 Recording in progress. McGee, can you hear us okay? Okay, great. With you, Councilor McGee, Councilor Chang and I. And so I'm going to call us to order at 5.36 p.m. and the first item on the agenda is, of course, the agenda. And I would want to comment on the motion without it. So move to ask anything that has to be put. Thank you, Councilor Chang. Okay. Seconded by Council McGee. Any discussion on the agenda? Any discussion? Seeing no discussion, we will go to a vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? And the agenda is adopted. We will go next to the public forum. And I'm looking here in the room. Are you here to speak at the public forum? No. Okay. And anyone, is there anyone online that's indicating that they want to be read next? Those of you who are online, I see there are phone numbers. And so you can't raise a hand in that function. But I have temporarily given you permission to talk. So you can unmute yourselves now and join us for public forum if you would like to. Okay. So it does not appear that we have anyone who wants to speak at public forum. So we will close the public forum. Excuse me. And if you do consent agenda, which has four items on it, I would welcome a vote regarding the property and consent agenda. I would move that we adopt the consent agenda and take the actions indicated. Thank you, Councillor McGee. Seconded by Councillor Jang. Any discussion? Seeing none, we'll go to the vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? The motion carries unanimously. Okay. So that brings us to the deliberative part of the agenda for approval and recommendation to the city council. The first item on the agenda is an item that I really welcome is gotten to the point where it's ready to move forward. This is something we have been working on and planning for for some time. And this is a fire station to dormitory renovation. The purpose of which to give us a facility that we're going to support having both men and women firefighters. And thank you for getting into this point. You want to see us off for us for them? Sure. So back in 2019, right after I started working for the city actually, we did a renovation for the bathroom areas and fire station so that there were private spaces for anybody to use any bathroom facility regardless of their gender. And now it is time for us to go ahead and renovate the dormitory space and also for equality in gender spaces. So we've worked with Doran Whittier who is an architect who's done a lot of work with the city and designed the space so that we can have five individual dormitory spaces. And what we did to kind of change up that space is we're taking some space from the kitchen slash desk area and rebuilding the desk area on the side so we can have more bedroom spaces. So you know it's really important to the fire team to be able to invite people of all genders to be in the station. This is the way to accomplish that. Great. Thank you, Kevin. Thanks for your work on this and I remember the bathroom renovation as well and I think our second busiest station. And I think that the floor is open. Welcome on motion or discussion. Thank you for being the issue of this. I think you can make the motion. Dr. Jang, do we have a second? Second. Thank you, Councilor Geary. Any discussion? Seeing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor of the motion please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously and next time we have people check there maybe we should I think this is maybe I think these initiatives are having an impact. We are still not we'd like to be in terms of governments, the fire part is what we have substantially expanded the number of women that are in the fire department. I think it's a business like this that'll make it make it very historical. If you look around the country, cities that make this kind of commitment system have very different. Okay, so it's an overwhelming male profession but cities that really make an effort to support women in this profession can have a real impact and this work should be done. With that we'll go to 4.2, balanced and restorative justice amendment balanced and restorative justice amendment approval. C.J.C. Adam, thank you, Kim and while you're here let me just say it's just it's super helpful how happy I am to see the painters outside. They've already gone. If you haven't been by City Hall recently, the church street side is crying and started scraping on the Seattle Park side and you can see the gold dome around the city until now. It's been juicy but we're very excited about it. It's not just the site it's keeping us fell in from our apartment. I'm removing my paint. Okay, Brian, welcome. Sure, the balanced and restorative justice program is funded by the State of Vermont, the Department for Children and Families. It is an intervention early in young people's lives to co-prevent future interactions with the criminal legal system is entirely a prevention model and the State of Vermont has essentially increased the grant amount and so you're being asked basically to approve more money which we thought we know we have to ask for but we thought you have no problem with that. Okay, thank you. Brian, the floor is open for questions or a motion? Thanks, Mayor. Brian, is this so this is additional funding that the State approved? Is it covering more work over the term of the contract or extending the contract? It actually just simply allows more hours to be spent working with young people who are just as involved. Great, thanks and I'm also happy to make the motion as indicated on Civic Clerk. I'll second. Great, thank you, Councilor Geith. Thank you, President Powell. Any further discussion? Seeing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Any opposed? The motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Brian. This brings us to 4.03, a FEMA hazard mitigation grant