 Election coverage by town meeting television. This is one of many forums we are bringing you in advance of local elections and town meeting, which is on the first Tuesday in March, March 1st, 2022. Town meeting is traditionally where voters weigh in on local government representation, municipal budgets, school budgets, and local ballot items. All candidates on the ballot are invited to participate in how many TV election forums, so stay tuned for that kind of thing. Today I'm here with Burlington City Councilor Perry Freeman. They'll be presenting a charter change on the Burlington ballot regarding language related to regulating sex work. Welcome today, Burlington City Councilor Perry Freeman. Thank you. Thank you so much for having me and for putting together this series. So this charter change is actually really straightforward. I started working on it last March, 2021. It's for the city, it's the section is section 48, subsection 7, so get into the details a little bit. The direct sort of wording is in that section is to restrain and suppress houses of ill-fame and disorderly houses, and to punish common prostitutes and persons consorting therewith. It was something that was in the back of my mind, I think, for a little while to look at this section, but as I've said a few times, there's sometimes just a lot of projects that come our way on council, and so it was definitely there in the back of my mind. I think what prompted it was in March of 2021, there was a shooting in Atlanta, and I think a lot of the media focused on the racial identities of the folks that were victimized, which I think was certainly an aspect and was important to discuss. I think there was a lot of really good conversation that happened about anti-Asian racism and discrimination, but the other piece that interested me in it and saw I think a lot of, a lot less press, but certainly some, was the fact that many of the people were sex workers and were specifically targeted and victimized because of that work and sex work. And this has just been an issue, you know, laws pertaining to sex work to, in terms of, you know, what is sort of where we're at in terms of the forefront of legal expertise and public health expertise on how to sort of modernize those policies has been something that I've been interested in for a while. And so when I looked at the Burlington Charter and saw this language, again, to restrain and suppress houses of ill fame, to punish common prostitutes, I thought, you know, for the, for one, it's extremely antiquated. And I think that people sort of across the aisle and sort of, not just the aisle, but sort of that, from different perspectives on this issue have largely felt that the, that the language is antiquated, outdated, and not good. And I think that beyond that, what seemed like another benefit to, to looking at this language was striking it and then allowing the state to look at this issue more broadly and think about how to modernize it. So that's sort of the like nitty gritty of the language itself. So that was that there were two parts to that resolution. It went to the ordinance committee where that language, the ordinance was, was struck by the, or repealed rather by the council already. And then it went to Charter Change where the strike all proposal was adopted and then referred back to council. We've had two public hearings. That's the language, sort of the version that will go on the ballot in March. And just for a little bit more background language, sorry, background information. The, so the, in Vermont, they're only, according, we went over this last Monday at the council meeting with the city attorney. So there are just six municipalities or townships in Vermont that even have language in any way relating to sex work on the books. And then there's really only four municipalities that refer to prostitution, which just so folks know that the, I think what is more favorably used now is the term sex work or sex worker, as opposed to prostitution or prostitute. That's an opinion. That's a perspective, but it's, I'll use the word prostitutes when referring to the charter language, but otherwise we use the word sex worker, sex worker. But so, and there's only four that even have sort of that term prostitution, sex work, prostitutes, et cetera. But largely it is something that is being regulated by the state. And that will continue to be the case. So this language, this charter change will go forward as a strike call, which means that that language will just be completely removed. It will remove the city of Wellington's power to regulate on this, on this issue, essentially. And then it will be dependent on the state to continue to decide how they want to regulate that. And there's, you know, there's a lot of different ways that that could look. You know, I'm interested in seeing certain conversations happening on the state level, but that that will be largely dependent on the state, the state of Vermont. I'm just checking my notes really quickly. The other aspect that I wanted to mention is that for people to know is that so currently, and I think this is important to note, the Wellington Police Department doesn't really in practice enforce this. The ordinance that was on the books, they weren't enforcing it. Certainly, we don't have the ordinance now, and they're not enforcing the state law. And to my understanding, the state attorney's office is not particularly interested in prosecuting this. So in practice, I think, if people are saying, well, what does this actually do? To me, it just sort of formalizes what we've been doing sort of all along in terms of on the ground, what's actually been happening. The fact is that I think law enforcement models and public health models are moving away from prosecuting these types of cases because of research that's being done by, you know, legal and public health experts on different ways to approach this. And so that's essentially, and I think the reason why I felt that it was, I think it's important