there as well staff tree staff sorry very pure i call i want to see some costs that's all yep yep absolutely yeah other thoughts i'd like to just see overtime numbers by department okay i would have a credit but um just the thought as we're looking at the i know it's good for our buck um i can't support uh vlct we're spending one dollar lobbying against minimum wage or paid family leave the state house this year using taxpayer dollars to do that so i think maybe that's just a message to back to the board there that we'd like to see their position on that yes i would anyways before i approve anything there um and i think i'm with ashley um between paco quitting after the last meeting and having another member of that board come up and say would you put a set of our misery i felt guilty when they came in here and did all this work you know they suffered over this work um and i don't feel like they got clear direction on what to do next so i'm inclined not to appropriate that money without giving them clear direction if you want you don't have to i don't think i have much to add i think i was captured pretty well uh in your your list i had two items and those are those are still my priorities i think and i i um am uh certainly very interested in all the other things on the list but i don't know that i've made uh a mayor uh suggested prioritized order a little bit of the other ones so yeah i can safely say i've hit 100 of their requests of at least one yes absolutely yes so there you go it's always always satisfied thank you anything you want to if not that's fine i think it uh the list captures my uh what i i mentioned three priorities uh housing trust fund which i would say is number one um police officer and emerald ash borer um it uh i could make may wind up needing to use myself on the issue of the emerald ash borer and and staffing for that um i'll have to think about that a little more why would you refuse yourself for that because my son just got hired as the arborist that's that makes sense part-time arborist yeah there we go and get your further thoughts another time unless you want to add anything neither one of us is supporting i guess i want to see some numbers and i want to see what the staff want what the staff are willing to fight for before making a call okay well i think what we we just want to make sure that there was nothing that was you don't want that's on the list or where the high points are i think what you'd help i'll just say and i it's no surprise that when we total up even the mayor's list with with the things that we're going to be probably higher than what you had all indicated was your level of of tolerance but at least it gives us a place to start and so while you know so i think you want to be thinking about at what level do you support these priorities if if we have to make tough decisions because you know and i guess that leads me to how what you want to see from us you know we talked about this a little bit in terms of you know years past we've had a hard target this year you know we opted not to do that in lieu of this process and so i think we'll be happy to put together a detailed operating budget detailed numbers on these kind of things and just leave these open and then you can work down to where you want to get or we can we can do it in increments of this is what you know but again you know we're prioritizing our own two versus uh their own versus what the council wants so i mean i i think the next step is just to see what the numbers are associated with all these things and then i'm not sure that that's much different than what we talked about sorry i'm starting to like lose it no i got it so it's like yeah unlike when the staff positions are only other than going for a time are hard to negotiate but how much goes into housing how much goes to be hard we could start increasing those in a more smaller level than requested but these have been present so i think that's important you see it great one final item of business um cip we exchanged emails a little bit is for at least for ann glenn and donna monday still good for everybody and five or five thirty do you have a preference and i'm gonna vote for five sure and i will send an invitation out in the morning i'll just make a request that i don't mean to single you out but there are people out watching these meetings who don't know what things like cip means so i just want to encourage all of us to remember to say what we're talking about absolutely um we take those things for granted sometimes the cip is the capital improvement plan and it is the committee uh that will be meeting on monday we'll be going through to look at the f y twenty uh initial proposals for infrastructure improvements to streets paving sidewalks and building repairs and maintenance so it's a fairly significant and sorry equipment right and equipment yes the big dollars okay thank you just assuming we're having conversations with bethany church sir about the warm shelter i know there were a number of calls that went out both from the police department and the fire department last year so i think this is a really important service that they offer our community i'm sure it saved lives i just want to make sure we're doing what we can to support those guys okay and donna sorry i may have just said December 5th monday december 3rd monday the 3rd at 5 p.m cip capital improvement plan meeting great thank you thank you okay amendments to the sprinkler ordinance what do you think it can read are we okay team well we've got to do two readings of it so i think we could go ahead and get one of those readings done tonight thank you're right um i can do you want yeah go ahead um so as you know we made a bunch of significant changes to the um sprinkler ordinance uh last winter spring um and uh glenn and i serve on the building appeal committee that is basically known as the sprinkler variance committee where we hear the request for variance from the ordinance and um it came to the attention of the committee that one of the weird things that happened as a result of our changes is that um under effectively under the um zoning and um under under the zoning ordinance uh and the sprinkler ordinance um let's see how to put this um we effectively treat a uh a duplex as a single family home under the the new zoning um and the state requires that you are allowed to add an auxiliary dwelling unit under a single family home um so effectively we treat triplexes as if they are single family homes um in both the sprinkler ordinance and in the the zoning um and then once you get up to uh four units or more then you really consider in a multifamily building um so the way that this ended up working was that um there were exceptions um and uh two requirements for sprinklers