 the agenda? Is there a motion to amend the no adopt the agenda? Is there a second? Thank you. All those in favor please say aye. We have an agenda. The forum is for sure an agenda item. It's a $40 million infrastructure bill. Although there has been a revised communication and clarification about the delay of payments regarding the interest. I still feel that not that I don't support all the items in it. All of you to really think about is that with reappraisal, with calling up more monies for the wastewater, BED coming in with a great increase, I think. And I just feel that I don't know, I don't think there's an appetite or an ability to pay more. It's not a lot. I understand that. But I don't want this to go forward and go down. I think if it goes down, it's harder the second time to get people to support something. They wonder why it went down, even if they weren't paying attention. So I would prefer that the mayor and the council look at that and then wait to see, I'm hoping Congress passes their infrastructure bill and to see what dollars we get. I understand there'll be a gap. There'll be a hiatus. I really could get this. I did talk to Gorm and Chapin about it. And I applaud them. They're bringing forward the needs of the city. But I still feel that we will have to tolerate that gap while we see what monies we get and what we ultimately need. I also know that if you go forward with a bond, you don't have to draw down those monies. I get that. But if you're looking at your total debt, if you have the potential to draw that place a roll, and I do wonder, one other thing, I do wonder if the school, high school, behind debt of the city, school and city, if the school needs... I'm really worried that that leaves us. And I think that high school is a priority. So those are my comments. I've really thought about this. I don't really like being in this position, but that's how I see it. And that's what I wanted to share with you. The second thing is, if you just let me speak to one other thing, you're going to take up an item before you have public forum at the City Council. And it has to do with the UVM agreement, as far as the number of students that they can have on campus. And my point for that is that I imagine with COVID that the last year or two enrollments have been down. So this freshman class being really big, probably will all flush out. So the number of students maybe is even down from what they could actually attain. I don't know those numbers. You'll find those out. My concern is, play this forward two years. When those now sophomores are going to bump into our community, that's a lot more students than we normally have. And then we normally house. And I really hope that you will negotiate hard with University of Vermont to say the excess that normally will now be dumping into our community is on their dime to figure out how to house them. And that it shouldn't be the city once again creating more of a housing crisis because of that. So I just wanted to make that statement. Also, thank you both. Thank you both. Sorry. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else for public forum? We have a motion on the consent agenda to adopt. Thank you. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Great. Central agenda passes. And we move on to item 4.01. How would the board like to proceed to recommend that the State Council do the reclassification of the system. So second. Are we ready to take a vote? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? And the motion carries. We are moving on to item 4.02 creation of a regular full-time water resources GIS and field transition field specialist position. What the board would like to proceed? Yes. Councilor Paul. Is there a second? Thank you, Councilor Hightower. Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item 4.03 reclassification and retunaling for the community outreach and support specialist. How would the board like to proceed? Yes. Councilor Paul. Thanks. I don't know if there's a second or so under the HR or HR, so I can just simply give us a brief synopsis of so yes we have the full HR intention because as we see there's a lot of retitling and there's a reclassification going on that I think we have now. The HR department signed one of the HR family with the CSL position creation. The department, the police department didn't have anybody to supervise these positions and train and we have Lacey Smith at the police department who is in the current position and after reviewing the job description and adding the supervising responsibility, we reclassified and are asking for the reclassification of the position. The extra responsibility of supervising the CSL positions. And training. Yes. Just one important part of getting them up to speed. Yes. It will be both the training and then eventually it's perfect. Yes. All in favor please say aye. Thank you. And now we are looking to reclassify a position in the CJC and of 4.04. How would the board like to proceed? Thank you councillor Paul. Is there a second? Great. Thank you. Any discussion? All those in favor please say aye. Thank you Rachel and Brian. It was such a good job we didn't even need to discuss it. Item 4.05. Reclassification of two REIB positions and creation of 4.04. And as you can see we have director Green joining us by Zoom. She was our test subject making sure things worked out well. Thank you for that. With all of our remote setup. How would the board like to proceed? We're getting tired of this. There's only one more reclass after this. Yes councillor Paul. Thanks. Well I think for the I think given the number of creations that it would be great and always always nice to hear from you. That's about what they're doing. So of course I don't mind. So we have two reclassifications and that is of the public policy and research analysts being reclassified to two manager positions and we have a supplier diversity and that position is formally known as the Equal Opportunity Specialist. We wanted to rename it supplier diversity so we can kind of frame what the job will actually be doing. We have a data analyst which will be an additional data analyst to the city's capacity to do data projects. Our data analysts will be focused on race and racial equity issues. We have an event planner that will not only do Juneteenth event, but all cultural events for the city. Most of which will be new focusing on not just you know black events but Asian events and Latino events and Jewish events and Muslim events. We have a digital designer that would be promoting those events and making artwork for those events and I believe that's it. And just these are positions that you would be that a couple of them are already the reclasses so they are already positions that are filled and the others are ones that you are creating so they have not yet been here in the process of finding both of those positions. That is correct so we would have to put out job announcements for the four brand new positions. I read the motion to recommend the council approve these positions so reclass reclass and creation positions. All those in favor? Are you opposed? I have the motion carries and with that I'm going to turn it over to the mayor. Thank you director Green. Excellent so 4.6 creation of one role and reclassification of one role within the human resources department. Because director Derpy is on vacation. I would be more like the students. I'm going to recommend that the city approve the creation of the HR benefits manager and the task to HR information about specialists as possible. We'll talk about further discussion. All those in favor? I'm going to close the motion carries me now so it's just a 4.7. So I'm going to close with authorization to issue early learning as your president for older than the arts. 143,676 creation of the city's early learning mission at work. So I'm going to come forward with a sheet of this short summary to help follow. So I'm going to do this. As you know the early learning initiative invests in affordable child care in the city in two ways. What is the first step scholarship program which goes directly to families helping support them in paying for high quality affordable well it's not always affordable we make it affordable high quality child care in the city. The second way we disperse funds is in the form of a capacity grant and this was an exciting application. The capacity grants are dispersed to either existing child care centers to help them expand their capacity and create more spots. Or they go as in this case to the one arts center which as you may know it does after school arts programming and summer camp arts programming and they have been working really hard to get the subs position to be a full child care facility. With this grant and we will help them with their construction and some of the purchase of their initial initial goods tables chairs for the children initial games and it's of that sort. We we can beat the capacity grant committee which has us on it as the counselor that counselor carpenter and other child care community partners. We voted unanimously in favor of this grant. We felt that there was a definitive need especially in this neighborhood for more high quality child care. One quick question in terms of deciding on the grants like is it was just the best one application or do you reach out or what's kind of the selection process. So we do reach out and we have historically as you see in the application we disperse many grants and this one is I think the only one we have at the moment is the only active application but it rose to the top but not waiting for others. Yeah that's what you're saying. I was just going to make a motion. I move to approve and recommend to the city council that it authorized the economic recovery manager to enter a capacity grant agreement with the R&D arts incorporated for $100,000, $103,676.61. Subject to the conditions incorporated in the grant capacity agreement here reviewed and approved by the city trends office. This one was just statewide strong supportive talk to the applicants multiple times. I'm really excited that they're able to report with this. I know they had had a prior location fall through as a neighborhood and so we're here I think it's a really strong sign. I think it's also just important to note that what could have happened here too instead this is a location that's a pretty prime location in the neighborhood so to see it go to child care as compared to like I don't know another brewery or something like that I think it's really exciting so I'm just super excited and I think one thing that stood out in the conversation that I had with Margaret Coleman recently about this was just the commitment to inclusion in the business and then that was sort of top of mind for her so I just really appreciate it thank you for your work in bringing this this grant to us and I appreciate that as well. Thanks for sharing that presentation. My daughter is going to be at the school program last spring and the idea of that program expanding to child care as well as this after school. Yes, I heard exciting that portion and exactly what we hope these capacity grants would do. It's just the three of us right so for the discussion and all those in favor of motion please say aye. Aye. Those in motion carries unanimously. I'm going to wait. I'm remembering committed I'm remembering committal materials for B-trans, bicycle and pedestrian program, for the interrail road, shared use path, it's a lot of problems and here's here to speak to this another setting project that partner has been hoping to see progress on for for some years and it's exciting to see the end of this one. It's been, you know, interrail road for a number of years. People expressed an interest in improving accessibility for bike and walking and there's been significant amount of planning studies plus CCRPC. This is the next stage of that process. We're actually going to attract something and I'm excited to see that we actually have some funding to support that. This request B-trans has changed the process. Normally we use they present to us cooperative agreements then I come before the finance board and council to seek your authorization to execute those cooperative agreements. The state now has what they call commitment letters that are in advance of the cooperative agreement so this is a commitment letter requesting authorization from the director to execute that commitment letter which really in some level binds us with accepting the grant but also paying the local match obligation. We will be coming back once we have a cooperative agreement and seek your authorization to execute that as well but this is the first stage of beginning that process. Yeah just a question on if this is at least in the anticipation of expecting something, do you have more of a plan of what that is and what that would look like? Yeah so the planning studies have indicated that shared use paths would be developed along that corridor to separate bikes and heads from the roadway itself. And is that going to be within the current footprint of the street or is it? Yeah so it will be within the current right-of-way city property. Which is not necessarily the same. Right it will be within the right-of-way versus what's in a roadway. Sorry I had a question about this. But the street will still be I assume then become a two-way marked street. It will remain service traffic on two-way but it will have a separated shared use facility within the right-of-way. So I don't know if you're familiar with what a shared use path is but it's effectively 10 feet out of the road that itself could accommodate both bikes and heads. Sorry he's trying to think of how like that. And how far down will that share these paths go before it? It at least goes to the face of the hill to Enfield Center. At which point will it become just one road slash bike path again? Yes certainly itself but those details are kind of not completely firm and so I would not that's exactly the case but I think the biggest thing is to be able to have a access over these rail crossings being out of the road where you have all that partial traffic. Go ahead I don't want to relate it. Well I guess to follow on that question about the shared path what was the thinking of going with a shared use path versus like a sidewalk bike when you kind of get big bridges? What is the special consideration you could do a sidewalk like on both sides or a bike lane on both sides and a sidewalk on both sides? Honestly that's a good telly. I guess the reason I asked you just because it's part of the new channel and shared use that raises a little bit of concern you know if there's any sort of signage or call-in that will take place because people have it pretty quickly on that hill so details of all that will be worked out in the design formalized design so right now we're just at a concept stage. So I suspect it will be making wholesale changes in terms of where that combination will be I believe we'll probably stay on that consistent with those planning so we're talking about shared use path but there'll be certainly opportunities for people to write comments in that design. I'm sorry yeah and then my last question just because if we're I guess still wondering what the design will be I know that you may not know where this amount came from but I guess it's like what is the consideration if the project amount doesn't end up being $4.45 million but the design is? Well I personally don't know. Okay I see they're my staff and my team have been working directly on it but we're very familiar with it and relied on the planning study that probably had detailed estimates based on the concept that we're being pursued. Hopefully the estimates are been both part appropriate and have some sort of nature film that go well with it and are one that's of an expense. And just to write that there is already a line of design. Let's see if the staff have a rough sketch out or if there are any of them to see it. Yeah I would imagine when we go back before the council with an actual comprehensive we'll provide you that level of detail. We can do that. Further discussion? No of course. So the issue with this bunch of amendments is that Tanya and I are both new to the budgeting process and frankly we did not know that this was something that needed to be carried over and included in the resolution and it wasn't. And as soon as we discovered that we are now coming to you to essentially ask for this piece of paper that the authors need. Yes that's what I'm talking about. Thanks because they're new. Thank you. Second by Councillor Hightower. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion would say aye. Aye. Thank you. Motion carries unanimously. I'm going to go ahead and have the situation plan of our case department. Not sure to keep your eye on it. It's focused on this paper telling you. So you might have to do the rest of the questions about it. Thanks. I'm just wondering given the fact that Tanya is here for 5.0. There's no objection. I'm going to make that agenda change on the flag here. So we'll grab 5.1. Confirmation, assessment and actual plan of operational work. It's all contract. Move on over to the next item. We can have a short summary. Okay. Hi again. So this cultural transformation is part of what I think I'm here to do is to bring the whole city along as far as making us a more inclusive place, a more racially just place. And so the last assessment I did was just focus on BIPOC. This assessment will be focused on the entire city. I also have like speaking events, educational opportunities, a data assessment to let us know where we are and also so that we can gather up a plan of where we want to go. One of the biggest focuses of this assessment is to bring together the African Black and the American Black. There's been a lot of tension between those two communities in this city and I want to be a part of the solution of that. Final minutes, discussion and questions. What's the follow-up? Thanks, I'll make a motion to offer the interpretation of the inclusion of the Long-Tex data contract with that noble, I'm sorry, what was the item for the last thing? It's noble jewels. Jewels, I wanted to make sure. For 88 hours to, oh 89, sorry, $6,000 to complete a cultural transformation assessment and I'm trying to play on such a target. Thank you both. And yeah, I would just say this challenge, this tension between those communities is something I've talked about and concerned about since you started and I think this will give us some additional tools for that work and I appreciate this coming forward. Any other discussion? All those in favor? Motion to say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Question carries unanimously. Now we will go back to the other questions about the proposal. Mayor, I understand that conversations have been continuing over the course of today. I'm just wondering where you are currently with things. Are you still in a place where you want to keep things the same? Or do you feel like you're receptive to some of the feedback around timing and amounts? I think like that. Yeah, okay. So just make sure all the same. It's the proposal that TBRID and I had the essentially two-year stabilization plan payments, three payments made over the course of two years. Essentially the first two payments taking place in the first year, second, third payment, which is the second half of the incentive being made to officers that are still with the department, essentially two years from now. Yes, we have gotten some feedback over the last couple of days at least since Mayor Chris was racing like this week too. I understand there being preference for focusing on the first year. I think it is likely that we are still going to be seeking to encourage officers to extend that. Here from now we're likely to still be facing some challenges with the level of staffing. Where the consensus of the council is around a shorter player combined with a modestly additional incentive for that first year, I think that is something that I think is something that we've achieved. We're on some discussions with officers today, especially if that's, at least for, let me just say one second. I'm thinking this moment, doing something together, something that has brought a person consensus, that sends a message to officers that value down the work they do and are concerned about rapid loss among officers and came back from that survey about the potential for significant additional departures. I think there would be a good value in doing something together and I think those represent accurately a broad sense of the community that we have important debates that we're working through important work to be done and police transformation that does not mean we don't be important to retain our return on the issue. So it's something that we can do together. I would really appreciate that flexibility and willingness to consider alterations. So what you've currently proposed, I think there are a couple different fronts where I think why that would make sense. I think the first of which is that we have a whole host of other potential priorities in the community. We haven't gone through the the broader analysis of what the community is looking for in terms of those are for dollars and so just to expand the significant portion of that money without having done that other work, I think is challenging and that's been some of the pushback that I've earned to this is wait a second we have all these other needs and we haven't committed to them. I don't think that people understand that this is the only chunk of money that we have but there's still a lot of remaining dollars but this is still significant so I think it makes sense to reduce that. The other piece is in terms of just time frame, I think that we recognize we have bargaining coming up in the next year and that providing a bridge to bargaining I think makes sense but well beyond that I think it could take something off the table in terms of just in terms of leverage I know that we're looking at the CNA report we're going to be asking me to ask for a lot of changes to that contract and so to take a significant economic lever off the table preemptively or before we even engage in bargaining. I just don't think that that makes a ton of sense from a negotiating standpoint in terms of all the necessary changes and then the other piece is also that I think that we are that this would be substantially above the other metrics that were provided by other communities in terms of in terms of that compensation so I think we could reduce it and still be relatively effective with other areas but you know I do support doing some sort of retention and improvement plan I think established a cap and we should try and look to that cap if you want to change that then we'll look to that cap but I think that this is where we are now so I do support us taking some sort of action I think that it really is a doubt what is appropriate in the short term in my view. I agree with what you just said but love to do this kind of you know more consensus than a majority. I agree with all the points which Tracy just made and I just had a question which was specifically around the first payment which I know we've been talking a lot about the third one and just the timing of what the logic wasn't having at the end of November was put to something just a little bit further out like January. So the logic was I think that's just that it's clearly I think we can all acknowledge that it's a challenging couple years for the least apartment people that are still with us now. Some of the recognition of the support and acknowledgement of this challenge period seemed important to some kind of meaningful setup. Soon there's particular magic to November but that was that was the logic and then you know have a recognizing that we are concerned about the the year or it's written up two-year period and how it further enlarged the arches the pressure that's going to put in terms that's going to create want to overly firm that's how we. So just to follow up on that I know it seems and if it is supposed to be a thank you for still being here and doing it now which maybe sounds like what you're saying I feel like then maybe that timeline makes sense if it's supposed to be we want to retain you until this day because that would