to note in general, but I think that one of the main things we've seen is that some of the people who share the perspective of being, you know, not supporting this change have claimed that it will be this huge change to Burlington. But in fact, in practice, this has already been the way that we essentially are operating. So that just doesn't have a lot of substantial, that claim doesn't really have a lot of substantial evidence. And that's most of what I had in terms of presenting on it. I mean, I can talk a little bit more about there were, you know, a few other concerns that I heard during the forums and the hearings. I'm not sure if we have, if there are any, anyone who has questions. Yeah. If I may, counselor Harry, I neglected to mention that time meeting TV election forums introduce our community, you know, communities to community decision makers like yourself and connect them with us with issues that shape local communities. If someone is watching this live, we do welcome your questions at 802-862-3966. Again, if you're watching this live, we welcome your questions at 802-862-3966. And counselor Perry, I did understand, I do understand, I think I'm understanding correctly that all sides of conversation regarding this language do seem to agree that the language itself is antiquated, like you said. And forgive me interrupting you, please further share your thoughts about what you heard at the forums. Oh, no, I just, I didn't know if there would be questions from folks, but that was sort of, those were some of the main concerns, I think, that came up were, you know, will this mean that Burlington is going to have a lot more crime or will there be a lot more, will we see an uptick in substance use? Will we see, you know, an uptick in sort of general sale of unregulated, you know, substances and use, will there be an increase in human trafficking, which I think a lot of times that term gets reduced to or kind of conflated with just sex trafficking, but, you know, trafficking I think is a broad term that, you know, refers to, you know, exploitation and other ways, you know, labor, labor exploitation. It doesn't just mean sex trafficking, though I think that's what the primary, it was brought up, I think, for that primary, maybe to indicate that primary concern. You know, people, I think we're asking if it would see an increase in, yeah, sort of violent crime overall. And I just, given all the research that's been done on this, you know, the World Health Organization supports modernizing these policies, the ACLU, Amnesty International, the fact that the state's attorney's office is just not prosecuting this. Currently, that the Burlington Police Department is not enforcing sort of laws that punish people who do sex work or that penalize them in some ways, that those concerns are not really founded and any demonstrable evidence that that would be the case. There's just not really a clear, there's no, to me there's no, there's nothing to demonstrate that that would remotely happen. So those were just some interesting things that came up. I think we were, you know, I was glad to hear from, there were some folks who came from the Ishtar Collective that do a lot of advocacy on this issue, spoke from personal experience, you know, doing sex work and how they were glad to see the language being modernized, you know, removed rather than that, you know, they're interested in, you know, seeing these issues, this issue sort of improve not just immun municipalities, but on the state level as well. So it sounds like, first of all, are there any calls as yet on this topic? I'm thinking no. And so I guess for voters, when they see this on the ballot, if this gets a yes vote, the yes vote then strikes the language from the city charter. And then as I understand charter changes, it goes to Montpelier where they just determine whether or not that that yes vote to indeed strike this language passes or not. If this gets a no vote, then the language remains in the charter and nothing happens from there. Right. It won't go to the legislature for approval. So for people, it sounds to me, if I'm helpful and if I'm not stopped me because my job is to be neutral and moderate, not give an opinion. So if I'm a voter, I can understand that my yes vote strikes the antiquated, I'm struggling with that word today, language from the charter. And then brings that charter change to the state level, which it sounds like would also bring some larger space for conversation about concerns people might have about this topic in general. I mean, it certainly could. And I think that there have been, for example, last year the state looked at not necessarily regarding sex work, because when we talk about sex work, we're talking about consensual sex work, which does not include anything that would be non consensual like someone were to be trafficked, harmed, sort of physically sexually harmed, none of those things are considered sex work, of course. But on a sort of different topic in terms of the state was looking at did look at trafficking laws in terms of the ability to have impunity, which is, you know, that is there because that's because sex work is not legal, or is not decriminalized. It can create the concern that people don't want to engage with the criminal justice system. And so they the state looked at sort of narrowly expanding impunity laws around people who could come forward if there had been an issue of trafficking. Not to say that that folks who are doing sex work are being trafficked consensual sex work, but just, you know, I think that there are conversations in general going on on the state level around laws that pertain to sort of these these various things, you know, whether it's sex work, whether it's trafficking, whether it's, you know, we've seen a lot of very large shift, I think, in terms of how we address substance use, you know, that being looked at as a public health issue, instead of the sort of, you know, older war on drugs model that was, you know, heavy