for 389 Riverside Avenue, PPI, and I think we have Scott Gustin here to kick this off for us. Welcome, Scott. I want to say a few words to get this one to you. Sure, good evening. So the real quick background on this, there was a slide back in October of 2019 landslide affecting this property into neighboring commercial properties that initiated some further investigation of slope stability for those properties. There was, I'll call it a close-up evaluation. I think it was April of 2022 with folks from the state, including the state geologists and others. Norm Baldwin, I think, recall was there as well. The upshot of that more in-depth analysis was that one of those three properties, this one at 389 Riverside Avenue, was found to be at imminent risk of slide. There were cracks in the foundation. There were pressure cracks in the soils around the property. The trees are leaning. The retaining walls are bowing, so none of that looks good. So we followed up with state emergency management folks. They have a funding available for matches on these FEMA hazard mitigation grants. So we proceeded to apply for hazard mitigation grant for the property with the consent and interest of the property owner, of course. Sort of a slow process, but fast forward to today. We've been approved for the grant of, I think it's about $460,000, and that amounts to appraising the property, demolishing everything on the property, converting it to green space, and it becomes city property. It's 90% FEMA funding, and as I mentioned, the state is providing the 10% match. So that's the real quick overview. Great. Thank you, Scott. Floor jump for discussion for questions. Thanks, Mayor. Scott, I'm curious, once the slide occurred, has somebody still been living in the residence that's on the property, or is it condemned in any way? Folks are living there. Okay. It's a rental property. Okay. When I saw the item on the agenda, I went and looked on Google Maps very quickly, and even with the 3D capability that it has, which doesn't always work that well in Burlington, you can tell that it's kind of sitting on a very precarious ledge. So I was curious about that. Well, I'm glad that this grant was approved and that this work can happen. Unless there are other questions, I'd be happy to make the motion. That will take that as a motion. Is that a motion? Okay. I'll second. Thank you, President Park. So it seems that there are two neighboring properties and what's the plan for those days? No effect. They won't be affected at all in the future? The two neighboring properties are commercial. They were evaluated same day, same process as this one was. I'm no engineer, but the short answer is that those two properties were not found to be at imminent risk of slide. Now, you know, those were duplexes and the city is planning on demolishing it, right? 89 is a duplex. Yes, it's a rental duplex. So basically, the city will push us to the property and demolish it. It would become city property as a vacant parcel? Thank you. Okay, if there's no further discussion, we will go to a vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Scott and Norm. Thank you. Okay, we're making good progress here. We've got two items left. 4.4 is the Champlain Parkway Cooperate Agreement, amendment number 8. Welcome. They've been in me so long for this one as well. Why don't you give a summary with this? Amendment 8 is all about, Norm's going to lead the way. Okay, go ahead, Norm. So, good evening, everyone. Just to give you context, this is an amendment with the state of for the grant agreement. This grant agreement amendment allows or provisions a reimbursement for costs that are being assumed under this Parkway contract. Under normal V-trans process, they don't give us the full amount of the contract value at the start. They give it amendments in this series of amendments as the needs arise. And so we are at a stage now with the development of the project where the state feels it's time to further obligate or amend the Cooperate Agreement that covers those costs of construction. So it's really critically important that we accept this grant opportunity. Otherwise, we assume these costs with no clear line of support for these high dollar costs of construction. So we have a very favorable local match of 9532, 2% being local match, and the rest being either federal, state obligation. This project has two areas of local match obligation. One is the 2% that I talked about that is carried by street capital. And the other is carried by what is non-participating costs. Those non-participating costs are landscaping, lighting, and soils, and obviously soils are a big component of that bond cost. And I just would note that there is a note within this communication about an additional need for that bond, our capital funds, for those non-participating costs. But we are working with the CT office to talk through solutions to that. It's not fully, completely clear as to what that final roll-up will be as we complete phase one construction, given that we are talking about volumetrics that are estimates and not actual costs. There is some swell costs are being assumed by the city at this point, but we'll be seeking reimbursement from the Petroleum Cleanup Fund on Flynn Avenue. There's a significant amount of petroleum contaminated soils that were captured and disposed of that is we are going to be seeking reimbursement from the state. So there's a lot of moving parts here, but we are continuing to advance and we are very hopeful that at the end that this project will be complete in the spring and as we progress, we'll have further clarity about finite finances for the project itself. And if there's any other questions that council members may have, I'm happy to entertain that. It's a good summary, Storm. Thank you. Yes, we'll open up the floor for questions, discussion, or a motion. That's a