be helpful for us in terms of that date then if that feels kind of we're okay so I feel like it would be I guess helpful to be clear on which one of those objectives because right now I'm not sure that it's meeting either we're trying to split the difference maybe. Thanks. So my sentence of that I was going to trace the Councilor Hightower I think that there is a genuine opportunity significant opportunity to come together on this issue it's only Monday Monday Monday should be 35 hours and not 24 at least during the day so that we have despite our best efforts did not necessarily be able to close a few of the conversations that we had and I was surprised by the local President Tracy said that doesn't surprise me since we had a conversation about a few hours ago but I think we just need a little bit more time and in view of the fact that actually here at this time here and we have we have received the communication and I'm sure we've all read it and it's going to be on the agenda for council meeting would it be possible to just simply put on this this evening just move on to type 4.1 and with the understanding that obviously we're going to be discussing this upstairs and yes I'm hoping that the council will take action this evening but I'm uncomfortable this is certainly something I do expect there's going to be greater discussion so I'm comfortable with the board's time on this so make sure to hear as aware of the skills we just had prior to this item coming up and we'll speak further to the time questions on that first okay now I'm going to close item 4.1 and um while we have left and it's good that we I believe we've warned the executives at 6.15 so we had 25 minutes which is a good amount of time for 4.11 which is the general obligation on the capital projects I talked about this two weeks ago I appreciate the feedback and the questions that came up there we've tried to use it two weeks since then well and I think I've both added some language to resolution and answer a lot of questions from the councilors and the last couple of weeks and done some important additional internal work on this and so hopefully it's now we're ready for for interaction how would the Mark Keenan is here I'm sorry Mark did you want to update anybody on anything that we've been talking about in the last couple of weeks before we turn it over to the board I don't know probably we answered most of the questions I came forward and so that's my hope okay um great I guess one I'll make only two two important points that I don't think I've made up until now or maybe haven't made strongly enough and that's all for your questions one is that we'll see you in all the materials for tonight more clearly Mark in the last the last time I think an important acknowledgement of the way the process works we are doing our best this this moment to project how we would spend the 40 million if the voters authorize it over the next three years those there are a lot of assumptions behind those projections and they and the world never unfolds exactly as we expect it to right now and so as a matter you know the way these way in which the final allocations of these dollars to projects gets made is through the annual city council process and I just thought it was important to make sure that that was clear second point I wanted to make that speak to you and that I don't think really I wanted I wouldn't make this point out I'll make it later on tonight as well but I don't think as well our materials at this point this is a second time since I've been in this role that we've come with a major general obligation on construction is from my perspective it should be the last time that we as city at least for the foreseeable future needs to do this and here's why me as you will see in the projections and we can walk through this and this will be helpful we are proposing that we fund up to essentially what our depth limits are capacity limits are within policy that we proved in 2018 and we would do that by 2025 in the years that follow on there you can see that there are two sort of powerful forces that kind of act that accrue that each year Russia accrues actually counting terms but they almost some Russia compounding this way but they take place each subsequent year which is the we are retiring significant amounts of debt we get to the point where we're retiring often five to seven million dollars a year of debt and we expect and there's lots of data behind this that the grant list the tax base will continue to to grow honestly as well in the subsequent years and between those two forces we have a pretty quick period of time and going over being at our debt capacity to having space again my vision of the future which is not supposed to be voted on tonight but it I think would be the way to continue this work beyond this bond is that in the future after this bond is expended over the next three years that we then shouldn't we first of all should have done a significant amount deferred maintenance work over a decade and be in a much better place than we were back in 2016 when we really started this and secondly I would recommend that at that point we increase the annual investment that we're making in infrastructure from the two million dollar a year tax that we have currently to something two or even three times that six seven million dollars a year if we do that the production show we can stay within our debt limits we can avoid another one of these big impactful bonds that has a big impact on taxes over a short period of time and we can keep up with the proper maintenance of our of our assets so that's the vision obviously I thought I was some counselors or another members of public I felt it helpful to lay out that mission so I thought it was taking a little time on that with that I'll stop talking the floor is open and um council hi there yeah thanks for that was helpful I think one of the questions that I have is one that I guess I've heard a lot which is in the past few days which is specifically around the 10 million for memorial which it seems like wasn't for the presentation so I think folks will first of all just surprise to see it and then two of the largest plan item and then also at the same time as the conversation about the school and if he doesn't make it to the memorial and that ends up not being the school location how is that and our play with that so yeah great so yes this has been we've been we've been working on this proposal hard for many months and it's been certainly intensified since July and August leading up to tonight's book and the some of the initial presentations were for $30 million on it did not really come up with the memorial auditorium I at the same time um we know that memorial auditorium is in is in rough shape and we are really reaching the point where something needs to happen there and you know engineers and professionals have been saying we need to do something for for many decades we're really getting to the point now where Billy has been closed for several years and there's great concern amongst the team that if we don't take you know action beyond the hundreds of thousands of dollars that we have put into it in recent years that you could really see the structure of each integrity we have it so that's something really terrible happening there so we're we're going to need to do something more we don't know exactly what that is and we're trying to be very transparent and clear about that I see three major possibilities one would be um if the high school does choose the gateway say this bond would give us the resources to be a partner for your use for your use of self um second if that does not materialize um I think we're going to want to quickly you you are going to want within the next year um probably within the next six to nine months uh having a conversation administration the council about if we want to essentially um stabilize the building and get it open again and that is going to require somewhere in uh six to ten million dollars like that that would not be the full on adaptive reuse expansion of the footprint kind of ambitious plan that has been talked about in the last couple years um it would be something that replaces the gives us sprinklers and it gives us a modern fire alarm system and that has an elevator so it's meeting ABA code properly and um you know it is it's a building we can use again it is it is not a building that goes through all the kind of exciting innovations that have to talk about various plans um a third possibility is the council could decide that we don't want to put that kind of money into this building um with the needs of the high school also out there with the other needs in the community this this bond vote would not decide that it would it would give us the ability to go in any of those three directions and it quite explicitly says in the resolution nobody would be spent without further council actions um I I think having that ability for us to make decisions and move in the next year is um is important if the voters are comfortable with that that delegating that level of authority to elect the leaders on kind of make the final decisions perhaps it's as possible they won't be often we don't go to voters without greater more specific clarity than that um I am concerned about waiting to get um get to get further we continue to wait where we're going to be in a tough spot and we're going to see somebody and we'll see that going if you're in this case that's flexibility for you and and just the last question apologize this is mostly for me so if we do decide that we don't want to use all 40 130 we could reallocate 10 to the school without any additional going back to the public with a question yeah great point kester high tower this is the the vote the question being from the voters to give us the authority to borrow up to 40 million dollars um none of that borrowing or bonding actually takes place without further action from the council and we certainly and it's expected to happen over three years you know the projections we have in the model they can get 10 20 10 if we get a year into this and discover that they're talented but same we decided that the needs of high school are so great that we just need to all of our remaining bonding capacity to be reserved for high school we could make that decision together and not um not draw down further make that something some kind of formal action that it would be necessary at that point to make it clear we're not going to draw it down so that we don't think that's the way our debt policy would you know you want to make it clear we're doing that we would not draw down the money and give it to the school district that's not the way it would work it would be us not borrowing money not taking down the debt or allowing them to have a greater shared debt capacity right all that said i do want to be clear that one upside of the really quite substantial growth in the tax base that this reappraisal has documented is that there is more borrowing you know what we're borrowing here is or proposing borrowing here is basically what for years we've been saying we needed to borrow about 40 million dollars by the end of 2025 that's when we created the policy in 2018 that was the assumption then what what has changed since then is the growth in the tax base means that the district could go higher i don't want to put a number out of here because it's our place i think but now it's what the class that we went school could be but there's considerable as if you look at those numbers you will see there's considerable additional capacity within the the debt policy for the high school to for the school district to go above the 70 million that was and then apologies for taking up all that question time but one more first question that former legislature asked just i guess are you like if this were to not pass in November or i guess are you worried about that i'm sure you have thought about so keep to start to see the like timing clock that you've had in terms of some of the other costs that have been down the pipeline for those what happens if we don't have a special election fails yeah so i mean i do want to say together this is max and i i presentation i were elected nine plus years ago together every bond issue we brought forward um which has been many now they have all passed so i don't want to you know i think you know and i don't take that for granted anyway i think that the the public has trusted and supported the need for investment in infrastructure and you've seen evidence of that continuing through some of the budget survey so i am hopeful that it will succeed um if it fails there will be some uh consequence of that i think it will mean that the the 2022 construction season is not as active as we've gotten used to seeing since 2016 over place as much as sidewalk we'll have this active road season still because we didn't you may be aware like the bidding this year came in so high that we ended up not doing as much road work this year we spent much less than we had resources for and we're rolling that over you know so there will still be significant road work done but the other priorities the investments in the buildings would wait i don't think we would come back in march i should be careful i mean i would be very concerned and i do expect the high school is going to be in front of the community in march and i think i think it'd be challenging that computing um i think it would be felt this computing bond issue so i don't know exactly i think there will probably be some delay certainly wouldn't give up uh we would i think you would come back with an amended plan but when that would be i haven't decided this and i don't kind of had a time to discuss it presentry so given the bonding experience that you just mentioned this year and the sort of greatly fluctuating costs how do you model out the costs for for our infrastructure needs going forward recognizing that we may be entering sort of a very challenging period i got with with infrastructure and with instruction um let me just take a shot and see if i'm answering your question maybe i go to the experts for but we basically have tried to we've been our guideposts for sidewalk investment for years has been basically three miles we wanted to be three years of triple the historic amount and is if you're able to do 40 years of three miles of sidewalk you would basically have a you know system that was sustainable um for the roadway we basically our goal has been to do at least five miles in years they've been double the stark average and i think the assumptions all are that we continue that for the next three years those those two metrics would some assumption about cost increases from from one year to the next not assuming the incredible volatility of this year assuming that we get back to some uh reasonable kind of inflation seen in the past um around this construction um is that are there passing areas you wanted us to talk speak to as well no that makes sense i understand thank you further further questions or are you ready for motion that's about i'll make a motion i'll speak to the specific sorry councillor paul uh councillor hanes is with us and i know um has been as the head of the two committee has worked hard on this and uh i did not i did not recognize you previously no that's okay i just i just put my hand up thanks mayor um so we've been having this conversation but i just wanted to have it publicly too which is just trying to provide clarity for everyone involved about the memorial piece and the flexibility around it so the that the ten million dollars that is listed for memorial does that have the same level of flexibility as the other all the other items on this list or is it uniquely inflexible um thank you councillor gison i um that i might read and we haven't seen you here as well if you want to weigh in on this um but i'm pretty confident with the analysis that um the bonding language is it's very flexible and really does as i sort of open with delegate ultimate decisions around exactly where we land in each of these different asset categories to future council actions um you know i think we will be mindful of what we i'm sure we'll be mindful of these projections and what we've said in the public and we will be deviating for good reason but there will be good reasons there will be changes in the bonding language which allows us to check to be vehicles i i do think the resolution as is currently reported is explicit that ten million dollars is being reserved for more latitorium um it's clear that none of that money gets spent without further council action balancing the uncertainty that we're in right now exactly what we're going to do so the count you know the administration will have no no ability um you know to act without the council you know approving how how we proceed with that project um i think the language does suggest that that is the only thing that that ten million dollars can be used for and you know um that your questions have really kind of focused on that so that that is that is that is the way the language the resolution so but the resolution wouldn't just by nature of being a council resolution it wouldn't bind a future council is that where we're because i'm trying to it seemed like your answer was kind of both you answered both ways to my question so does the resolution yeah does the resolution just kind of bind the current council whereas the voter language actually is permanently legally binding so the best way to explain a bonding issue like this at this stage is really nobody is bound for any reason whatsoever which is if and that's um think of it this way what what you're taking before the voters is really a question of maybe may we use may we borrow money um because you as citizens of the city ultimately you know bear the responsibility of paying it back but may we borrow this money and the citizens the voters will either say yes or no and if they say yes you have permission to borrow and you in a case like this you've done you've included some specific and some general language and so you're bound by those pieces of language but you're not bound to par and i've seen it with municipalities where a municipality says we want to build an indoor pool rec center and and everybody's very excited about it except something unexpected happens somebody builds a private pool or covid hits and the the the city board or body says or or even it's simple as there's a change over um in in the board the board is no longer excited about borrowing it so they don't borrow that they're not bound to have to borrow the money you will be bound by the terms under which you're borrowing so for example with we when we talk about the ten million dollars for the memorial auditorium um you know if you decide there is some language that allows some flexibility and how that's to be used um but in general it's tied to the specific idea or project where some of the other projects are a bit more generally stated giving future councils the flexibility um as those plans evolve i mean there's a general tying into um some of the the language of the resolution um that i would say does create a binding effect but it gives you it's aimed to give you and future councils the flexibility to as plans evolve you know we don't know for example how ARPA funds will be used or spent that may affect how much money needs to come into certain projects certain projects cost may go up or down or their scope or size may change um and now those those are decisions that future councils get to make regardless you know what's this what's this uh resolution would pass um this the citizens vote it would just simply become authority for you to take that action as as you or future council saw fit okay well we'll probably have to carry this into full council but i guess just where i'm at is i don't want i'm very supportive overall of you know going to the voters for infrastructure needs i like that the 30 million to my understanding can be used flexibly among all of these needs if the last 10 million can also be used flexibility among all those needs i think that's great i if that last 10 million can only be used for memorial um i find that a little bit problematic but i can i'll i'll save my thoughts for full council that's right um i think this might be i will re-ask this question i guess in full council but i want to give you a heads up safe answer but i wonder if you considered and or would be willing to have two separate questions on the ballot i know that that's probably not ideal but one for the 30 million general and what is that i'll ask for the discussion of thoughts that have want to proceed um council barlow we want to help us with the i mean i think we need to adjourn shortly here but um given that i think that i think it's fair to say the administration wrote the memorial drawing language but it was in response to some concerns and questions that you had so i want to speak to that in any way one word i'm not sure this tonight be glad to um my perspective on all of this is that the most important um and probably the most significant spending we'll have at a bus is the throwing high school project and until we know that i would like to have language i mean i'm not and i shared this with the mayor right over this meeting i'm not comfortable with this right now and the reason is is because we don't know where we're going to build our high school we don't know how much it's going to cost we don't know how we're going to pay for it until we know those things it's hard to prioritize this other spending and some and i appreciate the um provisions that were put into this to sort of put some guardrails around some of the spending and specifically around memorial my view is if we don't use it for memorial we shouldn't spend it at all um and i like the idea of having a further council approval for whatever the memorial plan was but i also would take that a step further on the other 30 million and i would say we can find specific funding sources for those items we don't spend that money either because we're going to need a lot of debt capacity for the high school and i honestly am troubled by the amount we're asking taxpayers right now to absorb on top of the reappraisal tax fakes that many many residents saw so trying to sort of you know thread the needle through paying for infrastructure needs including the high school and maintaining some level of portability for product to taxpayer which is sort of my my goal and that's helpful so how are we going to proceed i sense this general support for the direction here but i also some questions about the memorial on a term so i'm welcome if there's an endorsement resolution as it is i hope the court answer amendments here i think amendments might be possible upstairs i think i guess i'm hopeful that the form members of board of finance are here are directionally supportive and some kind of vote would be helpful from the full council to say but i also understand their sort of issue we're out of time they recommend or we should just not have awesome thank you very much is there a second for that thank you so all of them they were emotionally sad all right i'm already opposed trust unanimously we'll continue this conversation upstairs and without ejection or finances or the finances adjourn 619 i hand it over to president tracy to start yep so let me just see we're going to go off of this second year but once we had a new executive session and then we'll rest and we'll recess upstairs after i'm going to go ahead and call to order the relative city council meeting at 6.20 p.m. your agenda will do the to our next item which is the agenda itself one thing there's a couple of other items to the agenda that i just wanted to call out specifically so that the second the first motion however is just to the agenda the broader agenda itself so i'm going to go to councillor stromberg for a motion 1.01 which is the adoption of the agenda thanks president tracy i move to adopt the agenda as follows no revised version of consent agenda item 6.09 communication door re-encraft bca director karen durfey director of human resources ton very human resources manager regarding reclassification of one bca position per sarah cats per councillor paul add to the consent agenda item 6.22 communication michael a kasala market area manager kasala waste systems