if you had up to three units because we consider you a single family home and there were exceptions uh above four unit no above five units um if you met the state level requirements to have direct exits to the exterior um but there was if you went from a um a three unit two or four unit you would be required to have a sprinkler added and there wasn't really any way for us to um there wasn't an exception um so the staff suggested a change um the wording change that would allow you to um go through that and uh that's we're proposing so I'm sorry that I've not articulated it very well it is 10-05 but I did in writing so hopefully you read the memo and I will um attempt to articulate it better at the second uh hearing and Bob you're okay oh yes so we're going to officially open the public hearing on these uh amendments uh and Bob you're okay with these changes okay they came from came from us yeah Chris actually came up with the wording change Chris Lumber yeah and I know how concerned you all are about safety so that's very comforting uh well if we have to have it then I agree with the change fair enough yep yep by the way I hear you don't agree with the initial change no I I remember okay so um comments from either the council or the public council the public going once going twice okay I'm going to close the public hearing on that uh and we'll set the second hearing for the next meeting yes while we're on this topic just uh flag another issue I mean I suppose we could amend this as a second reading but I think that wouldn't be appropriate but um came up in light of the parking garage discussion which was that our ordinance requires all new buildings to be sprinkled and the state ordinances for park for sing freestanding open air concrete parking structures uh requires certain standpipes but doesn't require the this full dry sprinkler system and um it's about four hundred thousand dollars in project cost which isn't we don't it isn't necessarily that much of a benefit to public safety I mean obviously if it was a safe true safety issue we would be more concerned and whether it was us or any private person building a building of this type to spend money that isn't getting the value for um you know that makes sense so we propose that we I mean one choice as we go and seek a variance through the committee but what's you know the real basis for that under our ordinance and the second would be to simply amend the ordinance for structures like this and so like I said we could do it as an amendment at second reading I think that's not necessarily in keeping with the spirit of the process of having two meetings you know where this hasn't been worn so I'd recommend that if people are interested in taking that out that at the next meeting we do a first reading on that one and and Bob how do you feel about such a proposal obviously I like sprinklers in every building but you know there's some you know there's some common sense in an open-air freestanding parking garage great yeah okay Rosie I would suggest that the ordinance variance process does really allow for a city to make the argument that they've taken x additional steps to protect public safety and therefore I like how we structured the variance process to put the onus on the developer to prove that they've done other things that will protect public safety so my inclination would be to just let it go through the process although I'm there's three members of the committee and two of us are city councilors and so that seems a little yeah I mean I think conflicted and I don't know how we would deal with that properly but I think you know I'm we talked about both options and I think we felt it was more straightforward and honest to just say here's you know this is the way it is and and you know it's it's not out of the realm of possibility someone in the future could build another one of these structures somewhere a private person and again why I like the chief I strongly favor sprinklers and in the investment in sprinklers for safety but but you know the the cost versus the the benefit in these particular cases where they're not occupied you know I mean it seems you know personally that we've we've backed off on the residential sprinkler requirements and those kind of things that insist on them in a parking garage seemed silly so that's not right and no people you know so I think it's just more straightforward to say here's our intent here's what we're going to do and and that anyone in the future would not have to go through the appeal process but I think we should be upfront about it Donna would you be proposing the same language that's in the state rules yes oh yeah no yeah absolutely we couldn't we can't we can't be less restrictive in the state anyway but I think we would probably just say parking structures would follow the state code and that's what and then refer to it and we haven't actually dragged a good way to go yeah we make an amendment tonight no I wouldn't wait on that I think we should propose it and put on the agenda and let it be clear that's what we're doing okay is we would like I would like an opportunity to add some different some more wording to that also if it wasn't sprinkle would have protection stairwells things like that okay is there any other opinions about which direction alarms well but if we made a change it would also be posted and maybe would that not get the same attention between now and then versus waiting until you know that's your call I it doesn't get posted until the Friday that our agenda gets posted yeah I get it I guess I'm just subject I'm conscious of some of the comments and and things that we've received about the parking process the parking structure process and I think if however well intended if we were to you know we had an argument I think warned about changing two and three unit buildings and suddenly we amended it to include the parking garage I think it would be could be construed inappropriately as we were trying to slide something through and I think we ought to just be straightforward and put on the agenda that's what we're talking about and I think it's more public notice to put it in and then well then we'll still have public notice and I think that's good we should have more public notice it'll it'll be an ordinance change so it would be two public hearings once we make the notice so we caught it in time we could have added it to this but we didn't just how is that okay yeah that sounds okay okay great so we'll go ahead with that plan yes and I make just one more observation as I was going back through the language of the sprinkler ordinance I was realizing that one policy decision that we may we we made without really thinking about it which is an okay policy decision potentially but I just