giant. Yep. The most unknown indicated by the city vote. Thank you. You have a second? I'll second. Thank you, President Baugh. Discussion, item 4.4, the Champlain Parkway Crawford Agreement. Councilor McKee, go ahead. Thank you, Mayor. I'm shaping the norm. I don't have questions specifically related to the agreement, but we haven't had a council update on the Parkway project in some times, so I was curious if you could quickly let us know how it's progressing. It seems to me, at least from my own observations, that it's moving pretty quickly, which is exciting. Yeah. So I would note that we are certainly ahead of schedule with the project. It was, early in the summer, it was anticipated that we would be complete by the end of this construction season with punchless items. It doesn't appear that that's exactly the case as we get closer to the end of construction season. I think there is some procurement challenges with some of our procurement power, basically power supply that they had ordered cable for power in last January and won't be here until February. So as a result, we've had to face some delays and relocate poles to be able to do the capital infrastructure work. And then in the spring, basically pull those cables, make those connections, and remove those poles. So there's been some delays as a result of trying to do the capital work in the way of having utilities in a way, particularly on Lakeside Avenue. But that couple of the fact that we have some elements that need to have favorable weather, and as we get closer to end of October, the temperatures are not prudent for some of those installations, particularly the table or table intersections or frost walks. Okay. Councilor McGee, if I may. I think one of the important pieces here is that we will be coming back to you soon to talk about the South Bend Construction Coordination Plan. We have been keeping the two up to date. They did a site walk, I think, last month, about two months ago on the SharePoint Parkway, and then we did an update on the Raleigh Art Enterprise Project this last month. Given the new projects or at least new grants for Bank Street and Cherry Street, we are looking at expanding the South Bend Construction Coordination Plan to a South Bend downtown coordination plan. And we'll be coming to you within probably four to six weeks to look at where we are now with all the projects, now that it's been about a year, and reflect what decisions need to be made when and how these projects fit together to minimize construction impact. So you ask a good question and it's coming soon. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Well, I mean, I think that was my translation speaking about the coordination plan, that's what I have noticed from the people that are meeting with their employees and connecting with them, that came up. They were waiting for some more data from Bank Street, but it pulls us through. But now, you know, it seems that you will be coming back again, if it gets cold on the ground, and I'm just wondering why was it a beginning of a like combining both so that we can talk more about walkers, bikers, drivers, and that kind of thing. So then there's ways of working with them. Right. Nor can speak to the details of this. We are very well coordinated with utilities. The challenge on the lakeside right around the corner from Pine Street, where some of the poles will be staying through the winter are related to supply chain challenges, not a lack of coordination. Norm, do you want to add any details to that? Yeah. I mean, as I explained, the power cabling was ordered in last January and won't be here to February. And it's an unusual case. And I've talked quite a bit with BED about that, but there's unfortunately no other solution. We've basically scoured North America to find power cable to support the project, to allow it to continue on schedule. And it's unfortunate, but that's kind of where we're at. It couldn't be avoided. All right. For that additional impact, it is an additional impact, Councillor Jenkins. Largely, it's not a deep financial challenge. It's really more of a delay to seeing this completion to its full extent this fall, as opposed to spring. Okay. There are no further questions. I think we still need a... Sorry, we have a motion. All right. And back on this. So we will go to vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Are you opposed? We're taking pass unanimously. And... Great. Thank you, everyone. Yeah. Thank you. And just to make sure the point is clear, even though now summer work will be completed in the spring, that still significantly had a new original bid schedule. That is correct. Right. Right. Can you walk us through that to surround? Yeah. There's two parts of the Chinatown Plain Tarkway Project, the initial construction contract and the final construction contract. We're only talking about the initial construction contract, which is the middle portion of the project from Home Avenue to Kilburn Street. And we are expecting, as Norm said, even though it's not as aggressive and as ahead of schedule as we were expecting, still to be ahead of schedule with completion next spring or early summer. And then we will be returning the council to talk about how the final construction contract phase interfaces with all the other projects happening in the South Bend and downtown. Great. Okay. So that brings us to the final item of the night, which is the 4.5 request for approval of contract for emergency Reduski River Safe and Repair work. I know the Water Resources Team, DPW Team, Chief and Hustle to, I don't know if I did a lot of things since the break in July, but specifically to get ready for, so we can act on this tonight. Let's see, Megan Martin here as well. So, Megan, do you want to see this one of course? Sure. Yes. And we do appreciate folks moving it quickly to get it on this Board of