ink with the action to waive the reading except the communication placed on file add to the consent agenda item 6.23 communication burlington area waste and recycling haulers regarding consolidated collection update and next steps with the action to waive the reading except the communication placed on file add to the consent agenda item 6.24 communication ashley bond chair burlington fire commission regarding capital bond support with the motion to waive the reading except the communication and place on file adds to the consent agenda item 6.25 communication brad minor regarding municipal trash service with the action to waive the reading except the communication placed on file adds to the consent agenda item 6.26 communication arlene m lundquist regarding a delay on bds movement with the action to waive the reading except the communication in place on file adds to the consent agenda item 6.27 communication keen and christiansen member drb regarding resignation with the action to waive the reading except the communication and place it on file adds to the consent agenda item 6.28 communication melissa b lafayette regarding protect local waste collectors with the action to waive the reading except the communication in place on file adds to the consent agenda item 6.29 communication sole vague overview regarding statement in support of municipally operated consolidated collection system with the action to waive the reading except the communication and place it on file adds to the consent agenda item 6.30 communication william black regarding church street with the action to waive the reading except the communication and place it on file adds to the consent agenda item 6.31 communication emma quarry regarding bpd incentive proposal with the action to waive the reading except the communication and place it on file note toke as the correct sponsor for agenda item 7.03 resolution advancing a municipally operated consolidated collection system for trash recycling and organics per council hansen note toke as the correct sponsor for agenda item 7.04 resolution december 7 2021 special meeting issuance of general obligation bonds for the capital projects per councilor hansen thank you councilor strunberg for that very low in motion um cap emotion is there a second seconded by councilor hightower any discussion take your none all those in favor please say aye aye any opposed that carries unanimously brings us to item 1.02 which is a motion to further amend the agenda to add to the consent agenda an item regarding the establishment of a date for the special election um for burlington electric city departments this was an item that was um needed um to add um for in order to establish the date it's something that brought forward in our last meeting um and it said that we were going to do this it just did not get on the consent agenda what we do want to establish that do so um councilor strunberg are you able to offer a motion on this item i would just like a little guidance as to what number that item would be because i'm a little one point one point oh two okay um so i would move to amend the agenda sorry go ahead just on the consent agenda so just read the motion under one point oh two okay um sorry one second so just add one point oh two uh no so just if you click on one point oh two and then take the motion for um just that's under the recommendation for tax oh interesting mine is not reflecting one point oh two okay that's our agenda to amend the agenda to add to the consent agenda item 6.32 resolution december 7 2021 special city council meeting in addition to the privilege of the burlington electric department here we have a motion on that is there a second seconded by councilor paul any discussion okay seeing none let's go to a vote all those in favor please say aye aye any opposed i'm curious unanimously that item will be attached to our consent agenda which will then be adopted later in our meeting after public forum brings us into item number two which is the reason why we are down here for right now which is the executive session with director pine regarding the extension of the uvm housing agreement um before we go into executive session i'll have director pine um if you could i mean that's what i see uh so i have a city planner i'm in a tunnel with us um so i just wanted to see if i can you want to share an open session before we go into executive as far as information to provide in the in the public session tonight uh for the record i'm brian pine cito director uh i would just share that we are here to discuss the view some preliminary conversations between the city and the university regarding increased student housing and as a result um hopefully it was appropriate to bring the council up to speed but uh preliminary it's information with this and are you expecting any action to come out of this executive session now that we've had that briefing um may it please have the first part of the motion regarding the finding on executive session do i just say that i find that minister don't acknowledge of this item with the city council and a substantial disadvantage in contracting pursuant to one usa 131 a and one half we have a motion is there a second by councilor b any discussion okay hearing none let's go to vote all those in favor please say i um so we will if you'd like to just please join us here um i'm just going to hear a little bit about a community survey that uvm is doing regarding community health so if you want to just join us here and just explain a little bit about the survey um we'll go ahead and and get into that thank you so much for coming tonight if you could just speak right into the mics and we're going to ask folks to do that um this evening um one of the things this this evening is that we are um the concern is really not around as much surface transmission as it is sort of the droplets so keeping your mask on is helpful but it is difficult sometimes to hear you with um with the mic so just getting a little bit closer or at least trying to project with the mics is is helpful just the not only the folks in the room can hear and but also the folks who are tuning in virtually can hear as well and that goes for public forum i'll i'll be we'll get to public forum right after this so if you are interested in signing up for public forum the sign-up sheets are over in the corner there um and folks will have two minutes for public forum so we'll get into that in just a moment go right ahead thank you so much for being with us tonight thank you council president tracy thank you members of the council um for giving me this opportunity to briefly share about our community health needs assessment process for chinden and granddale counties which is currently underway in partnership with over 25 local organizations my name is molly lorenz and i work for the university of ron medical center in our community health improvement department and as a not-for-profit hospital we're required every three years to conduct a community health needs assessment to examine the top needs and strengths to build upon as a community for an assessment process i would love to invite anyone who lives in chinden and grandale counties who's age 16 and older um to please participate in our brief community survey and share your top priorities for what can strengthen the health and well-being of your community we would love to hear from as many voices as we can um i shared a poster that was attached with today's meeting materials which has a qr code on it um which you could access the survey there uh it's the survey has been intentionally designed through a lens of equity and inclusivity and i'm very pleased that for the first time we've made this community survey available in 10 written languages and asl and information is at the top of the survey on how to take the survey with an interpreter you can um take the survey through october 15th and it is anonymous and you will not be asked to provide any uh personally identifiable information and all survey takers can enter to win one of four fifty dollar visa gift cards um results of this survey are going to inform a three-year community health improvement plan that prioritizes health needs to address and collaboratively invest in solutions with our community partners so for example we have a community health investment fund which invests more than eight hundred fifty thousand dollars annually in community-based initiatives addressing these top identified needs so i would really invite um anyone who lives in chinden and grandale counties age 16 and older to please take the 10 uh about 10 minutes to participate in the survey share what can strengthen the health of your community and if you have any questions please email me it's molly.lorence at uvmhealth.org and thank you so much for your time and your support as we strengthen the health of the community awesome thank you so much molly really appreciate it appreciate the time any questions or comments brief comments from counselors okay seeing none um we will um continue on with our agenda we're a little bit early for public forum so i'm going to go through our deliberative agenda and deliberative items before um that will come to public forum at seven thirty um but i do want to just continue on with a couple other items starting with committee reports um is are there any committee chairs wishing to offer a report this evening Councillor paul so the so the public safety thank you president tracy the public safety committee is going to be meeting on thursday september 30th at five thirty downstairs in the busher conference room um we have only one item on our agenda and that is in view of the cna report we are simply going to be going back and making sure that we have done and have made as complete a resolution as we can on police oversight and so that is thursday uh september 30th thanks okay thank you councillor paul councillor hightower and just to follow up on that um the for the joint committee of public safety and the police commission as we do expect the cna report to come out on friday uh this week thank you for that uh any further committee chairs uh councillor hanson great thanks president tracy um the transportation energy and utilities committee is going to meet tomorrow um tuesday the 28th at four thirty pm a little bit earlier of a start than normal um and we meet down at the dpw building department of public works building 645 pine street um we're going to be looking at district energy uh lake side avenue intermodal facility planning main street great streets overview and uh 195 201 flinn avenue um so those are some of the items on the agenda and please feel free to come in and make your voice sir thanks thank you any other councillors wishing councillor carpenter i just want to report that after hot you just use your mic after hiatus and not having um an hr director which we now have and we're very pleased about the hr committee is now trying to meet regularly we had we have a couple grievances we have to deal with but i just wanted to let you know after the discussion we had on the aviation director that we have talked to the hr director about putting on her work plan um really beefing up and examining evaluation for executive staff and department heads thank you any other committee chairs okay um anyone with uh city council general affairs okay seeing none um councillor councillor paul go ahead thanks um i actually should have mentioned this before but it's not a committee that i chair but just wanted to let um let the council know and let the community know that um about a month and a half ago we passed a resolution on redistricting and that required a ask for the formation of an ad hoc committee on redistricting and i'm happy to say that the committee is moving along exactly on schedule um uh they're having their first organizational meeting on wednesday from six to eight p.m there's an agenda i don't know if it's been posted on the city calendar but um hopefully it will be soon each of the wards did get a representative um so there are eight representatives on this ad hoc committee a couple of them went and got a an alternate um just a couple of them um but it's moving along really right on schedule so they'll have two meetings and probably another meeting where they will develop the report that they will then come back to us with in late october so we will have that for probably our first meeting in november um so just wanted to mention that i apologize i should have mentioned that earlier thank you um anyone else with city council general affairs okay next is city council president updates the one update that i did want to share is regarding hybrid meetings and specifically the hybrid offering a public forum we're still in the process of installing the technology we have one remaining issue to figure out which is the installation of a second set of cameras that will allow us to more readily switch between in-person commenters and folks who are connecting remotely um we should be able to by our next meeting which is on october 18th um have that as an option and so folks um will be able to to comment in either way um apologize for it taking uh a while to get figure that all out there certainly there is a number of different considerations that we that we have had to work through in order to make it happen but um it looks like we're on the cusp of being able to do that so just wanted to alert folks to that um and that was the only update that i had for this evening um mayor did you wanted um i'll transition to mayor uh mayor weinberger's general affairs update president tracy um we're going to have a lot of updates through the course of tonight's meeting we're talking about a number of major initiatives from the the administration's been working on so i think i'll save my comments for later okay all right well we are just about at public forum um so i will go to that um we've got plenty of commenters for this evening um we'll have uh two minutes per commenter again if you are interested in commenting the sheets are available in the corner over here you can just hand them over to the the city clerk um and then i'll get them that way i'll read them in the order that they're received again please focus on uh on issues and refrain from uh personal attacks um in in your comments um and the other piece is also as i said before um with a concern around sort of droplet transmission um just keeping your mask on um that's the guidance that we've been that we've received um in terms of uh in terms of the the commenting period so um again just make sure you're speaking into the mic um i think the one on this side works better than than than that one um just in terms of projecting so um and i'll call the the first person the the person who's speaking as well as the one to follow um and again just please respect the time limits um that that are given i'll let you finish your sentence but um please don't go too far over um as we do have quite a few folks um who are interested in speaking this evening with that our first speaker will be gene bergman to be followed by winifred mccarthy don we'll see if we can you hear me i couldn't hear anybody when the mask was on by the way back yeah can i take my mask off please sure i mean it is i think less than two make sure you also use the mic that's the another the other piece of this yes yeah that works yeah okay burlington burlingtonians believe in democracy and equity we want to say and how our public services are delivered we believe in acting now for our kids who are inheriting a lot of messes this is why a municipal collection system is needed we support paying people fairly and making sure all of us are economically secure we support unions and the decent wages and benefits including pensions which are a part of union contracts this is why a municipal system is needed we are practical and frugal and this includes investing in infrastructure needed for democratic and equitable city investing in a municipal system is such an investment we can invest in a municipal system and account for our debt ceiling and other infrastructure needs this means taking time building a program that encourages reuse and understanding that this is a revenue generating program that can pay off the initial bonds and pay for itself with the fees generated just like the water department it also means questioning locking up 10 million dollars in debt capacity for memorial when we don't even know what we're going to be doing it with it 10 million dollars is four million dollars over the estimated cost of a municipal system now there are legitimate questions on the details of a consolidated system this resolution puts us on a path that is consistent with our values our commitment to democratic control over public services equity and worker empowerment fighting climate change and smart investments in our future we have the time to walk this path responsibly building a future we can be proud of the waterfront boathouse bed the water system airport church street all jewels of this jewels of this queen's city we're created by visionary leaders who embrace these values and we are richer for it my last sentence is you have a chance to join these those leaders if you embrace the municipal system please do thank you thank you our next speaker is winifred mccarthy don um and and then our next speaker to follow that is pat brown believe i've read that correctly okay i start my clock okay the progressive platform is to support local ownership locally owned energy economic justice local businesses are a cornerstone i'm quoting from the vermont progressive party preamble cornerstone of our vermont communities we believe in a strong local economy and local investments taxes for the wealthiest vermonters to pay a higher percentage so parentheses here for me if you remove five private companies from service you diminish your large tax base d for the progressive preamble protects citizens from unconstitutional government intrusion how many employees will be out of work to and how many to replace if you remove the private waste company disposal companies higher taxes for new facilities present waste present the waste haulers right now take the waste to a williston transfer station which then takes it to the northeast kingdom if we have waste sites in the city where will they be a proposal was for flint avenue a few blocks from where i live the nation pattern is to put waste disposal and dumps in poor areas we have lead water in flint michigan we have rats in public housing public roles do not guarantee public good renters students may not see property tax rise but water electricity consumer taxes parking other city fees will all go up for a five million dollar plus waste facility cost estimated to build waste disposal sites formerly known as garbage dumps on proposal for flint avenue i mentioned that oh shoot thank you this is an area of low income so if you could please just wrap up dumps if you could please wrap up okay okay um a lot of private companies have been the cornerstone for the green revolution and the state and your time is up that's it thank you okay our next speaker is pat brown to be to be followed by kassie gardener i have pat brown to be followed by kassie gardener i'm sorry that's i must have read it wrong i apologize for that joanne brown i've come from st albins vermont like a many people in the area speaking to the mic like many people in the area have occasion to use the airport a good deal and um we were a little bit um it was a little unsettling to hear about the recent termination by the council of uh uh the director gene richard um he appeared to be uh rather summarily dismissed we're looking for a little comment um from the council with regard to uh some of the areas where his performance was uh remiss uh allegedly remiss um i understand from um wcx um indicates that the acting chief is expected to speak later tonight and uh i just wonder if maybe there were uh problems at the airport with uh the police presence there that of law enforcement because fairly recently uh their um office has been moved from the upper the second floor to the first floor and uh they may not be um as happy with their accommodation as they were before also um it's it's my understanding that the chief expects to address new hires are he's looking for more cops on the beat i'm looking to know if perhaps um there was a budgetary concern related to his termination are you looking for funds it's my understanding my further understanding that the chief uh is is the acting chief in this area and do you plan to um hire uh a permanent in a permanent position thank you appreciate that money well thank you for that i appreciate that so this is not a uh we don't go back and forth in public forum um with uh with with public we just hear from hear from commenters so our next speaker will be uh cassie gardener to be followed by kurt shaker or i'm i'm sorry i can't read it shuler okay cassie gardener i'm cassie gardener can you hear me okay great so i haven't been here for a meeting since i was very young i think my last meeting the only person i could remember was you chip um i was trying to maybe increase the number of chickens that you might be able to have back in the day which i think we ended up with three and that was a long time ago today i didn't know i was speaking but i did have a couple of questions and i don't know if i'm allowed to ask them but one is i don't understand redistricting and i was hoping that at some point someone could try to explain why we do why we're doing that if anyone wants to and the second issue i thought that i just would love to bring up is that there seems to be a bit of a crime increase in my neighborhood and all over the city and and a lot of us we're hoping we could just hire a few more policemen and women if that's a possibility and and that's those are the only two points i have thank you thank you very much kurt shuler okay passing our next speaker then will be jada bearden to be followed by sylvia night hi there it's good to see y'all um so i don't want to stay before you long i just want to like share a story uh september is suicide awareness month and because i work with children and i am an activist in the community i find it necessary and imperative to speak out and just like make everyone aware about this month and not just this month but like year-round awareness um um so in april of this year i um i had a i tried to um attempt suicide in my um in the second room of the house of the apartment i was staying at the time and i would have not been here had and i've been for my partner at the time uh so i share that because like y'all see me like rah rah rah and like here on the mondays um and i just wanted to share that because it could darkness passes everyone and i know we get so caught up in politics and who's voting for what or what positions we stand on about the end of the day we're all human so um mental health and uh suicide prevention and awareness is really important and i just really want y'all to like give a damn like about your like constituents and your the people of berlington um because yeah like if y'all are aware like mental health in the city of berlington is it's a hot mess respectfully um but yeah so that's it thank y'all for letting me share and i'm really thankful for that person who like saved my life um but yeah like i could check on your people that's all thank you our next speaker is sylvia night to be followed by uh grace file good evening my name is sylvia night i live with my husband bob right in berlington vermont ward seven i'm speaking about item 614 on the consent agenda a letter from the reverend standard baker and the social justice committee of st paul's cathedral in berlington the letter concerns the attempts by new african americans to achieve justice following civil rights violations we appeal to you as persons of conscience we want to support the melly brothers and mr jock in seeking a just compassionate and culturally responsible resolution to claims brought against this city by jeremy elbin and trelly melly and mobby or jock arising from injuries caused by berlington police using excessive force two and three years ago the city's unfortunate failure to reach an equitable settlement or accept the claims of these men appears to arise from an underlying culture of institutional racism and insulation of