on law enforcement, heavy on criminalization. So I think that there are just general shifts going on. And this wouldn't necessarily create a conversation around that since it is, it really just removes the unit Burlington as a municipality, it removes our sort of powers to around on this issue. But certainly the state statutes still remain. And that is a come that is its own policy. And that sorry, I don't know if you could hear this by my computer, alerting me, it's its own, it's its own policy tracks. So, so a legislature that are the, you know, the government, you know, they would, they would have to take that on as a as a policy initiative independently. This is really just looking at whether to modify and change the Burlington City Charter exclusively. So then just a question, please. How will this appear? What will it all the question look like on the ballot? That's a good question. Oh, I'm sorry. No, no, I know it's good. I think it will look, I'm going to pull up and see if I can find. I have the language here if you want me to share that. I have, I think I have it for, I have the original resolution that referred it to the charter change, but I did not pull up the language that was sent from the charter change, which I think has the ballot language on it. Also pulled that up, but I apologize for asking a question. I didn't say I was going to ask you. No, no, no, it's a good question. I think, you know, everyone, it's, it's a question that often people ask is what will this look like on the ballot? I think that's why, you know, the city often provides or provides sample, sample ballots. I know that I am one who I love to look at the sample ballots because I love to know what I'm looking up before I go into it. Is it somewhere, can we send people somewhere that they can find out more information on this topic? Is there an area of a website that someone could find out the language? So the, the sample language will be, the sample ballots will be posted, I think, I want to say, imminently. I think just, we just had the meeting, so I'm not sure, like, someone was asking me, well, what ballot number, what ballot item number is this? I'm not sure. I was, this was like last week and I was like, I don't, I don't actually know yet since we hadn't fully approved everything for the ballot. But And right, we're only in January still. And again, just while you're looking for that town meeting day is the first Tuesday in March, March 1st, 2022. And if, if you are watching live with us now, we welcome your questions at 802-862-3966. To me, to me, I would, if I lived in Burlington, I'm a resident of Essex, but if I lived in, am I correct, Burlington, if I lived in Burlington, I would be curious about how it looked and what my vote meant. And I feel like you covered all that and that the sample ballot will be available closer to March on the, on the Burlington City website. Yeah, I'm guessing the way that it will show up on the ballot is that it will look like it will say that it's basically a proposal to strike the language. And then I'm, I'm guessing it shows up as a strike all, right, which would be a line through it. And then if you are like this is what I, that's what I agree with, that's the change that I want to see, then you would say yes. And then if you're like, nope, I just wanted to say the way it is, I don't want that change to happen, then you would just say no. And I, I will, I will, I am, I anticipate that the, that the actual sample ballot will be available on the city, city website imminently though. That's great. I feel that this is very clear. And like you're saying, it's a, it's a small sentence or piece of language. And it's a very clear cut situation. And I think this has been very informative and very helpful to people to decide what they will be voting on and what the process will be. If the vote, if the vote of yes to strike this from the charter is a yes, then that goes to Montpelier for finalization of the charter change. And if the vote is no, it still, it stops in the language remains. Yeah. Correct. Yeah. And the, the support for it at the council has been unanimous or near unanimous. There was only one no vote on Monday in terms of putting this on the ballot. So it was 11 to one, but all counselors unanimously or near unanimously have supported this at every step. So referring it to charter change, also the ordinance, you know, that passed unanimously at every point. So that, that got repealed. And that was, I can read the ordinance quickly. Section 2133 title prostitution. And that was, it shall be unlawful for any female to be a prostitute, apply the vocation of a prostitute in the city, or subject her person to prostitution and no males shall associate and consort with such female for the purpose of prostitution. And then it was another section in 2134, keeping house of prostitution. And that said, it shall be unlawful for any person to keep a house of prostitution permit prostitution in any house or building. He may occupy be an inmate of any house of ill fame or in any manner contribute to the support or maintenance of any house of ill fame. It shall also be unlawful for any person having control of any house or building to lease or rent the same to any prostitute to be kept as a house of ill fame. And that was a straight call. So that's been completely removed from the city ordinance and related city ordinances. And that was unanimous. And this to this vote to the vote to send the entire proposal to the ordinance committee and the charge change committee was unanimous. The striking it from the ordinance repealing ordinance was unanimous, the, you know, sending it back to to council and then the council voting on the charter changed to be on the ballot was all and to have the hearing and then, which I think has been, I'm glad I'm glad to see it. I think that there have been people are coming at it from a couple different approaches in terms of, you know, thinking that again, I think the most popular, more like sort of