Finance agenda. We received bids at 2 p.m. on Friday and with the bids, we only received one bid from ETI and they in their bid packet really focused on the fact that they needed to proceed with this work immediately in order to ensure that it could happen before winter. And so that is why we are bringing it forward to you now and with the intention of executing a contract and then proceeding to city council for sort of after-the-fact approval, relying on the approval of the Board of Finance. I think you're all familiar with everything that's happened. This is sort of the phase three of our long-term project, which is trying to get as best of an in-river band-aid on the existing pipe as possible so that we don't have to rely and run the temporary bypass throughout the winter. At the same time, we're going to be doing an alternative evaluation and design process for a climate resilient approach, but that's going to be much further out as far as construction and so this is really the best thing that we can do for the winter time. The really good news is that FEMA is in fact viewing this as part of the emergency repair package and not the permanent fix, meaning that we should still be able to access FEMA and other funding in order to implement the sort of long-term climate resilient repair, which could include anything from a modern underneath the river directionally drilled approach or even potentially turning it into a formal pump station and landslide force name. Any other questions or? Excellent. Thank you, Megan. Yes, thank you very much. This use is not very clear from my perspective. Yes, 75% of these experts would be covered by FEMA, right? 12% by the city and 12% by the state. But at the same time, you have to also be extra careful in documenting everything in order to be on the sole of your basis, right? Yes. Yes, and we continue further as part of this memo and it says, the very amount that would exist so first of all, $11 billion and then available for the activities of costs. I wasn't very familiar with that. Yep. So if I understood the question correctly, we are still waiting and then our last meetings with FEMA, they're still tracking whether or not Vermont has reached the overall threshold. If Vermont as a whole exceeds the sort of, I think they had said it was like $111 million statewide, then the cost share proportion goes from the 25% down to the 10%. And my understanding is that the state would cover half of that and we would only have to cover half of it. So that's certainly advantageous for us, although it will mean in fact that Vermont got pounded pretty hard. But if everybody can document that total amount, then we'll be able to have a lower cost share. But we're proceeding with the assumption that we might have to cover up to 12 and a half percent of the total project cost with the fingers crossed hope that it'll be a lesser amount. Did that answer your question? Yes, yes. So basically, everything in the silent question. Correct. We want to show the rate of hairs in the council, the worst case scenario. Yep. And I think it's important to note one thing I'd add to Megan's piece if I may is just this force main, which is above ground, hasn't, it doesn't have the same kind of protections and redundancies as a normal system hasn't placed. We've already had some challenges this fall. Trying to maintain it over a winter is would be a herculean feat. And this really is the right thing to do. And we felt like it was better to rush this or the approval process than to take a risk that we couldn't get the repair done this fall. Thank you. And I'm happy to make the motion. Great. Thank you. January of a second for motion. Second. Thank you, President Paul. Discussion. Okay. Seeing none, we will go to a vote. All those in favor of motion, please say aye. Right. Aye. Very close. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you again, team UW resources for all the work on this has been a huge, huge progress since July. And I used to feel like we're really challenging circumstances while in Congress. And I appreciate the attention to making it possible to get as much of the more and stay very immersed in this possible. We appreciate that. And Martin and Ashley worked on the memo in the weekend, deserve special appreciation. Kate. Yep. Oh, thank you. Kate. I'm Kate. Yeah. And next time the agency says the director, they write it down too. Because most of you are the repatriated director. Sorry, I'm in for the report. Okay. In 25 years from now, we don't see you. Yes. Thank you, Councilor Chen. So that concludes our agenda. I will just take the liberty to quickly say I am anticipating calling a more finance meeting next Tuesday to be for the Council meeting. I think it should be a brief meeting, but we have had another team that's been working very hard and has had success securing state support for a winter warming shelter, which is answering one of the big questions with the homelessness challenges that we're facing currently. As you all know, the new place shelter has just shifted the management to CBO and CHT, which we're very pleased about having long-term operators of that facility. However, it is no longer going to function as an emergency warming shelter the way it has. So this is an important item and one that we need to look at as well to get the work done and get this open. So it's possible. I don't, it's my belief that that's the only item on the agenda. It will be a brief meeting. The board heads up that we will. And President Paul and I will work out the exact timing details of the whole evening. We're meeting tomorrow. I believe to do that or should I say, but I just want to give you all heads up on that now. And with that, if there's no objection, the business of the board of finance is concluded. So we are adjourned at 6.09 p.m. Thank you. Thanks very much. Have a good night. You too.