police from accountability the optics of this city going to court refusing to take responsibility for excessive force and resulting injuries and refusing to settle with people of color injured by police are severely at at odds with a city working for racial justice we urge you to enter into a restorative justice process for the melly brothers and mr jock if you could please in order to take responsibility can you please wrap up thank you thank you our next speaker will be grace file to be followed by john mohoney oh can you hear me nice to see you all in person um i just wanted to speak to agenda item 7.05 and 7.06 um the entirety of the arpa funding needs to go directly into our community taking arpa funds and putting them into the police department contradicts the racial justice resolution and the city's commitment to invest in our community the cna report which will be made public on friday um which some of you may have already seen affirms that we have the correct number of officers for the city of our size and demographic i want to encourage the council to genuinely explore and fund public safety alternatives that truly meet the needs of all of our neighbors instead of continuing to rely on and fund the violent white supremacist institution of policing and investing in mental health investing in all of these resources that is public safety like jada was talking about earlier we need to genuinely invest in all of those different things and all of those different resources for our constituents and the safety of everyone not just people who live in the hill drifter thank you thank you our next speaker is john mohoney to be followed by ron jacobs my name is john mohoney and i grew up in burlington just a few blocks from where we are sitting thank you for continuing to make the time to listen to constituent concerns there were 11 in the household that i grew up in and when we graduated from high school there was an expectation that we would pursue opportunities in higher education my parents committed to providing us room and board and we were responsible to pay for education i never lived in a dorm or an apartment my parents kept their end of the bargain and i'm proud to say that i'm a graduate of the university of vermont i think that the university is a great asset to the community and to the region that said i could not be more disappointed in the university's behavior regarding not providing housing for its admitted students over the course of their matriculation i'm especially disturbed that the university has this year admitted its largest class ever this guarantees continued greater stress on the housing market perhaps moving out of a dorm is a rite of passage every time a student moves out of a dorm and into a house or apartment they take away housing from a waitress or bartender downtown a teacher a teacher's aid at a public or private school a produce worker at a grocery store or a nurse or resident at the hospital i would urge you to do everything that you can to hold the university responsible for their continued lack of commitment to the greater burlington community and its housing needs thank you for your time thank you our next speaker is ron jacob's to be followed by angelique goffier i'm not ron jacob's he had to leave but i do have his statement i'm reading a statement from ron jacob's the current president of afts me local 1343 which is the union that would represent the workers at a municipally owned waste management facility our members represent city employees all over the city from the department of public works to fletcher free library and from city hall to the parks of our town even if we don't live in burlington proper we share the desire of everyone here to create and maintain a livable city in recent decades many of us have watched as governments in vermont and around the country have privatized services once run by the city themselves here in burlington some have openly advocated to privatize the city owned electric department an attempt to set up a publicly owned internet and cable system was crushed when corporate interests manipulated the situation to prevent it from happening the only real beneficiary of that endeavor were the banking and telecommunications industry now with this question of how burlington residents will deal with their trash and recycling in the in front of the city council we have an opportunity to reset the current mishmash of private for-profit companies and city-run departments into a consolidated city owned and managed waste management operation there are many reasons to support this publicly owned and managed facility foremost among them is that such an operation would be answerable to the people of burlington its government and its residents private waste management operations are answerable firstly to the market a market which demands a certain rate of profit which in turn means shifting prices and levels of service with little or no recourse for those who wish for those whose trash recycling is being collected there's a few more sentences here so i'll just read the last one please vote against outsourcing and for a city owned operation thank you thank you our next speaker is angelique gothier to be followed by jane gothier good evening can you hear me yep okay so my name is angelique and i'm speaking on behalf of my mother jane gothier who's one of the owners of gothier trucking company and my family's been taking care of the trash needs uh in burlington since 1950 when my grandfather started this company we've now heard that the city wants to take over the waste business in burlington and this is a business that my family's worked decades to build and that would mean taking away our customers that we know and that know us when we asked our customers to complete your survey the results showed that the people of burlington don't want this change and i understand that the city wants to improve the waste pickup system in some ways that's why we're always working hard to make our service better for our customers the community and the environment remont's motto is to support local but this this will take business and jobs away from local companies that part i don't understand we can work to address the concerns and solve them together burlington is a big part of gothier's business and please let us be a part of the solution rather than label us as the problem and lastly i'll ask you not to vote um to take away 61 years of my family's hard work that's not the remont way thank you thank you uh jane gothier did did you want to add anything okay all right okay our next speaker then will be ryan mires to be followed by joe senagra my name is ryan mires from mires waste recycle i'm here tonight because i don't support either models the city is proposing for waste consolidation picking up trash is what we do it's not just our job it's part of our life we don't just do it because we want to we do it because we are good at it we are the professionals the city of burlington sorry the city of burlington should be working with us not against us we are here to help thank you thank you our next speaker will be joe senagra to be followed by dave coval good evening thank you for having me um my name is joe senagra i'm here representing mires waste recycling we're here to ask you uh we do not support either resolution and a few points on it is why are we rushing on this there are so many questions and so few answers on both resolutions more studying needs to occur before we rush into a decision mires wasting recycling like gothiers like kasella like duffie's like so many other haulers didn't just start yesterday these are businesses that have multiple generations who started here in vermont the vermont way and grew to hundreds if not thousands of employees hardworking good meeting vermonters we have the same goals as your resolutions and i think what you're looking for we're in the business of extending vermont's future having clean energy that's why we all invest thousands tens of thousands of dollars on energy efficient trucks why we spend so much on educating and training our employees our employees have worked for our companies for decades not weeks finally i ask why the waste industry i could sit here and ride aloft 20 other industries that are in burlington who have bigger trucks and more pollutants that have a bigger effect adverse effect on the city than trash my question is is trash today and is taxis oil delivery beer delivery car delivery next we all stand jointly as opposing both of these resolutions thank you thank you our next speaker will be dav coval to be followed by elizabeth kasella as he said my name is david coval i work with kasella right now i previously worked for my own business with tim mac his clean green sanitation we decided to sell to kasella based on the fact that the environment that chitin and solid waste was creating was going to make it very difficult to stay in business as they really were there wanted to manage fewer companies that was the way we understood it and it was very difficult to navigate those waters and so being at the mercy of their decision making to consolidate we decided it was a good time to take matters into our own hands and to sell to somebody who could navigate against a larger government entity we were in business for almost 20 years and it was it was a good effort i enjoyed being in that business i enjoy working with kasella as as they move forward into new avenues with their d-pack facility is where i work now what i can say is that the vision the visions that even mires have with with their construction reconciled recycling facility and and the things that these companies are pushing forward is is the vision that they create through the industry that they master um i do know that what you're certainly doing in these uncertain times that we've all been listening to is that you certainly will affect the livelihood of the people that work at these companies and the companies themselves thank you thank you our next speaker is elizabeth kasella to be followed by michael kasella good evening can you hear me yep just lean right into the bike okay um i'll be speaking with with my brother michael um good evening my name is liza kasella and i'm here with my brother michael thank you so much for the opportunity to speak with you all tonight uh in opposition to the resolution and support of the fully municipal collection model almost 50 years ago our uncle founded kasella refuse removal right down the road in rutherland and our father joined him about a year later still leads the company today and we're still headquartered in rutherland having spent the last decade in our business i've gained a deep understanding and a deep appreciation for the ins and outs of this incredibly complex industry we applaud the city for trying to address these issues but we are here today with our industry peers to share our disappointment that we were not included in the lead up to this vote to share our perspective and our expertise one that we feel is incredibly valuable and i'm michael kasella um i think most of the trash people actually would rather be out picking up trash and recycling and organics than having these discussions here um i think we're not in support of any of the resolutions as well and we're not we're not your enemies we're vermoners we grew up here we live here and up until last year i lived i rented an apartment right down on college street i know the challenges of the city um we want to be part of the solution with the city and achieving their goals and the goals of the residents of burlington uh one of the things i've learned is is the details are important and one of the big things in the gbb study that you're making your decisions on tonight it's inaccurate misleading and incomplete you know costs are underestimated environmental benefits are assumptions not facts and the choice is important to residents whether it be a hauler the service level that they're going to select or using a local bag drop our company has been serving the city of burlington for nearly as long as we've been in business and we've enjoyed the opportunity to work with some of our burlington customers for over 30 years we asked our customers to complete your survey because we find that their perspective is equally important and like gothers we found that what they value is our service just as much as we value them as always we are committed to evolving our business to meet the needs and goals of our communities we want to continue to offer opportunities to hardworking vermoners and more importantly we want to continue to be a part of the solution as mic referenced we want to provide innovative services to advance material management and sustainability that is our business and that is the future of burlington and i think two partnerships will make vermont's waste and recycling successful we're local experts all the haulers that are here tonight we've grown up in the vermont we've worked here for decades and i'm confident we can reach your goals we've supported many organizations like the flan ronald mcdonald house lond we'd love to continue in partnership with the city to address its concerns with the current collection system rather than be driven out altogether please let us and other vermoners help you we ask you to vote now on a municipal model so that we can have a seat at the table thank you thank you thank you um our next speaker is our jim and joe trask to be followed by kelly divine our jim and joe trask here okay not seeing them so i will go to kelly divine and kelly will be followed by barrett sinowitz i'm kelly divine i'm the executive director of the burlington business association i'm actually here to speak quickly on three different items um first of all there's a renewal for a peddler's license for a food truck on the agenda tonight and i looked over the application and not surprising to me at all there were repeated violations at various places around the city parks and rec space downtown space concerned by local businesses i just want to say that you know i represent a lot of different businesses and i think it's important that everyone follow the rules if you need the rules changed come before the city and get that done but this to me seems like a fragrant flagrant dismissal of the rules so just caution the city council about that i'm also here to speak about the changes to downtown parking um as some of you know i've worked on parking for a long time worked on the removal of downtown minimums for almost a decade i think it's a very very important issue to burlington and i'm generally supportive of the idea i just think that this proposal i didn't even know about it before it came before the council i checked with planning commission members who haven't had a chance to really look at it and i have to question the process on this one it seems rushed to me i'd love for my constituents and myself to have some input on it it's something i've given a lot about our organization has done two studies on downtown tdm and i can't see something like this advancing to a council vote without more input from the community the third thing i want to speak about is the plan to provide some financial ability to help with the retention of officers i mean we are losing officers at a rapid pace i'll just say quickly that i came upon upon an overdose of this victim in the middle of the day last week and i have to say thank god there was somebody there to respond because this young man surely would not have survived that day without the help of the burlington police department so i encourage you to pass that resolution thank you thank you our next speaker will be barrett sinowitz to be followed by lauren fissano hello my name is barrett sinowitz i just celebrated my fifth month here in burlington this is a wonderful place i've never if you could just please either speak up or speak closer to the mic i've never seen such courtesy i'm from new york i've lived in new york for the last 60 years and this is a great place but i've got to say this i'll make it short in just the five months that i've been here i've noticed the deterioration in the morning when i get the new york times delivered frequently there's probably just a homeless person sleeping in the doorway i've noticed also uh we're right in the pentagonia store building uh people taking a crap on the sidewalk you don't see that in new york believe it or not i don't see the policemen around as much as i do even in new york i think you've got a wonderful city the unbelievable courtesy that you have here should be preserved i like it here please keep it good and keep it going up not down thank you thank you our next speaker will be lauren fissano to be followed by christopher hasley hello can you hear me all right yep all right this is my first time here so i'm not going to pretend like i know what i'm talking about what you guys have discussed in your past meetings because i don't but what i do know is the fear that i feel as a student every single day living on college street above pentagonia like that man did like that man explained he does as well i am also from new york think about your college experiences your kids does it include being cat called by a registered sex offender does it include being delayed going to the grocery store because you have to call 911 for an overdosed man does it include opening your window in the morning deep breakfast and seeing someone shoot heroin right outside does that include any of your college experiences and should it i don't think it should i have lived here for three years and been coming here for five i have had family here for more than 10 none of this should be what the city is about it was a beautiful city and it had so much potential it's a waste to see what it is going to now and it is really unfortunate that a student like myself does not even feel safe feels the same anxiety here in this room talking about it that i do going to my car at night i should not have to be the one to call 911 when a man overdoses i was 18 i should not be that person when you go to sleep at night i hope you can think about your children your nieces and nephews your own personal experience and relate it to mine and realize this is not what this city should be about i hope you guys take this into consideration and really take into consideration the people who do live on college and church street because it is not just businesses we are here and we live here we face these same problems and it's 24 hours i appreciate you letting me have time to speak especially with my anxiety thank you thank you our next speaker will be christopher hasley to be followed by steven margolet remove the mask if that's okay with y'all i am fully vaccinated i just wanted to elaborate on what my neighbor lauren had spoke about i've lived in the city for a little over two decades five years in my current address on college street and i have noticed a decline in the quality of life here um for many years i heard about the opioid crisis and it was just kind of something i didn't really know much about until about a month ago when i was walking into the parking garage and i saw a man who i thought had passed out and when i when i went to see check on him he jumped up and he's like do you like to watch people shooting heroine and he had a needle in his hand and it was kind of like whoa i had never seen that before most recently about a week and a half ago i returned to the same garage to my car to head to a doctor's appointment only to discover it had been broken into so i'm going to take in a rock and smash the window and stole my backpack my wife's backpack my chainsaw my personal protective equipment things i used to try to give back to the community by doing trail work here in vermont in new york i don't know what the solution is so i started going out just trying to talk to people on the downtown i've talked to people that are on house i've talked to people that work here in city hall and kind of feel like a political football you know people say well call the police or call the howard center and we call and we don't get a response and then we hear from the city government well call the police and they're like well you need to talk to city hall and we just don't know what to do but what we do know is that we have people dealing drugs and shooting heroin like right outside our door you walk over to the park in the morning my son's 18 year old girlfriend moved up from north carolina and she's having to step over dirty needles when she's out walking the the dog and like lauren she's getting catcalls by people that are just people you know and it's just she shouldn't have to deal with that again i don't know what the solution is but like barry had said he have come out i found people feces in front of our you know our door the one bright spot i see is that we do have a lot of people that have come out tonight to speak on a variety of issues and while we all are different people and we all have different ideas i think the one thing that we can agree on and i think the one thing that unites us as a city is a common desire to be able to feel safe as we walk around day or night and not have to look over our shoulder so on that note i would ask you guys to let us know what we can do because we're just we're done thank you all right our next speaker is steven margolan to be followed by christopher erin felker hi can anybody hear me uh not not super well this better yep awesome uh it's cool to be doing this in person uh normally i've only spoken on the uh digital calls so hi my name is steven margolan i'm a ward 8 resident i've lived in burlington for seven years and recently i just started teaching at the college so that's cool and primarily i wanted to start off by first saying uh i support uh the public efforts and support unionization i don't think we need as many trucks um it's really um unnecessary and crowds out another thing i'd like to talk about being unnecessary is the police department's request for covid relief money uh it is a gross misuse of that money and what we should be doing is funding uh public supports and um systems that will enable us to address the concerns a lot of our neighbors have said here today there's a growing fear of houseless of our houseless neighbors uh there's growing fear of the opioid crisis and i think we can address that by reinvesting in public services and health as opposed to criminalizing it because then you're only punishing the people who are already a victim of these horrible circumstances i don't think we need more police and i certainly don't think we need to give them more money the report that uh commissioner mirad will say today says that the average police uh salary is 77 thousand dollars the average burlington uh like individual income is 20 thousand dollars so they're making 50 thousand dollars over that and now we're going to give them even more money i think that's really unnecessary and i'd like to end my time by just putting forward a question of really how do we want to spend this money because what we do now will shape what we do with the future and all of these problems are interconnected and they can be solved by reinvesting in the public good not in a force that will criminalize people who are already suffering mr mayor your legacy is already the pit do you want to throw away another million dollars next speaker and again please focus comments to the chair and on the issues our next speaker is christopher erin felker to be followed by solvi overby good evening my name is christopher erin felker i am the chairman of the burlington gop and the communications director for the chitenden county republican party i am here to speak to this council this evening on two points the first is on municipal consolidation the burlington republican party and the chitenden county gop as a whole are opposed to this measure we believe we oppose any measure that has government intervention to crush small business we believe that this will result in a net loss of jobs and it will crush small businesses that have been here in burlington and in vermont for decades so we ask you to oppose the municipal model uh we're also here to this evening i'm here this evening to speak on behalf of uh 7.05 we recommend that you you adopt this measure for retention and recruitment of new officers and at burlington police department