wanted to draw our attention to it is that in our rush to earn our desire to allow for more units to be added to existing buildings without throwing up additional burdens we did basically allow assuming you weren't expanding the building of the footprint by more than I believe 10 percent or a thousand square 50 percent 15 percent 50 there was anyway there was there is a small addition that you were allowed to make without having to add a sprinkler for somebody who owned a multi-unit building an existing apartment building say of two units or you know or two two bedroom units there is nothing in the state law or our ordinance that would prohibit them from breaking that up into much smaller units without adding sprinklers and right now we haven't really seen that as a problem happening but I could foresee an instance where you know you have a landlord who decides that they're going to make a quick buck by breaking these up into really tiny units and in old building without sprinklers where we haven't been able to kind of come in and add some of these additional life safety requirements you could have a bad situation where people are you know in an unsafe apartment basically that aren't protected so we kind of we decided that it was more important to be able to add additional units but that is a decision we made and so I just want to make sure we all know that and it's just kind of on our radar is something to think about if we do see you know there's suddenly a lot of landlords trying to squeeze more units in or something um that could be a problem so thank you okay well I've already closed the public hearing on this ordinance and we do we need to vote to set the next do okay well is there a motion to set the second reading for the next meeting for the discussion one favor if you say aye pose great what can I have one more yeah you made me wait to last so I know right yeah and I just want to remind people of Monday nights um we had a fire at five state street on Monday night and that building is standing today and there's people living in it and working in it because of the sprinkler system that was that building we all know there's only one you can only see the front of that building you can't even get to the back of that building it's surrounded by buildings and this fire was in a fourth floor apartment in the back corner it would have been extremely difficult to get to that fire extremely difficult and extremely dangerous to the firefighters if that fire had if it had not been for the sprinkler system we um we calculated um based on the amount of time the sprinkler ran and the size of the head that probably 450 to 500 gallons of water flowed to the building caused a little bit of damage but if that had not been sprinkled that probably would not be here today that maybe some of the adjacent buildings could be adjacent buildings up there were people sleeping in that building when the fire started um the birds yeah the birds want to have made it but it's the importance of sprinklers you know that you know that that's a very valuable building that's still here today and occupied because oh it wasn't because of me or the fellas next door it was because of the sprinkler system the fire we got there in under two minutes and the fire was out when we got there well and if we need to be having any further conversation about like retrofitting buildings i mean that's that's kind of a scary i mean that's that's the policy decision we've made is that we wanted people to be able to add to existing buildings add units we wanted more housing units and so we took away a lot of those requirements to sprinkle in an existing building yeah it was a policy decision we made you know but it's true i'm going to continue to talk about including single-family homes including single-family homes because as we talked about 85 percent we had in summerville indiana today a family of six mom and dad and four children lost their lives in their home it burned and they lost their lives that was this morning it happens every day and we we need to continue to think about that thank you thank you okay council reports uh who would like to start sure um jump in around i would just like to remind everyone who is listening or watching or however you are participating in this meeting um that there are resources uh for addiction support and recovery here in our community and our surrounding communities that are critical lifesaving things um we've had a number of overdose deaths in the recent weeks uh here in montpelier and the berry area uh and i would encourage anyone who is uh dealing with any sort of substance use or abuse issues to um reach out to community supports we have a number of them available law enforcement actually and montpelier police department here uh offers um rides to anyone who is willing to or are ready to go to treatment they will take you there no questions asked um there are also lots of service providers here in the montpelier and berry area their door is always open the turning point center is a great resource and i would just uh encourage anyone watching this who knows anyone to to sort of pass that on uh because there have been an alarming number of deaths recently uh and it is entirely preventable thank you who else would like to go i i'll say something um the other night uh over at the berry granite museum there was a great event uh for people to come over and see the uh finished product of the series sculpture that's going up on the uh state house um there was a good turnout the artists were there i thought it was a great uh uh celebration of uh of public art and the whole public process of the artist uh uh being they're doing the work and interacting with the public as uh as as he was chipping away at the mahogany was a great thing for the public um maybe 10 or 15 years ago uh uh my wife and i had jerry williams who made the clay model for this do uh do a bronze of his previous uh iteration of that uh sculpture and so we brought that with us and so if you've seen any of my facebook page photos we'll see you'll see a picture of jerry with the clay model that he made which is about four feet tall and uh and the the bronze that he was reunited with and i think that if people don't know about it Friday morning it's going up on top of the of the dome i'm i'm not going to be able to be there but people should uh try to make time to be there very friday morning it's friday at noon it's being hoisted friday at noon and i was gonna say it's like 10 30 that people can see it before it gets lifted yeah um so i wanted to let you all know that i have decided not to run for reelection in march um so i'm gonna have my one term and i've uh feel like i've put my all in for one term but um i can't continue to to do it at this