widely held belief is that the language is just extremely antiquated and outdated. So, you know, just that in and of itself that it could be removed on those grounds. And then I think secondly that that that it's just not necessary for the city of Burlington to have this this on the books that the state is better equipped to look at the policies overall and moderate and, you know, either they could say the same, you know, my opinion and there's some opinion, I think, by others that they could be modernized more and looked at more in terms of again, a sort of more modern legal and public health perspective. But yeah, there's been pretty wide support which has been which was good. I didn't really know at first what the reception would be like, necessarily, you know, it's something that I've I think spend a fair amount of time thinking about and talking to folks about but I just sort of in my own like circles in my own advocacy work and sort of just re curiosity in terms of research and and this kind of thing but I wasn't really sure how what to anticipate. I think it's a it's a topic, you know, sort of like we've seen with substance use or other things that have unfortunately for too long just been so stigmatized that people don't even don't even bring them up or so I was glad to see that. Yeah, the ordinance committee I think did a great job engaging on this the church needs to do a great job. You know, there's been there's been a lot of it's it's been good to have a fair amount of support and engagement throughout the process. It's great. Sorry. Oh, no, that was it. I feel I feel that the voters of Burlington can watch this this interaction and feel informed about the process about what their vote means about background about both sides that have been in conversation about what happens when if and when it goes to the state level about this background information you've been introducing now about this these other pieces and the way the votes went and public hearings and it sounds like we've been pretty thorough. We do have there are five minutes remaining in the program if somebody wanted to call in so if you're live I invite you to phone in with questions to counselor Perry at 802-862-3966. You can watch town meeting TV on Comcast channel 1087 Burlington Telecom channels 17 and 217 as well as online at town meeting TVs YouTube page and we'll just give it another minute if there's anyone else that phones in I myself feel prepared that I could go find the sample ballot on the Burlington site and vote if I was a resident of Burlington and know what I was going to vote for while I'm talking do you have any further thoughts that you thought of now that you would like to share I just thought I would I would repeat what it was which is that it's to remove the city's power regarding sort of the regulation of sex work it's section 48 subsection seven again it's to strike and remove the language which is currently reads to restrain and suppress houses of ill fame and disorderly houses and to punish common prostitutes and persons consorting therewith so it's definitely a pretty straightforward pretty straightforward change I know if you can see that's great I hope I didn't share anything off my own screen I was a little too quick with the share screen there oh this is perfect this is great so that is um how's that gun yes and so then this again when when did this resolution occur uh well the the this vote to put it on the ballot was Monday but it was I you know I started working on it last year and it was first introduced in council uh at the city council in Burlington in I want to say that would have been July oh right 2021 and then I'm thinking that the ordinance was repealed I want to say in October but I might be a few a little bit off on that but I think it was it was sometime in the fall and then this um this was in committee and charter change committee and it got sent back to referred back to the council we had two public hearings one on the 18th January 18th and one on January 24th uh and then on the 24th so this past Monday um it was approved in a vote 11 to 1 which was actually the first dissenting vote that we had at any point in the process yet um and um but it got approved 11 to 1 so you know nearing unanimous um to be uh put before the voters on the ballot great uh I I don't personally have any further questions I think we've done a great job I'm not sure my screen share was successful but hopefully I thought it was great thank you I appreciate that uh and then so I will um without further ado there's a little closing statement I'm going to make and then we'll call it yeah wonderful thank you so much I really appreciate it thank you for doing this series and thank you for taking the time to to moderate I think it's great I think Tom meeting I'm I'm such a fan just on a personal level I'm such a huge fan of Tom meeting television I feel that especially during the pandemic they have brought everything to our homes in ways that we could interact even more than usual and and really community has grown more deeply because of channel 17 that's a personal antecooper statement let me read the um thank you for tuning into Tom meeting TV coverage of local community candidates budget uh budget and ballot items you can find this and more forums at www.ch17.tv don't forget to vote honor before the first Tuesday and March town meeting day March 1st 2022 early voting by mail is available by contacting your town clerk's office polls will also be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. um I would like to thank uh counselor uh Perry Freeman for their time today and I would like to thank also town meeting TV for this opportunity for us to have this conversation thank you all so much for being here yeah thank you so much Dave thank you to channel 17 and thank you any for monitoring I appreciate it and to the all the folks behind the scenes too the same to town meeting TV thank you so much for your time and uh stay well and stay safe thank you so much