as the leaked copy of the cna report will show burlington needs 76 to 83 officers currently we're at 68 and since this council failed to act two months ago to raise the cap we need to try to do whatever we can to try and retain our officers and make lateral recruitment from other departments throughout our nation so we ask that you consider this motion that you approve this motion because it's in the best interest of burlingtonians as you've heard this evening people that live right outside this door don't feel safe people in this ward don't feel safe it's your responsibility to make sure that we have a functional public safety team in this city it's the first time i have extra time left thank you very much thank you our next speaker will be solvi overby to be followed by lizz medina i support expanding burlington's successful recycling program into a fully consolidated municipal waste collection system handling trash recycling and compost only 11 to 15 percent of the city study use private hauler subscriptions like we do our current situation leaves residents with just the options and prices that are most profitable for private haulers to offer if burlington wants to reduce reuse and recycle it should not continue a system that provides no incentive for waste reduction a municipal system facilitates innovation and democratic control over the cost and service options it provides fair treatment of essential waste management employees the municipal system proposed will serve the roughly 10 000 households in buildings with one to four residences that don't want to self haul their trash to drop off nearly 25 percent of residents some 3 000 households are not paying the estimated 30 to 50 dollar cost per month for home trash pickup they're also not paying the four dollars and 84 cent per month solid waste generation tax which is added to private haulers trash bills to fund the city's recycling program residents that self haul trash say they reduce their waste so they pay just six to eight dollars to dump a 35 to 45 gallon trash bag every month or so a municipal system won't exclude any private hauler commercial properties and residential buildings with over four units will still be served through individual contracts with private haulers municipal buildings could also be served by private hauler service the one thing missing from your materials is the city's highly beneficial 20-year lease purchase option on the three acres solid waste property at 195 201 flint avenue this property would provide one acre for the municipal waste operation two acres for a new drop-off center to replace the one closed on pine street the rent would be 25 000 a year for 20 years to pay off the 500 000 purchase price critically this option agreement expires this october 31st just coming up it should be extended another year at the risk of or risk a costly lost opportunity for establishing a municipal system that lease option is in my materials at consent agenda item 6.29 for those who want to read the terms thank you thank you our next speaker is liz madina to be followed by paul flockenstein i'm two people tonight hello my name is liz madina i'm the executive director of the vermont state labor council afl cio which is our state's federation of labor unions i'll say it's not enough to have jobs as a representative organized labor we need to have good paying union jobs and as director one of the biggest problems i hear about time and time again for up from our over thousand member or thousands of members actually i think it's over 6000 in burlington is that there is immense downward pressure on wages from non-union workers in the industry and moving towards a public waste consolidation consolidation system would create good paying union jobs in the public sector and i think that's really important to keep in mind i did some research into what the private sector pays for waste hauling and i saw wages as low as 11 an hour i wonder how anyone could possibly live on 11 an hour in this city which is very expensive so i hope none of you are having to live off 11 an hour because it is not a living wage and second i want to just emphasize the importance of keeping the long-term big picture in mind it may seem more advantageous to just quickly go with this mishmash that we already have versus setting up a public municipal system but we know that the only way to rationalize waste management is to have a public system and that will save the environment and it will save residents from the noise and disturbances of having multiple too many trucks on the road down the road and it's just simple as this it's the tragedy of commons right how can we possibly get a bunch of private companies to most efficiently plan their routes for all the different kinds of waste that need to be collected in this city it's just not a feasible thing so i encourage you to support consolidation in a public waste system thank you so much thank you our final speaker is paul fleckenstein i'm paul fleckenstein a burlington resident and i'm here to support municipal waste consolidation the technical research that i've gone through supports this in terms of co2 emissions and other environmental impacts the significantly better union jobs with pensions and retirement supports municipal ownership and control and i'm proud to stand with burlington's public sector union supporting this most importantly though the horizon for a radical green new deal in vermont and beyond urgently supports this the current prioritization of existing private undemocratic profit-oriented business interest is a roadblock to the changes needed to address global heating if local state and federal governments continue with the status quo primarily representing private businesses and their investments there will not be much if any meaningful progress toward climate goals we should believe in the science we have to prioritize the common and majority good over private and corporate interests and support increase municipal ownership democratic management union rights and consolidated services when that's indicated thank you and with that i will that was our final speaker for this evening so i'm going to go ahead and close the public forum we'll move into our agenda for this evening the next item on the agenda is are the climate emergency reports did any councilor have a climate emergency report that they'd like to offer okay seeing none i'm going to go to the consent agenda um councillor stromburg may please have a motion on the consent agenda yes i move to adopt the consent agenda and take the actions as indicated thank you we have a motion is there a second seconded by councillor magie any discussion councillor paul just a moment i'm getting the consent agenda up yes i just wanted to state that i'll be recusing myself from item 6.05 due to a professional conflict of interest thank you will the record please note that recusal um are there is there any other discussion okay seeing none we'll go to a vote on the consent agenda all those in favor of adopting our consent agenda agenda this evening please say aye aye any opposed that carries unanimously into our deliberative agenda but before we get into that deliberative agenda i'm going to go to the um i'm going to recess this meeting and go to the board of tax the full board of tax abatement of taxes meeting um and convene that meeting so i'll recess the city council meeting at 822 and convene that full board of abatement of taxes meeting at 822 um our first item on this agenda um is a is the agenda itself um um sorry mayor thank you i think our custom is that the mayor chairs this uh this board so i apologize no no no worries um uh i will ask the same question present tracy was uh are we ready for a motion on the agenda ocean to adopt thank you councillor paul do we have a second second by councillor mason any discussion all those in favor of the vote please say aye aye are there any opposed the motion carries unanimously um and that brings us to consent agenda i would welcome motion regarding the consent agenda thank you move that we adopt the consent agenda and take the actions indicated second any discussion all those in favor of the motion please say aye any opposed the motion carries unanimously and that brings us that's the entire agenda brings us well if there's no objection i'll adjourn the full board of tax abatement at 8 24 p.m. thank you mayor that brings us back into the regular city council meeting and our deliberative agenda for this evening i'll reconvene the city council meeting at 8 24 and we'll move into our deliberative agenda we have a item 7.01 which is a peddler license renewal for fast food good food councillor mason thank you president tracy i'd like to make a motion to approve and recommend that the city council approve the applicant's fast food good food application for peddler license renewal subject to a six month term commencing on june 1st 2021 ending on november 30th 2021 and a further refund 100 of the 300 dollar full year renewal fee already paid by the applicant and ask for the floor back after a second thank you councilor mason is there a second is there a second seconded by councilor mcgee go ahead councilor mason thank you councilor mcgee so to explain why this is on and the applicant was notified lory confirmed but is not present as was noted this is an applicant with a rather checkered past there was a lengthy discussion at the license committee about exactly what to do the most recent transgression related to appearing in a non-sanctioned spot down at the skate park the applicant gave a very detailed oh he is here forgive me i'll go to the applicant after my statement um the state of justification at the time was you know in essence covet there in order to feed his family and stay alive he you know moved understanding that that was not okay the other issue that the license committee grappled with a little bit that notice of violation had not yet been served on the applicant so technically was not even ripe for consideration where the committee ultimately ended up on a two to one vote with councilor hanson voting no was to in essence put some conditions on the license expect full compliance by the applicant as sort of a final chance um with that i know the applicant is here if there are questions from this body for the applicant feel free to ask thank you thank you councilor mason any comments from councillors councillor hanson yeah do you want them now or after after the applicant speaks oh sure um yeah i'll let the i'll go to the applicant now actually go ahead you don't have anything to offer okay go ahead councillor hanson yeah i just wanted to say i yeah i voted no on this in committee um i've been on the license committee for two and a half years and um even before i got on the license committee there were there were known issues with this applicant violating uh violating the rules of his license um and it's just been a consistent problem for for many years on end at one point we did take action and um suspended the license for a couple of weeks but it doesn't appear that that has really caused um a behavior change so i can't support at this time um the renewal thank you thank you councillor hanson any further comments from councillors okay hearing none we will go to a vote um will the city clerk please call the roll councillor barlow no councillor carpenter councillor jeng no councillor hanson no councillor hightower yes councillor mason yes councillor paul yes councillor magie yes councillor stromberg no um looks like councillor freeman has joined us so councillor freeman uh no and council president tracy no eyes six nays so point of order just when did councillor freeman join i want to make sure she was involved in the whole discussion and didn't just vote councillor freeman were you on for that whole item um i just was able to get my um zoom up so if you don't want me to vote that's fine okay i'll say thank you for that um the motion i would still fail on a five to five councillor mason so let's thank you for that point of order um and so it'll be uh please record a five to five vote given that councillors do need to be present for the full item councillor paul did you have okay i'm just wondering thank you we will go to our next item which is the item 7.02 comprehensive development ordinance minimum parking requirements councillor hanson yeah i'll move to consider this as a first reading and refer to the ordinance committee and would ask for the floor back after a second thank you we have a motion is there a second second seconded by councillor hightower go ahead councillor hanson great thanks so there's many issues that we uh disagree on and debate about but i think two of the issues that there's widespread agreement not only on council but throughout the committee throughout the community is around housing affordability and addressing that um as well as addressing the climate crisis and being a leader as a community in burlington um we still have a number of policies on the books that not only don't do enough but in fact we have some policies that actually are moving us in the opposite direction um one of those is right here before us um is this policy that we have existing around uh minimum parking requirements and these are requirements that force developers to build a minimum number of parking spaces regardless of whether or not the developers or their finance or their financiers feel that those spaces are are needed for the development um so this causes money and resources that could otherwise go towards building housing to go instead towards building more car infrastructure in burlington it makes development more difficult more expensive drives up housing costs and increases car dependency um last year we took a positive step forward and we eliminated these minimum parking requirements for downtown as well as along transit corridors and we replaced them with sustainable transportation requirements um that policy has been really successful and has enabled projects that otherwise wouldn't have been possible and wouldn't have been built um and it also reduced the cost of sorry there can people hear me there was a noise on your yes go ahead councillor okay sorry um yeah and it has reduced the costs of projects that have come through my understanding is that every project that has come through the development review board under this new policy has built less parking than they would have been required to previously by the city um and so tonight i'm proposing that we would that we build on that success and expand the citywide um the existing policy as i said is new is downtown in transit corridors and the sustainable transportation requirements are specific to um projects that have 10 or more housing units or 15 000 uh gross square foot of floor area or more um for the rest of the city i would propose that we would lower that threshold to five units because in many areas of the city there's not the same access to alternatives that exist in the downtown and along transit corridors and so if developers are going to build less parking in those areas um we would ask them to step up a little bit more on supporting other modes of transportation for the residents and you know employees or other folks that they're bringing to that location that they would step up on supporting not transportation impact um the table for the parking maximums that you see here is meant to reflect the current policy um because the current policy bases the maximums on the minimums and since we're deleting the minimums we would need to then put in this table for maximum so it's not a policy change it's just a way of representing what the maximums are um there's a few cases where that amount ends up at zero so we would just need to address that detail at the committee level but the big picture here is just really we need to we really need to reshape our transportation system not only for climate but for affordability safety health and a number of other issues and this is a piece of that puzzle i think the bigger picture is the city-wide transportation demand management program uh that were that was approved in the budget that we included $50,000 for and i'm working on a resolution on that i think that's going to have a larger impact but that's going to take some time to develop this is an immediate thing that we can do to ensure that new development isn't digging a deeper hole and building extra um car infrastructure that we don't need so that you know the policy we passed last year i think was was really popular and has been successful so far and i hope we can continue to build on that with this change thank you thank you any councillors wishing to speak to this item councillor mason uh thank you president tracy um i want to thank councillor hanson for bringing this forward my understanding from conversations with most around this table and at least my view i support the policy councillor hanson and i have gone back and forth and i know he has with the planting and zoning department as well relating to timing um for everyone's benefit we did just move forward you know on these requirements for the downtown core and the transportation corridors my understanding at the time that we passed that was we were really punting on the transportation demand management side um for those of us that were on the committee it was really at the end we were making up what we felt were appropriate policies but the expectation was we would budget forward and move forward with a you know a consultant outreach and an actual come forward with a citywide tdm policy my understanding and jack just conferred councillor hanson confirmed you know the money's in the budget and the expectation is that will happen so i'm a little scratching my head that we don't necessarily have the cart before the horse here if if mistuttle on behalf of the department is prepared to come up and maybe answer some questions too i would like to ask sort of their position on that i am i think as we all are cognizant of our demands on staff and i have some concerns that you know advancing this may imperil other initiatives that we have also asked that department to handle so i don't know megan if you want to share some of the conversations you've had or concerns with this proposal at this time sure thank you councillor mason um and i will just say that from a staff perspective we absolutely agree with uh the intent that councillor hanson has introduced this resolution under we agree and we discussed widely about the costs and impacts of parking requirement relative to the development of housing and the affordability of housing and support the concept of exploring extending the elimination of those minimum requirements to other parts of the city um i think our our main concern right now is just what councillor mason said is that we do um have money in our budget this year to do the transportation demand management study and feel that that will be a really good exercise for us to explore the range of options for how we could manage tdm requirements in the city not only for new development but also for potentially for existing development um and just about our capacity to manage doing both of those processes at the same time along with other major policy work thank you councillor mason anything else no thank you okay any other councillors on this item councillor hanson yeah just to just so everyone's clear on the fact that you know there's there's a big difference between regulating new construction which is what you know the comprehensive development ordinance does and what we the changes we made last year what i'm proposing here um it's a lot more simple and straightforward and i think frankly we never should have had these parking minimums but i think we're long overdue in eliminating them but the regulating existing employers existing um institutions that have a transportation impact getting them to engage and participate with transportation demand management is a completely different um animal and it's going to take quite a long time to develop that it's starting out with an expensive study that we're going to have to contract out it's going to be a long process i think it's really important and i'm looking forward to working on that but to hold up to continue to to force new development to overbuild parking in the meantime i think is is just backwards and and so that's why i'm proposing that we move this forward now rather than waiting for that larger TD TDM program to be developed thanks thank you council hanson council hat tower oh actually if i could have this total answer to that um what your opinion was on that before i make my comment yeah i mean i think councilor hanson is right that the TDM study will help us identify a much broader range of strategies that we can use for existing development and i i think in some ways that might be a more difficult not for us to crack um as far as the development goes again um you know this the current policy does not address kind of neighborhood scale development which is really the the districts of the city that we would be talking about expanding this elimination of minimums too um i think the areas of the city that are included in the the law it's a mouthful the downtown mixed use the downtown and mixed use um parking district that we just created is actually the part of the city where we would anticipate seeing the most and most intensive development in probably the near term um and particularly as we think about making addressing some of the other barriers in our zoning ordinance that might be limiting residential development in other parts of the city i think this is we have an opportunity to include parking in that work as well um thank you i think based on that answer i still feel comfortable moving this discussion to ordinance um with some of those assumptions and i think especially because as we're starting to think about community feedback and folks seeing this new that that's just a more better avenue to have those conversations in any further comments from councillors okay seeing none let's go to a vote will the city clerk please call the roll councillor barlow yes councillor carpenter yes councillor jang yes councillor freeman yes councillor hanson yes councillor hightower yes councillor mason no no councillor paul yes councillor meggy yes councillor shannon no councillor stromburg yes city council president tracy yes 10 eyes to nays the motion carries thank you very much for joining us for some questions appreciate that as well okay that brings us to our next item which is item 7.03 a resolution advancing a municipally operated consolidated collection system for trash recycling and organics councillor stromburg thanks president tracy i'd like to wave i'd move to waive the reading adopt the resolution um and ask for the floor back after a second please thank you councillor stromburg that we have a motion is there a second seconded by councillor meggy councillor stromburg go ahead thanks i'm sorry i'm like terribly backlit it's the best i can do for it now um so big topic lately right um i i truly believe that it is healthy for our community to always look at and weigh options waste and waste management is a huge part of our lives even if we don't think about it every day i know i certainly don't um but it is very important and it's something that um you know i i know there are a lot of takeaways a lot of very different takeaways for what is being proposed the one thing i really do want to mention before i go into why this is on the table um and kind of break that down i i do want to mention that you know we are not at war with any companies or any entity we're simply questioning the way that we currently function because we must consider changes as the world around us changes um the climate is changing as we know um the need for good paying jobs with benefits not not only changing goods increasing intensely um the proposal on the table is a page in a quarter long there is a lot that hasn't been covered in that um there would be a lot of details to work out no matter what model ends up being the chosen one um you know no one is no one is taking away the right to choose you know this is democracy and this is i've reiterated this on the phone of a lot of people um and i'm just truly fully supportive of a municipal model being implemented um in Burlington uh with the opt-out option