level and i feel that even at this level i'm just constantly in awe of donna and your ability to go to every meeting and participate so much and glenn your um your ability to listen to constituents and interact with constituents i just am constantly amazed by the level of work that my fellow counselors put in um and feel like i can't continue to do that um and still uh give to the rest of the parts of my life so um i've learned so much from the staff and from the fellow counselors and i don't want to waste that so i um i'm hoping to be able to serve on a committee or something going forward so that i don't uh don't disappear from um montpelier uh civic life but um i wanted to give folks plenty of notice um so that anyone who's thinking about running in district one uh will have time to think it through and i would be so happy to talk to anybody about what it's been like and uh what the commitment is um and to help you through that thought process and deciding if this is something that you can do i will miss you yeah i'm wow i know so just before we go any further oh my gosh rosie i am so grateful for all of your energy and time that you've been putting into being the best counselor that you can be because it really shows and uh whoever you know runs in your place uh these big shoes i mean i think that goes without saying um but we're just so grateful thanks for great questions and great thinking and i told bill i'm happy to continue sending annoying questions but please do please do we gotta be on the ordinance committee woman i think you've gotta be yeah i guess it's me um i am strongly tempted to say that i've just decided to uh talk rosie out of quitting um you got time yeah but i don't know that sounded like a pretty well considered decision and i don't want to to um disrespect that but uh i would challenge anyone considering running to try to do it as well as you have um and i would totally open it up to the public anyone who would like to try it persuade rosie to uh i i would encourage that um and i will be at baguitos tomorrow morning 8 30 to 9 30 if you want to talk about that or anything else thank you i know i haven't okay i've gotten comments from constituents concerned about streetlights and at one point we talked about a committee because there had been a committee that eliminated a lot of excess lights but maybe we've gotten it too dark in some places so i'd like to bring that back up and also a couple emails about deer and deer yards and there's a committee that didi who was here march is leading dealing about montpellier deer and then there's the commissioner of wildlife of a porter who wants montpellier to allow hunting for deer inside the city limits so i think we need to become part of this conversation so i'd like to put it out there as a future agenda item uh so one thought about the street lighting um if we want to get the committee back together that's certainly a possibility i do know that we will be considering um it's on the budget list to do the l leds downtown which would make a big difference um so you know we well we haven't got that many most of the complaints we've received have been about downtown and there's a couple of reasons state street outer state street and we removed lights out there yeah sidewalks people who use sidewalks a lot yeah and berry well maybe you know it's just one light maybe we can pop it back so i mean nation contact us so i had hesitated about getting the committee back together because there was this proposal that was um on the table right um so what we should talk about what's the best talk to staff but yeah let's i have constituents i have more than one that yeah i mean open to either i've also mentioned crosswalks particularly are not that well and it's been on front porch forum a number of times in the last few weeks so it's so dark so dark and the other thing i'm just really excited about potential of more green space downtown thank you for considering it free uh so i just have one uh thing to add which is that some time ago as we were considering um the charter change um regarding sustainability and we ended up narrowing it to single use plastics part of that discussion was also around energy efficiency and just want to update you that i'm continuing to have conversations and doing with our lawyer and doing some research as to what might be necessary to have some level of energy efficiency ordinances implemented and so just want to put that back on the radar that we may be having that discussion again in the near future so hope to have more information to you all about that soon but not yet so that's it for me city clerk um real quick speaking of the charter changes um speaking of the charter changes the city clerk's office has started to uh take an active role in uh trying to make sure that the legislature hears the voices of the citizens of Montpelier on the two charter changes that we uh we voted to enact on November 6th um so i will be reaching out to all of you to ask for help thank you uh just a couple very quick things one uh just to follow up on what Ashley said um there was a rash of uh break-ins in downtown over the last week or so there's a lot of talk about that in businesses in some homes um and while that person has not been apprehended by us they may have been apprehended by another agency for a different cause but there's a strong suspect and my main point is it was directly tied into substance abuse and addiction and um heavy issues so um we have our budget what we call budget congress next week so that is if you hear us referring to that that's just the staff gets in a room for a couple of days and that's all we do for a couple of days until we come up with a number so or numbers and one thing I just want to mention quickly we've come up and we've we've we're talking about this but you know we had a somewhat of an extensive goals or a strategic planning process uh this past year that I think most people liked and we talked some about doing it again next year and possibly also at least including some members of other committees or at least tying it into the master planning process somehow and I you know I know we're talking about something after the date of which at least one council member will not be a member but it um but there will be a majority of you returning assuming good health and um to the extent that we want to make some kind of commitment or try to start scheduling that ideally with Julia again um I could do that guy just happened to have a conversation with her and she said she's booking up fast so I thought I'd at least run it up the flagpole before we think I'd even sent you a note about that yeah sounds good okay so that's all I have okay then without objection we're gonna consider this meeting adjourned