obviously choice because a public system like this simply enables more democratic public and economic control um we spend so much time in these seats discussing these important pillars of our society um so i think that that's all in our best that is in our best interests um i truly believe that and i'm i know i'm not alone right now we overly prioritize considerations of the private profit of owners um we take a lot of what they need and want into account um we do that because they are people they are families they have businesses i respect that but we need to also really value the concerns of rate payers the environment especially now and the workers locally and probably in Burma and afar um greater control and flexibility over our rates and what we offer and the design of the system itself is truly a good thing um i think that's just good no matter what um no matter what angle you're coming at it um municipal consolidated collection is um you know the system in which that is you know it's most in the public interest because um consolidation creates monopoly conditions that are not really conducive to lower in cost through competition um so as you know monopolization is is fostered because customer costs decrease as the number of customers increase which makes competition not very favorable or advantageous um a public system will build a stronger middle class which is shrinking at a historically high rate um this would also build a more just economy which we talk about a lot as a council um through growing union jobs which we heard from tonight um unions um and fighting privatization that would eliminate union jobs and replace them with lower paying jobs with not as great benefits so no pensions and things to kind of pay into um this could also provide on the job protections like the union contract um and grievance procedures and things like that um finally i do want to say that a municipal system keeps the income generated in the public hands that's i think honestly again in our best interest the city already runs a citywide recycling program a lecture program bd um and public water which is huge um this really proves and shows to me that we are more than capable of running this type of system um and it would honestly also add capacity to the department of public works by adding staff who could be used in other ways um street cleaning is a big thing snow removal there's a lot of different avenues that they could go down and kind of alleviate that um i honestly hope that we can move forward as a city on this project because it does have a long range of benefits and keeps our assets local um therefore increasing efficiencies on a multitude of fronts so thank you very much and i hope we can pass this tonight thank you councillor strongberg and our councillors councillor shannon thank you president tracy um my constituents are the rate payers which councillor strongberg mentioned this uh policy would be a disadvantage to the rate payers and it will cost the rate payers more so i will not be supporting it thank you councillor shannon are there others wishing to speak councillor barlow thank you president tracy um i have a number i've been you know i've spoken against consolidated collection when it was in committee and when it was you know it's been talked about for the last two or three months but i have um just a few points i'd like to make about it um first of all as i've said before the there's significant impact on small businesses that haul trash and food waste and i've talked to a few of them and as we heard from them tonight and as they indicated when i talked to them on the phone this would be significant impact to them because burlington's a large market for them with regard to the municipal option i philosophically believe it's not the role of local government to displace local business where there's healthy competition and where those businesses are already providing quality services we need more businesses in vermont not fewer um i also wonder if we can afford the six plus million dollar bond for a municipal consolidated option um in addition to all the other bonding that we're considering doing all increased costs for city residents and recent tax increases have already stretched residents ability to pay and i've concerns about impacts on affordability with any unnecessary bonding we should be really picky about the projects we ask taxpayers and ratepayers to pay and those projects should all have really good roi i also have questions about uh some of the pricing projections um in a memo that dpw did the the zero percent opt out case for the municipal option is only projected to cost city residents three thirty cents a month or three dollars and sixty cents more a year than the franchise option and it only raises forty seven thousand dollars more a year how can this possibly be enough um the municipal option has a debt service on a six million dollar bond and we have to pay for 13 new city employees um i price it out just on an internet loan calculator and debt service alone on a six million dollar bond at four percent for 20 years is 36 000 a month so i don't have 47 000 a year annually would come even close to covering the costs um and lastly i'll just say some of the benefits listed might be able to be achieved be achieved in other simpler less expensive ways we already licensed the haulers in the city so if we require licensed haulers to use more efficient routes restrict days and hours of service in various neighborhoods we might be able to achieve some of these objectives and compliance with mandates and regulations might be achieved through more aggressive education efforts um and maybe we even instead of taking haulers out of the mix we create incentives for haulers like fewer restrictions if they electrify their fleets and i think there's other ways to approach this so i'm not supportive of of this resolution tonight thank you thank you i don't have anyone else in the queue councillor mcgee thank you president tracy um i just want to take a moment to uh review the benefit that a municipal operation model would have for councillor mcgee i'm having trouble hearing you is this better i just you can take it okay i just want to take a moment to address the benefit that this would have for our workforce in the city this would create nine to twelve good paying union jobs and those jobs would come with a guarantee of a fair wage health care benefits and pension benefits you know time and again we have seen privatization a sharp decline in union membership result in the erosion of workers rights and economic security through lower wages reduced benefits and no promise of a pension further we know city workers in particular have a vested interest in ensuring that berlington remains a vibrant healthy inhabitable city and these new positions would bolster dpw's capacity to address other quality of life concerns like snow removal tonight we have the opportunity to set a direction for waste consolidation which recognizes that our most essential services should be provided by the city with the best interests of residents considered above all else we can state clearly that all workers deserve a union a livable wage health care and pension benefits while i recognize that there are many questions left to answer i believe it is important for us to take this step that will ensure that the best outcome for both residents and workers uh for these reasons i'll be voting yes on this resolution thank you mayor one burger thank you president tracy i i agree with the sponsors of this resolution that there are some benefits to be gained from the city playing a more active role in the collection of waste the there's a reason i think that 80 percent of municipalities according to our professionals have some form of consolidated collection and i am supportive of us trying to move in a direction that reduces the greenhouse gas emissions that creates efficiencies that has less wear and tear on our roads that improves working conditions and i had hoped that we would be able to move forward in a bipartisan fashion with a proposal that achieves all that and more and perhaps uh there's still a route there we could do that after tonight but i i cannot support um the the current resolution i mean let's let's be really frank about what's being proposed here there is a proposal to essentially create two new businesses to have the city of brunington get into the waste hauling and the compost hauling business this is not something that can be done casually we should all remember what happened the last time the city in the name of lofty goals started a business it was a disaster that took us a full decade to dig out from under and only recently was completed for us to take this on this would have to become a major new priority there's no other way to do it with that and ensure that this does not become another disaster we are living in historically challenging times where we are already fully committed to a huge range of priorities we are still fighting our way through the end of a pandemic we have a very uncertain recovery that gives it the best in us the responsibility of deploying millions of dollars of federal dollars to relief efforts we are uh reckoning finally as a nation and as a community with racial justice and starting up a large number of new programs and efforts we have a acute housing crisis that demands city action on many fronts we have an opioid crisis that after some years of progress is seeing all the numbers move in the wrong direction and as we'll be discussing later on this agenda we have a major challenge with public safety and with forming a new consensus about where we go with public safety and how we get through this period even just looking at the team the you know and the the administration is responsible for working with the council on all those issues the day-to-day responsibilities for starting these two new businesses would fall to a public works team that also is straining to meet historic challenges we they we are attempting to address decades of deferred maintenance on many infrastructure areas we have another major initiative before you tonight that would accelerate that work we are trying to transform our streets to a much better active transportation network that requires innovation and transformation and it's already putting considerable strain on this team it there is no way to add another major priority to this very long list already and and there's no need to we can achieve virtually all as the analysis that's been shared with the council has shown we can achieve virtually all of the the the social goals that the sponsors of this resolution see to through the hybrid model that the department of public works team has proposed and we could do that with much less strain and diversion of critical attention and focus and resources thank you presentry thank you mayor i have councilor hanson to be followed by councilor mason great thanks well first of all i'm really excited that we're moving forward with consolidated collection um whichever route we go this uh it's been discussed for a very long time and i feel like we're finally and in a position to make progress on it and actually implement it it's going to save residents money on waste collection it's going to save taxpayers money on infrastructure it's going to reduce traffic reduce noise improve wages and benefits for workers improve air quality reduce fossil fuel use reduce greenhouse gas emissions and those things are true regardless of what type of consolidated system in terms of the decision between the hybrid model and the municipal i think we're faced with a common issue which is that the choice that is really best in the long term looking decades out is more costly more painful and more difficult in the short term that's especially tough right now with the recent reappraisal and many other competing needs that the mayor just laid out but in the long run this this would save money as others have noted it would build jobs that would support middle-class families to live in burlington really well paying jobs and benefits that are hard to come by these days and we would have more local control over over the specifics of how our waste is collected and you know the ratepayers would have a seat at the table and would actually have that public control over over the process over the system and i guess one example of that is on the climate front which is that we would have a greater ability to decarbonize and maximize efficiency within waste collection if it were municipal because if it were municipal it would fall under our net zero by 2030 goals and we could work aggressively do electrify the vehicles and make the operation efficient we can push through a hybrid system we can push the private sector through contracts and get some degree of of those benefits but having that full control and oversight and running as a city you have greater ability to to make those changes happen and i think the burlington electric department is the perfect example of that is as a utility they've been consistently a leader across utility you know looking at utilities across the country and world and that's because we've had that public ownership and have been able to guide that department not only in terms of economic benefits for for customers but also the values that we want to see from an electric department so i do think it's the harder path and it would take longer to set up but ultimately looking at the very long view i think it's the it's the right way to go but either way i'm excited to as i said in forward consolidated collection thank you thank you councillor hanson councillor mason thank you president tracy um to somewhat pick up on councillor hanson's comments um at least from the constituents that have reached out to me not a single one is interested in paying more period full stop we're all still getting yelled at for what we've done on electric rates on water rates and on the reappraisal not a single constituent has said i want to pay more move forward the municipal model i'm sorry but that's that's the reality of what i'm hearing as the ward five councillor i'm also pretty concerned about other priorities we've advanced and lumped on chappen and his team and an inability to move forward with this last meeting we advanced you know when we are now or i am optimistic that we will break round on the champlain parkway a year you know in under a year we're also advancing um the rail yard enterprise project i don't know that there's capacity to move forward with this at the same time and i think we're being unrealistic to just pass this and ask his team to do that so i will be voting now thank you thank you councillor mason i don't have anyone else in the queue i would like to speak about just crazy go ahead i'll have councillor jing to be followed by councillor hightower thank you i would like to thank the dpw chappen spent and team and the dpw commission as well for the hard work over the past couple of months about this and took as well but i do believe you know that it is important for us to at least listen here to our constituency people are a little bit confused and i think the amount of communication that has gone from the private holders to our constituency has brought some level of confusion and to me i have been leaning toward the uh municipal option but i want to grant my constitution the freedom to choose who would like to pick up their recycling their their trash and their organics therefore i will not be voting in support of this resolution and i think it will be imperative for us to have this conversation keep on talking for the right amount in collaboration with the private holders for the right system for the city of i will not be voting in support of this resolution thank you thank you councillor jing councillor hightower um yes so i just want to quickly state that i think that my understanding is that chappen and the administration um at least is just represented by um mayor weinberger i are interested in moving forward despite the many other projects that are going on in the city with a consolidated option and that consolidation is often a cheaper option which is why it has been chosen by 80 percent of municipalities it supports a lot of environmental goals it supports um some social goals i think the municipal option also supports a lot of social environmental goals including the ability to set ambitious priorities and i think part of what we're hearing is that that part is difficult to do right now i think as councillor hanson mentioned um i do think that it's important for us to show support for consolidation regardless of how we go forward um based on that i would like to divide the question of the two therefore be it resolved clauses so we have a motion to divide the question is there a second for that motion second is that a second councillor stromberg yes okay we have a motion and a second attorney richardson is the motion to divide the question debatable it is not debatable okay so we will um now go to a vote on the question to divide the two the the vote between the two resolve clauses there are two resolve clauses so the motion is to vote on each of those individually um we're not voting on those questions yet but this is a motion just to simply divide the question will the city clerk please call the roll on the the motion to divide the question between the two resolve clauses in the resolution okay councillor barlow no councillor carpenter yes councillor jen no councillor freeman yes yes yes councillor hanson yes councillor hightower yes councillor mason no councillor paul yes councillor magie yes councillor shannon no councillor stromberg yes city council president tracy yes eight eyes four nays so the motion to divide the question passes so we will divide the question were there any further comments on the resolution councillor shannon um just to clarify the um first question we will be voting on now is the city council supports the implementation of a consolidated collection approach to picking up residential trash recycling and organics for at least one to four unit residential parcels um does that include the hybrid approach that in that um if if you're supportive of the hybrid approach that would be included as a consolidated collection approach correct that's how i read it yes so point of order would that not include a municipal model it would it would include both because they're both consolidated collection options the the municipal option is for the the next clause further clarifies a municipal option so so i guess point of information to the city attorney what i'm trying to figure out is if i were to vote in favor of the first which is generic consolidated collection and i vote no on the second which is the municipal model i'm trying to figure out if if the municipal model still is in play based on a majority vote in favor of the first question as opposed to a negative on the second question because if that's true that will dictate how i vote on the first and the second question so my read of the of the two resolutions certainly obviously the second one very specifically calls out the full municipal operation model the first one however just simply speaks of a consolidated collection approach to picking up residential trash recycling organics so under that it would depend upon the definition of consolidated collection approach and simply because it was a resolution it would open up the possibility that both options were essentially on the table however read read together well let me just leave it at that simply because the resolution that would pass would have brought enough language um but certainly the second vote would clarify in some respects that first vote thank you okay any further discussion councilor hanson yeah from my perspective it's important it's helpful even if some even if the councilor opposes the municipal collection i think but they support the hybrid i do think it's helpful to support consolidation in general and not shoot that down because if that if that goes down i don't know exactly where that leaves us in terms of moving forward if the council has rejected consolidation period um so i would encourage anyone who supports um validated generally to support that and then we can specifically vote on how we feel about municipal you know immediately following that council mason oh sorry can i just say yeah go ahead just that if the municipal fails i think then but the but the consolidated succeeds i think it's pretty clear that the hybrid is what you know is where we're going thank you council hanson councilor mason i'm not this is a convoluted way now that we've done this you know i councilor hanson i don't and i i'm not sure i i agree that you know by voting no on both that forecloses the possibility of a hybrid consolidated approach you know we have not specifically voted on and i believe our rules would allow that to come back um so i will be voting no on both only because my intention is to foreclose the municipal option i don't want to leave it open by a majority vote on the first question and a minority or a negative vote on the second so i didn't create this little puzzle we've got here now but i want to explain you know i'm interested in a further conversation about the hybrid model and i'm hoping i don't believe my vote no on both the first and the second question will preclude that from happening thank you council mason i have council shannon to be followed by council carpenter because i don't know what um the uh yes vote on the first one opens the door to and it's not defined i will be voting no thank you council carpenter um attorney wedgeson can you just clarify if can we bring back a resolution on some form of of consolidated collection or other incentives or other program if we don't know on the first resolve that doesn't prohibit us from coming back with another proposal so if if both are just the first resolution was not to pass um you know it would require um the business to be brought subsequent to be significantly new business and i think it could be defined in that respect if you use language such as a hybrid model or with some degree of specificity that it would allow that to come back as as new business so if we vote no tonight we still could bring some proposal back at some time i mean certainly as a piece of new business not limited by yes okay any other comments from counselors we're going to vote on the two questions okay so we will start off with a vote on the first resolve clause online from lines 28 through 30 that reads now therefore be it resolved that the city council supports the implementation of a consolidated collection approach to picking up its residential trash recycling and organics for at least one to four residential unit residential parcels will the city clerk please call the roll councillor barlow no councillor carpenter no councillor jang no councillor freeman yes councillor hanson yes councillor high tower yes councillor mason no councillor paul no councillor mcgee yes councillor shannon no councillor stromburg yes city council president tracy yes six eyes six nays the first question fails now we will go to the second which is the lines 31 and 32 be it further resolved that the city council supports the full municipal operation model where the city would collect all three waste streams trash recycling and organics will the city clerk please call the roll on that question councillor barlow no councillor carpenter no councillor jang no councillor freeman yes councillor hanson yes councillor high tower yes councillor mason no councillor paul no councillor mcgee yes councillor shannon no councillor stromburg yes city council president tracy yes six eyes six nays the second question fails as well that closes that item and brings us into our next item which is uh 7.04 a resolution regarding a special city meeting issuance of general obligation bonds for capital projects councillor paul thanks i'd like to move the resolution waive the reading um and i i'm happy to speak to this but i'm not sure if the administration councillor paul if you could use your mic please i'm not sure if the administration sorry would um would like to speak with this to this first but i would ask for a second first okay seconded by councillor high tower mayor did you want to speak to this first thank you president tracy just just uh briefly want to make sure the full council is aware you know we we have um been discussing and evolving um this plan for the last couple months and including presentations at the two committee and mpa's and the board of finance um two weeks ago and then an extended discussion earlier tonight i am pleased to say that the board of finance did by a unanimous four zero vote rec recommend um the approval of of this plan um and and a vote tonight by the council to put this um bond issue before the voters um for a special election and um i i hope i hope that this council will find a way to strongly support this i think this is um an opportunity for us together to take the next step and really critical work that i think defines uh significantly much more important part of our work together for the last five years 2016 we passed a sustainable infrastructure plan that changed the trajectory of um so much of our critical public infrastructure our streets our sidewalks our bike path the investment in our parks and these municipal buildings it was always contemplated that there would be a need for a second major uh infusion of resources after the first five years of the plan was complete we are now at that moment where if we're going to continue this momentum we need to go back to the voters and ask for the support uh we have tried to be very mindful of our responsibilities to manage the city's finances responsibly and to be aware of affordability issues with this this plan we um are making this presentation consistent and you will see in the details of the resolution this is very much a plan that is being done consistent with the 2018 debt management plan that this council passed recognizing that we were in a period of needing to make major capital investment we can make investment we we can we can take on bonding at this level and stay consistent with that debt policy and as i hope you saw this is recently just in the last week been reaffirmed by our credit rating agency moody's which reaffirmed the city's double a credit rating uh with an expectation that we would be making significant additional general obligation borrowing tiff borrowing and school investment um uh and uh nonetheless um they uh essentially gave an endorsement of the the direction that we are are headed and then secondly in terms of affordability we have worked very hard and what we have brought forward here to have a plan before you that would leverage tens of millions of dollars from other sources to minimize the impact on local taxpayers we'll be pursuing uh federal and state funding over the next three years as we implement this plan we will um be uh utilizing other other sources and um thus we are we our intention would be over the next three years to build nearly 150 million dollars of infrastructure investment um while the local this new bond would be um uh less than a third of that total um keeping the cost to the average burlington homeowner it to a when fully drawn down um approximately 13 dollars a month um i think i'll i'll leave it there and uh our public works director chippen spencer is here to help help answer any questions um i hope this is something uh that uh we can we can do together and that can be a lasting uh impact of our service together if we get this right thank you mayor council high tower um great so i'm going to ask the same question that i originally asked in board of finance um which is would you consider dividing the question to having 30 million of some of the funds that were discussed in tuke and then 10 million for memorial auditorium and two reasons for that the first being um that some of the public process originally did not include memorial auditorium and then the second one being that um i think at least the folks who have contacted me i think would like to show different preferences between those items thank you council high tower mayor the administration has put this forward uh and worked with the council um uh and counselors answering questions and come up with a resolution that that is before you um and it is our recommendation that we go forward with the resolution um as written uh i think we are um already this would be a second ballot item on the on the special election ballot in addition to the burlington electric department uh revenue bonds and um uh my sense is uh that um it as it as two items it is clear and is a straightforward decision and i think it is uh it adds some complication to create another item um and further i i think we have reached the point where we can no longer and then we've been it's been taking us decades to get to this point we can no longer afford not to budget significant funds from a memorial auditorium so the we are we are at the point the building has been closed for years it is deteriorating and we are going to need to make significant investment in it so um i think we should put in front of the voters a package that gives us resources to to deal with that um and um that the 40 million dollar proposal does that if we were to split into two i think we may find ourselves needing to make significant repairs from a memorial auditorium out of the smaller number and that would then come at the expense of other key priorities i think this has been a problem many decades many years in the making and the way to ensure that we have the resources to address the problem is to pass the resolution as it is and and to have one valid item uh you have the floor comes right thank you mayor um i will not attempt to divide something again that i don't know we'll have a different vote um so unless i hear i do think that that is something that i'm hearing from my constituents that they would like to express a difference in preference that some folks would like to vote for one of it so i am throwing that out for discussion but i won't take any action thank you councillor hightower councillor paul thanks president tracy um so you know i remember the vote that we took uh to get this started five years ago and at the time i remember talking about that you know one of the most fundamental and critical needs of our city and one of our most important responsibilities as elected officials is to address infrastructure maintenance and then also what's i think equally as important is implementing cutting-edge technology responsiveness all of these things cost um cost a lot of money and they don't they don't end up they don't cost less if we wait longer the bonding that is before us and it's in the resolution and i think it's worth the the public knowing is that there's a list of the proposed allocation of the 40 million dollars and of course that could be subject to change our evolving needs but i think it's worth mentioning that um in the resolution streets and sidewalks are an amount of four million dollars bike bike infrastructure in intersection enhancements in the amount of two and a half million dollars also our bridges civic buildings parks fleet enhancement and greater public safety infrastructure one thing that's also important to note is that while it is 40 million dollars it's not as if we will be bonding for 40 million dollars on day one and even the numbers that the administration has come up with are very round amounts 10 million the first year 20 and then 10 um and uh but it's important to note that you know we're not going to bond for projects that aren't ready to go so in other words we are going to be careful uh with this bonding authority as we always are but careful in the sense that we're not needlessly spending interest on on projects that haven't quite gotten to that point um as well there's going to be these will go through an annual budgeting process so there's more opportunity for input and um and as i say it'll be on an as approved or as needed basis um one of the things that i also wanted to just mention is that we talked about this um at the uh we talked about this bonding at the board of finance meeting on september 13th and the information that we had gotten at that time was very different from the bonding the the debt policy assumptions that we got in 2018 that were done by the former ceo uh beth anderson and i was sort of taken back by the fact that the grand list was assumptions were much greater than what i have always been told since i've been involved with municipal government how much our grand list grows however i have never been um associated with city finances uh um after a reappraisal because we don't do them very often um and given that um the reappraisal that does have an impact and and rightly so on the overall grand list value um based on that um there is a there was a spreadsheet and well actually many spreadsheets that we were given to give us the overall effect of what this will mean on our debt policy and i share the concerns that i think many people do that we all know we need a new high school um there's probably a very good chance that the school department is going to come back with an uh with an ass that is significantly higher than the one that they asked for three years ago um and how are we going to be able to afford more of this now i don't know what they're going to come back so it's not appropriate for me to say but based on the administration's assumption i think assumptions and their spreadsheets um you know i think that uh there is a lot of capacity um while still allowing us to continue to maintain an investment to maintain um an investment grade bond rating and as the mayor has alluded the moody's assessment um acknowledges all of these things they they acknowledge the um uh the new the new high school that will be coming at some point and they are still uh very supportive of our credit rating which to me adds a lot of credibility and veracity to our conclusion and going forward with this 40 million dollar geo bond um the last thing i just wanted to mention is that um uh i spoke with um i spoke with the ceo today we spent about an hour on the phone sharing uh sharing our screens and um i i certainly got a um a very clear understanding in terms of also how interactive the spreadsheet is and being able to understand what kind of debt capacity we can absorb um uh while still maintaining a a great a great credit rating um and just wanted to thank katherine thank your team and also thank uh the former ceo's beth and bob who have been amazing through all of this you've got like a major financial brain trust going here and i am very grateful for the amount of time that all of you have spent to make this um an understandable um uh uh assessment and am supportive of going of going forward with this i just in closing would also just like to mention that i know that we have all been through a tough year and we've been through a reappraisal many people have had personal losses and challenges through this pandemic um we're looking at a a cost that will work out to about 15 dollars on a median home um i know that money is still money but i'm hopeful that this is something that we can all support because it's a capital need and it's something that we i think as elected officials need to need to do and do now thank you thank you councillor paul mayor weinberger thanks for his interest i just wanted to add very quickly um and just the people that should be called out as having worked on this for years should include martha keenan who has been responsible both for the development of our initial sustainable infrastructure plan the implementation on much of the plan personally managing many of the projects and the presentation of the materials for tonight and so she is a new elected mention she's also here and available for questions if there are any at this point thank you very much are there any other comments from councillors councillor barlow to be followed by councillor hanson thank you president tracy um i was sort of i'd say luke warm at best when this was first brought up two weeks ago and i do appreciate all the work that's been done to address my concern about finding ways to limit the tax implications of this binding request there's two resolve clauses that were added uh the the first that will um seek additional um non-tax funding sources like federal money that we don't know um how how yet will materialize and if we can find that for projects we'll use that instead of leveraging um additional debt and and putting um guard rails around the 10 million dollars for memorial auditorium with additional council action required if we want to move ahead on any of that so i i appreciate the work that was done to address that and those were definitely improvements uh in my view to the original proposal the other thing as councillor paul mentioned is the high school you know i served on the school board for four years and was part of the original re-envisioning project and was spent many many hours on on that proposal and understanding um all of the city uh cap the school district capital needs and bonding processes and um i just wanted to thank uh cio shed and mayor windberger for spending a lot of time and a lot of spreadsheets uh sent to me to make to help me to understand where the debt capacity is and how adding uh this bond will um affect the overall ability of the city to also fund a high school and i have a level of comfort with that now that i didn't have even at the start of today so thank you for that and i will be supporting this tonight thank you councillor borough councillor hanson yeah i come at it from a different angle of councillor borough that i've been very supportive of this from the beginning and the need is very critical um if folks didn't see the full presentation the need is actually much greater than what than what we're asking for and it's a lot of maintenance it's been deferred for far too long um so it's it's really important that we that we try to catch up and that we try to address infrastructure in our city and if we don't and and if this fails um we're gonna just have to spend more money um later so although it might be challenging um for folks to to be able to afford the tax increase that this would that this would lead to um if we defer it it's gonna be even worse economically for for all of us as taxpayers and so it's really important that we try to support our infrastructure um and catch up on deferred maintenance i don't the the the change around memorial auditorium and you know the rest of the 30 million of this is flexible between projects which i think is a good way to go because we don't think the pandemic has really underscored the fact that we don't know what's coming next and um we live in a very dynamic and constantly evolving world and there's so many examples i could think of that would cause us to need to change direction need to be flexible and nimble in terms of what infrastructure we're prioritizing so i don't like that 10 million is can't be used for anything other than memorial um i like the other 30 million because it's flexible among urgent priorities i also don't really like that it's it's a little bit unclear at least when i tried to address it in board of finance is what uh legally sort of where where where that actually falls um because there's the resolution and then there's the actual ballot language so i am a bit uncomfortable with that but at the same time this is so important um and i want councillor barlow and others to support it so i'm not going to propose any changes i want to see us all you know get behind this i think it's it's critically important for the the community thank you thank you council shannon thank you president tracy i think that this bond gives the city a lot of bang for the buck um however i know that my constituents are really struggling with the reappraisal they need lower taxes not higher taxes they also need the infrastructure maintained my main objection to this bond is the timing i don't think it's fair to put this ahead of the school i think that our um voters should have the opportunity to look at them to either look at the school first and then this or look at them together but i won't support putting the spawn forward at this time thank you any other comments from councillors okay hearing none we'll go to a vote will the city clerk please call the roll councillor barlow yes councillor carpenter yes councillor um freeman yes councillor hanson yes councillor high tower yes councillor mason yes councillor paul yes councillor magie yes councillor shannon no councillor stromburg yes city council president tracy yes ten eyes one day thank you and one absent councillor jane let me know that he had signed off for for that item so the the the resolution carries and this will be placed on a special election ballot moves us into our next item which is item 7.05 um before we get into that item i'm actually going to call a 10 minute recess so we will come back reconvene at 947 um so i'll come right back thank you communication acting chief of stabilization plan for the berlington police department councillor mason thank you president tracy um i would like to move that we approve the authorization of john mirad acting chief of police execute retention and recruitment plan for officers of the berlington police department with a maximum limiting amount calculation $850,000 thank you we have a motion from councillor mason is there a second seconded by councillor shannon councillor mason did you want the floor back no but i would invite the chief acting chief up maybe to yield any questions on the plan certainly welcome acting chief mirad thank you council president are there did you want so yeah may may i start chief could um we've had the benefit of reading the plan if i for the public's benefit and for those who have not read it could i maybe have you offer a little primer and then what's proposed thank you sure uh so i i did prepare a uh a power point with some quick slides thank you uh if you will proceed to the first thank so these are we have been rapidly uh decreasing our numbers and that's of course was was the intention um of the resolution last june i think it has happened at a more accelerated clip than many people anticipated um we did have some anticipation of this but certainly it has been rapid uh 96 92 at the time of the resolution uh we are currently at 68 uh as i clarify in i clarify that in the memorandum of what 68 is but 68 is what is currently available to us and in fact it's actually below 68 because three of the people counted in that 68 are either on long-term military deployment or our are injured and are on long-term administrative duty could you go to the next slide please this is a picture of the current sworn staffing and the effective number as i said of 65 that 68 minus those three who are not available um and and these are are the numbers that we have it is below what even the uh the resolution last summer envisioned uh by contract and by workload our detectives must have 10 officers and uh by mo u we must commit a certain number of officers to coosie in proportion to our uh the incidents of sex crimes that occur in burlington and crimes against children in burlington that is part of that compliment that you can see on the right side of this uh graphic federal law dictates the number of officers that we dedicate to the airport it's determined in part by the number of gates including the baggage gate and that dictates the fact that we have a supervisor and seven officers at the airport in order to have 24-hour staffing for all gates there um and then uh we have the rest of our officers primarily dedicated to patrol and to our day shift and our evening shift um but we anticipate that we're going to lose another 10 officers between now and next july and that anticipation is based on uh knowledge of officers who've said they're going officers we know are in processes with other uh police departments and also officers who are anticipated to retire based on tenure uh if we could go now i do want to note that this graphic doesn't show the cso's or the csl's we currently have two cso's we have had those cso positions for a long time this body agreed uh to increase the allotment of cso's we are working on hiring new cso's i i point out in the memo i believe that we are um we have uh three csl's in the hiring process and four cso's in various stages the hiring or training process so this does not show those positions uh but these are the officers that we need to train the cso's and work with the csl's and backstop both positions and we are losing officers rapidly uh at a rate that that frankly does begin to compromise what we can do we already cannot provide the services that we have in the past uh the next slide please um this is just a different way of looking at the officers available uh the next slide please um this is our hiring versus our attrition and and this is actually slightly different than the one that was in the memorandum you'll see that they're 17 in 2021 not 16 which the memorandum shows uh that's year to date and that is because i i had missed one we've lost a large number and there was one who had sort of snuck out at the end of august who hadn't been counted in the table that i included in the mo u um next slide please this is our headcount month by month from 2015 to 2021 these are the first of the month uh so on the you know on january first on february first on march first and you can see where we were previously and where we've gone um and that is a tremendous tremendous deficit i spoke recently with uh former chief of police shirling now commissioner shirling of the department of public safety he pointed out that uh to go from the mid 80s to 100 which was a move they made in the uh in the early 2000s took them seven years and that was with an existing pool of applicants in the hundreds 200 to 300 existing pools we currently have about i think 30 to 40 in our pool uh by no means or all those candidates going to be people who ultimately become police officers the point of a pool like that is to have a deep uh body of folks that you can select from and and be uh stringent in your standards but we don't have that pool we thought we had to forego that pool once we were no longer allowed to hire and we're unsure when hiring would begin again and so for us to be able to climb in the same kind of numbers if if it is determined that this agency needs to be whether it's at 74 whether it's higher than that uh once this final version of the cna report comes out and then others are able to weigh in and and determine a number if that number is is 20 higher than we currently are in in the mid 60s um it's going to take a very long time it's going to take uh several years at minimum to achieve those numbers and what will aggravate that or make that harder is if we continue to lose from where we are that's predicated that that seven-year multi-year bill build is predicated on staying at this 68 65 number if we in fact lose 10 over the next year uh well between now and july is as we anticipate then it's that much more difficult and and as i've pointed out before it has partly to do with the length of time it takes to identify vet uh hire and train a police officer it also has to do with the fact that in vermont all police officers ultimately have to go through the vermont police academy recruits have to be there for the full academy experience but even lateral officers who we bring in from out other states who are already certified officers have to go through a process that that is uh dictated by the pace of the vermont police academy and therefore there's a bottleneck for us that even if i could miraculously identify 12 officers in one swoop and we could also fund those 12 officers we would not be able to have those 12 officers get seats in the vermont police academy and suddenly be hired so this hiring process is going to be for the next year or two it is going to be a matter of of one step forward and three or four steps back as officers depart and then we will stabilize in another two years in a process of of two steps forward two steps back where we're going to kind of stabilize and then we hope to be able to get to a process in four years or more of saying okay now we're actually in a place where we're going three or four steps forward and only one step back at any given time and and anything we can do to minimize the uh the level at which we are falling and minimize the you know to prevent us from falling further um I think is worthwhile and that was the nature of this proposal thank you thank you acting chief comes on me so did you want the floor yes please president tracy um thank you acting chief mirad just I think two points of clarification what would the proposal in front of us because there was a little bit of a discussion about a potential modification to the retention piece as opposed to the recruitment but the retention piece I think the consensus of the council was to move forward with the retention piece of a $2,000 payment on what's the date November 15th 2021 which is consistent with what was in your memo and the second recommendation was to move the second payment on September 1st 2022 to $8,000 and not have the third payment so that was the justification and the math that was behind the reduction in the overall so I don't know how we make that binding because it's not in the resolution but that was the sense of the council in my understanding that's been discussed with the administration with you and that is acceptable is that correct yes sir I uh yes okay and to be clear that amount was in your your original motion correct well the resolution only has a dollar amount it doesn't right and you made the dollar you made a different I did reduce the dollar amount to take into account that there was not the third payment um so thank you for that clarification um I will be supporting this resolution I think for those of us I mean the public comments that were we heard earlier tonight were not a surprise um those are consistent with not only my own personal experience unfortunately I've had my car broken into twice I'm intersecting you know with individuals who are living in our parking garage and dealing with staff who are quite afraid um we're all getting the front porch forums that read more like a crime blotter right these days than you know necessarily a front porch forum I'm not naive enough to believe that this is the panacea or this solves it um but I do feel that we would you know a further reduction of 10 or even one officer um is not going to improve our public safety output I appreciate there are other conversations about how to address what's going on but I think I see this personally as one step um to moving that forward so for that reason I will be supporting this thank you thank you councillor mason councillor hi car um oh my gosh I have so much to say did not plan on saying any of this but I think the first thing is is we have 70 officers first I do just sometimes I feel like we are throwing out a lot of different definitions of numbers of effective cap how many effective officers we have how many actual officers we have and sometimes it gets a little bit confusing when you have charts that not only have axes that don't go to zero which at least if you're a millennial like me you learned in high school that that is a strategy for distorting data um but more than that um when you're comparing things like oh the most officers we've ever had some of which I assume we're about to go into retirement some of which I assume we're also on military leave and then we're comparing it to the worst case scenario now we're comparing apples and oranges to be very clear in the same graph and it's frustrating um but that's not a point I guess a question that I have is why we're coming back for sworn officer deal sweetener which I'm not opposed to because I do think they are I do think that we have good people on the force who are trying to do a very difficult job right now but at the same time we approved other positions back in February none of which we've come back for for a way to improve recruitment around that or if it's been so difficult why hasn't that been part of the plan um and I think the second thing is just we've been talking about alternatives for so long and we keep coming back to the sworn officer count which is great but maybe this is so that's a question to chief mirad but then I think also the alternatives is something that we can't seem to get on the table at all when we're talking about the sworn officer count over and over and over again which is maybe more of a question to the mayor so both of those okay well why don't we start with acting chief mirad may I what what specifically yes I would like to hear why the CSO CSL hires have been so slow and why if they were approved over half a year ago there's been no ask to help support those hires so when when they were approved uh the memorandum at the time actually stated that we wouldn't be able to hire them until the the new fiscal year uh in July we did begin that process we're we have as many as we have had viable candidates we have had a number of candidates I want to say in the vicinity of 35 and the number who actually uh showed up for final stages of interviews and took the tests uh got us to where we are right now with uh approximately I think three in process and a fourth who is is close to being ready to to begin those processes and then going through a background check etc and then training and so I'm quite hopeful that we'll actually have four who are in the field at least in training before the end of this year which is pretty much what I indicated would be the case in the memorandum in January with regard to the CSLs we have all three uh they are not uh I think one is hired and the other two are in background um and uh we're going to have to we'll be working on the training for those three CSLs and then we'll figure out where two of them are ultimately going to be assigned and sit um but as uh Lacey Smith who's doing the bulk of that training uh has made it clear seating is somewhat incidental to the work that they do which is in the field so those positions are priorities for us we've been working to identify candidates bring candidates in and actually get them on board but it's not out of keeping with what the plan stated when I first proposed it in December of 2020 um and then formalized it in the memorandum to the city council in January of 2021 right but your original sorry go ahead your original plan also said that we would take seven months to train the CSOs when we had heard it would take our previous CSOs had been trained in one month um to how much do CSOs get paid training is not seven months training is it is the entirety of the process that is seven months and while the the field training process for the existing CSOs may have been in the order of about six weeks we anticipate this being longer because we're asking them to do more things we have to train them to be able to respond to uh non-injury crashes uh where there's no investigation but reports have to be taken we have to train them to work with people and potentially issue municipal tickets which they have not done in the past there are changes to their job description that are going to entail changes to the training regime um so uh what do the the CSOs make I had that amount I can find it for you if you give me a moment yeah no rush okay did you have another question for the mayor council hi tar yeah which is just if on this we could also get an update on where we are with alternatives and why you know we haven't moved as quickly on that as maybe some of us would have hoped mayor Weinberger um thanks president tracy counselor hi tower um so from my perspective the council has now authorized at different times not all going back to february three different significant uh increases in capacity the cso program the cso program and then the rf the the hope for a cahoots like partnership um I think there has been progress on on all three fronts notably the csl program as the chief just reported we have hired an additional csl the council did not authorize the hiring of the final two csls until I believe the July uh July resolution and as heard we had we had a successful that is going well we have the two candidates identified and they're going through the um the final uh processes for becoming an employee and and and being able to do this work so I think they were making real progress and I'm hopeful about that there's clearly a huge need there and uh them all three of them being deployed can't come soon enough the cso program uh I think it's accurate what the chief uh has said that he indicated this would be a new program that took time to build up at the same time I you know I don't think the chief would disagree we were hoping the the initial yield of the initial round of advertising and um uh candidates uh gives me some concern about how quickly we are going to be able to develop this program and it may be that uh as we are we're in the process of taking stock from this first effort that uh something needs to be done there to make that a um to get to our goals with this the CSLs um sorry with the CSOs uh the the budget process in the past at the end of June is what authorized the creation of a cahoots like uh partnership and there there has been an enormous amount of work that's gone on through the through the summer by uh by city staff as well as um by uh community members and um I I think we are very close to being at the point where we can put it out in RFP there too uh you know it's a major new uh undertaking one that will involve um probably multiple partners and I think we were clear this was going to take um significant time to actually create and it shouldn't be a surprise that it's it's taking some time uh so I I guess I um I uh I think it is clear that there is consensus around these alternative resources and we are trying to move that on them uh and none of that should is there is no scenario where we don't also need a significant number of sworn officers for public safety to be our public safety goals to be achieved as the chief pointed out quick in a comment there but I think it's a combination is important one for all three of these additional alternative resources require significant coordination and in some cases training and uh support from the police to be successful we are we are going to be more able to uh launch and implement those programs if we have uh if we do not lose more officers so I I think there's we agree there needs to be more progress there and I think that is uh I hope we do not lose sight of the issue that is in front of the council tonight which is this is something after a number of contentious uh divided votes I hope this is something we can do with with broad consensus there the uh whether or not you believe the 74 was the right number or 85 or or the original 105 regardless we are now below those numbers and every I think we should believe the officers who are telling us that we are going to lose more soon if we don't do something this is an opportunity for the administration and the council to say together to the officers that we value their work we know they are important part of our of our public safety efforts and um we uh know that um that and we value them we value their work and we value them as individuals and I think that would be a more powerful statement if this this is something that council can do with a broad consensus I Mr. President I do have those those figures um in the the pilot plan that was presented in in January was different than the full plan that was presented in December and early January the full plan talked about 12 cso's eventually and and six csl's uh deploying with officers um and that talked about that being a uh one or two year you know way to to stabilize versus a multi-year five or six or seven uh with regard to hiring officers so it was always planned that that was something that was a it had a time window it wasn't something that was going to happen immediately but are we do we wish that we were able to recruit a little more do we wish we were seeing better numbers as the mayor stated yes absolutely we do so I'll take an opportunity to plug it right now and say that anybody watching whether that's the media or whether that's on on our town hall tv uh these are great positions there it is $47,000 a year uh starting for a cso that's $22 and 60 cents an hour uh that is an excellent wage for excellent work it is meaningful work um and uh uh there is a an opportunity to engage with the public to to serve this community uh to be part of something that is that is new and different and is going to be an expansion of an existing role that role tops out at $56,000 and uh at $26 an hour the csl's as I stated the three that we were allotted are filled but ultimately the public safety continuity plan the full build out called for six six to be based in the police department working with police officers and and turning out with officers that role starts at $60,000 a year or $29 an hour and and tops at $72,000 a year or $3460 an hour those are are are are strong salaries in this marketplace they are strong salaries in the city they are uh indicative of the value that we place in these these positions and the the real potential for people to come aboard in this department and and be able to serve their community in a new way and ultimately I think that we are hopeful that the police excuse me that the cso role will be a uh a way of identifying good police officers it has been in the past uh but irrespective of whether or not that's the case it's it's a great job in and of itself and so I will say to the to the media they were like we are looking for people to fill these positions and uh it is uh an excellent opportunity to find a good job with the city of burlington to serve the city of burlington and to have a real career that has potential for growth and new things thank you councilor hightower you have the floor thanks um and thank you for that recruiting pitch because those are certain positions that I'm anxious to fill um I do think that I have to say that while we say we keep losing not to lose sight of the issue I do think part of the issue is how much more we've talked about this police cap than we've talked about solutions to alternatives I'm really glad that this conversation has happened I think lacy and smith has taken a great leadership role in moving it forward this summer I wish that had happened last summer last fall last winter when we had a bullet director of police transformation who was supposed to be leading some of those conversations um and I'm frustrated that that we're still here and we haven't done anything and while you know half of the city thinks that the problem is that we don't have enough officers the other half of the city thinks that the problem is that we just keep saying we're not going to enforce anything and are releasing more press releases on crime like while we're playing politics like the city's front the city's frustrated like we're not we don't we have problems that can't be solved by police officers that we're not dealing with we have problems that can be solved by police officers that we're not dealing with and I think it's I think it's I think people are frustrated with us because we're too busy playing politics to solve anything so yes I will be voting yes on this proposal but I think that it's frustrating that we're talking about a cap again about what we're talking about sworn officers again when there's so many other public health issues that we should be bringing forward to the council thank you councilor hightower mayor I just think it's important to not lose sight of the fact that we are here tonight presenting a retention and recruitment plan for sworn officers because that was explicitly the charge that was in the council resolution and the police commission resolution um asking us to to come back from from the august resolution so it's just a little tough I think the council invited this discussion we have come forward with a proposal to address a clear need no one is suggesting by the focus on this tonight that we do not have a bunch a ton of work to do in numerous other areas and that work is moving as quickly as we can move it and we will continue to be working hard on that thank you mayor I don't have anyone else in the queue councilor shaman thank you I don't think it's fair to berate you for all the work that you have done to try and hold things together in a profoundly difficult environment which was projected on you without any kind of plan and I appreciate all the work that you have done to to play the hand that's dealt you and to find solutions and I want to thank you the other officers that are on the job that have chosen to stay here and I also want to share that my constituents appreciate your work and I hear that quite regularly I think that it's great that we are hiring CSOs and CSLs because I do think that there is a new future for policing but it obviously it doesn't happen in a day it's a building process and you have diligently worked on building that new process so I want to thank you and I do support this plan to try and retain officers and attract officers to Burlington and I hope that there's an interest in serving here because we are going to have a new kind of of policing here and new kinds of opportunities for public safety and ultimately I think people are not feeling safe in our community and I think we all want public safety so thank you for your commitment to that thank you Councillor Shannon don't have anyone else in the queue Councillor Hanson thanks yeah and I would echo a lot of what I've heard especially from Councillor Hightower I think we're we've been in this really challenging debate and process around public safety and really trying to forge ahead and build a new system that not many communities have have built out in the US thus far but I think it's critical we need to stay focused on that and I too am frustrated as others are that I feel that there's been there there could be more progress and more discussion there rather than that the focus around maintaining the CAP or maintaining sworn officers I think we recognize that that this is an issue that's why we invited it back at the last council meeting because we do understand that we haven't yet built up the alternatives enough to where you know to where the system can handle losing so many officers we simply just haven't created the new system properly enough to to allow for a drop in officer count and so I think that's that's why we're here we're trying to come together around that we're trying to address that that's really what this is about at the same time I want to see us you know coming together around really leaning into the transition and I think part of that ties in with officer recruitment and retention is how do we how do we communicate that vision in a way that that brings people in and and and part of that is coming together around something like this but I think part of that is setting the tone of officers can be part of this transition and should come to burlington if they want to be on the cutting edge of building out a new system and same with existing officers that want to stay and want to serve the community and want to see that and I hope that that's who we're attracting that that's who we're keeping on is is folks who are of that mindset and I don't know I don't I don't want to see us creating a tone of or a culture of of resistance to that within BPD so it's difficult I think we're coming at this issue from different perspectives but as much as we can try to move forward together and recognize that this is a change this is uncomfortable but ultimately it's going to serve the community better and ultimately it is what we've heard overwhelmingly from the community in terms of of where we want to go so I you know I support this understanding that we we haven't built up those alternatives yet and I hope that those of us who have been the most eager to to see that built out I hope that you know others can come together with us on that since we're coming together around around this and around you know supporting the existing system has as we do that work please thank you thank you Councillor Henson Councillor Paul thanks President Tracy um so I think you know I think that uh we've we've come to this we've come to this conversation a number of times but I think it's worth repeating that um I still feel and I think there's a number of us who still feel that there was a lot of good that came out of the racial justice resolution which we passed nine to three last summer um a lot that moved a needle that desperately needed to be moved and a lot that created a stir and discomfort to the status quo but in the end I think it brought us awareness as a community to move forward um and as a community we do need a police department that is community engaged um is supportive of collaborative change and transformation of thinking way outside the box and with a genuine mindset to finding new solutions um as well as professional self-reflection um you know I know that's a mouthful these are complex asks um and our officers who hear this and do this um they are deserving of our support and our mentorship um at the same time I also want to acknowledge um you know how appreciative I am of the work that all of our colleagues at this table have done this evening to come to consensus so that we can send a collective message of support um to our officers um I think our greatest priority going forward is that we need to reimagine public safety together not us them but together and I think that if we do that that we can find long-term progress together and I'm hopeful that we can all be a part of that solution going forward this evening thanks thank you Councillor Paul I don't have anyone else in the queue ready to vote okay will um all those in favor please say aye aye aye any opposed that carries unanimously thank you very much acting chief actually acting chief we have you're on next for the next item as well so state put for for just a second um brings us to our next item which is item 7.06 uh which is uh a community just simply a communication um may please have a motion on the the communication Councillor Shannon I move to waive the reading and accept the communication and place it on file thank you Councillor Shannon there's a motion is there a second seconded by Councillor Barlow Councillor Shannon did you want the floor back thank you council uh acting chief Murad will you uh are you able to just explain now what's in this memo yes thank you uh council president um this memo is about the 2021 equitable sharing annual agreement and certification um since we've waived the reading I don't I don't think it's necessary for me to read this uh the entirety of it but um equitable sharing is is a federal program in which the proceeds of liquidated assets for faded after criminal investigations and obtained almost entirely from post conviction distributions are shared among participating state and federal law enforcement authorities after being distributed to victims it has to go to victims and have victim compensation first um we participate in this program we have uh it requires a certification each year which the mayor signed uh that has been signed for this year in the most recent fiscal year the city received $32,695.52 through this program I have detailed in this memorandum 11 pages of examples of the cases from which that money was obtained all of them with the exception of two postal cases involved convictions of criminals uh these are criminals who were moving felony weight of narcotics 290 bags of heroin and laced with fentanyl in one instance 41 grams of crack uh federal cases involving the sale of contraband and drugs to children um a half kilo of marijuana in a sale front right across the street from city hall a instance in which a long-term case that involved 27 defendants arrested and convicted and again all of these are detailed in that memorandum and an appendix but those are the kinds of cases that we're talking about and from which we received those funds okay thank you chief is there any discussion okay seeing none we're gonna we can go to a vote and just to be clear we're just voting to accept the communication and place it on file we're not voting on any policy matters or any certifications of this program is that correct chief that is correct okay everybody ready to vote okay all those in favor please say aye aye any opposed that carries unanimously having already completed the other items on our agenda this evening a motion to adjourn is in order moved by councilor paul is there a second seconded by councilor McGee any discussion okay all those in favor of adjournment please say aye aye be opposed we are adjourned at 10 29 have a good night everyone