Montpelier City Council - September 9, 2026 [MCC]

Uh ladies and gentlemen, it is Wednesday, September 9th at 2026 at 6:30 p.m. This meeting of the Montpielar City Council is hereby called to order. Um let's just lay a few ground rules, meeting logistics, and remote introductions. Please display your first and last name if you are joining us remotely. When you are speaking, please state your name and where you live. Keep your comments to about the well to the allotted time depending on when we are so that others have the opportunity to speak. If you have several questions, please ask them all together. Please focus your comments on the agenda item under discussion. Please direct your remarks towards policies, decisions, and ideas and not individuals. Please avoid comments about a person's character or intent. Please wait to be recognized by the mayor before speaking and please follow the rules of procedure included in the agenda packet which will guide how the meeting is conducted and may be applied as needed to maintain an orderly discussion. Um I'll just check and see if we have anyone any counselors joining online. Not seeing any. Okay, no need for a roll call. Um, last week we opened the meeting with uh some quotes from Dolly Parton and we had just lost her and uh we've lost several other people in the ensuing two weeks. So I'd just like to offer a couple of quotes from some of those folks. It may be that when we no longer know what to do, we have come to our real work. And that when we no longer know which way to go, we have come to our real journey. The mind that is not baffled is not employed. The impeded stream is the one that sings. That's the real work by Wendel Bry. And to follow up a quote from Gloria Steinum from 1992. The future depends entirely on what each of us does every day. A movement is only people moving. It is 6:32. We'll move on to our first real item of business. Uh approving the agenda. Usually do this by unanimous consent. If there is no objection, seeing none, the agenda is adopted by unanimous consent. It's 6:33. We're moving on now to um our first public hearing with public comment. Um Manager Curry, would you like to tell us what this is about and then we'll open the public hearing formally. >> Sure. I I'll turn this over to Mike Miller who can give you more detail. you recently approved updates to the river hazard area regulations and we received feedback that we could improve um improve our protections by making an additional update and so this is being brought forward as an interim amendment and I'll turn it over to Mike for more detail. Mike Miller, our planning director. Hi. >> Mr. Miller, go ahead. Thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, Mike Miller, planning director. So, planning staff have been working uh for close to two years with representatives of FEMA to complete our five-year cycle verification for our community rating system. This is a program that provides discounts to holders of flood insurance policies um uh due to holders of flood insurance due to the efforts of the city government. Montpilar is currently at a rating of eight, which gives uh everybody in town in the city a 10% reduction. Our current work is to try to get us to a score of seven, which would match the highest score in Vermont and provide a 15% discount. During our review, the coordinator determined that our river hazard area regulations were very subtly out of compliance with the class 8 requirement. They had changed that requirement a few years ago and uh they felt it was out of compliance. We disagreed with their assessment, but their recommended solution was simple and added some clarifications to the rule. They agreed to allow us to amend the rules in an interim fashion, provided we also document our intent to make these changes permanent. We have therefore brought to you this interim change for you to approve quickly um during the FEMA's review period of um period of uh for our request. And this also includes a letter for the mayor's signature that states the council will intend to make these changes permanent within two years. So there'll be actually two recommended changes. One would be to approve the interim change. And because it's an interim change, it can be done in one meeting. It does not require a second meeting. And uh if that is approved and passed, then we would need another approval to uh approve the draft letter for the mayor's signature stating the intent of the council to make these changes permanent. And they're just two really short pieces. They were on yellow. Um, and if you have any questions, I could certainly answer them. One is just basically stating that except as allowed under the international residential code and FEMA 348, all utilities for residential structures shall be elevated at or above the design flood elevation. Our rules already say that, but they wanted us to be more explicit about that. And then because we were talking about utilities, we noted we did not have a definition of utilities. So we added a definition of utilities into the the uh definition section as well. So >> great. Thank you. Um just to keep things tight. At this time we'll officially open the public hearing. Um and I'll just remind everyone that the the process we've been following which I think has been working well for us is that we have the tea up or the initial sort of presentation by staff. We'll follow that by clarifying questions uh from council and then in this case it's a hearing. So we'll have public comment. After that we'll have a motion of some kind to do something and then we'll have discussion and debate on that motion and that's really the time for us to try to sway each other's opinions or explain why we've taken a vote and then we'll vote. So if there are no objections to that, the hearing is now open. Are there any clarifying questions from council? Uh, councelor Doyle, go ahead. Do >> Mike, do if we make these um these changes, do you think that we'll get to that score of seven? >> Uh, we don't know yet. They uh the folks that do the ISO ratings really keep their cards close to the chest and then they kind of come out at the end and say, "Here you go." And so our hope is that uh this this is a requirement for us to maintain at least our level of eight. So, it's if if we were to not do this, we would actually even if we had enough points to be a seven, we would actually be a nine. >> Thank you. >> Great. Other clarifying questions from council. >> Okay. At this time, I would welcome anyone in the room and then we'll go to online who would like to speak on this topic. Uh we'll you we'll have two minutes for agenda items. There will be 5 minutes allowed for any topic you choose during general business and appearances which will come just before or after the break roughly around 8:30 or so. Is there anyone in the room that would like to speak on this agenda item? Is there anyone online? Okay, seeing none, u we'll >> I'll make a >> go ahead, Mr. Whitaker. on it and that when you're holding a public hearing and people do the time do the time to come up to speed on the issues limiting public comment on a public hearing to two minutes is absurd and disrespectful of the people willing to do learn the material. >> Okay. Um thank you for your comment. All right. Um Mr. Miller, welcome back. At this time, we'll close the public hearing portion and we would entertain a motion followed by any discussion or um debate on the topic. Um, Councelor Sheridan, go ahead. >> I'll move to um approve the interim changes to the regulations. >> Okay. Is there a second to that? >> I'll second. >> Okay. Uh, Councelor Castella, thank you. Is there any discussion or debate on this topic? >> My >> go ahead. Councelor Costello. >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh Mike, this is it's already in policy and it's uh it doesn't add any um any provision for um anything that's already built. It's a development line, right? So, it has to do with what may come next for building in the city. >> Is that correct? >> Yeah, it would. It can apply to any utilities can also be damaged and destroyed. So, we're also talking about potentially um somebody if if you're in a flood and your furnace gets damaged, that's a utility. So, it will come up in other instances, not just building a new structure. So, we will have it'll come into play in a couple of places. Obviously, building a new building is pretty easy. Everything has to be elevated. The little exceptions are in there are for things that are like, well, your obviously your water and sewer pipes are going to be underground, so they're below the flood stage, but that's okay because it's outlined in the code and what things are okay to be below the design flood. When you have a renovation, we will or or a flood, then we will look at it and make those determinations as it goes along. But our rules we have in place right now state that utilities that get uh damaged and need to be replaced have to be elevated. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your work on this. >> Does that out of curiosity does that could be damaged by a baseball bat or anything other than flood and be subject to the same thing? What about just upgrades? >> Um it'll have to anytime there's a replacement. So it depends. Sometimes you can repair things. So, there's a number of times peu uh people will repair a furnace and that's fine. Replacing the furnace would need to be elevated. Um, and yes, it's actually one of those the the damage can come from anything. And so, if you had a building in the flood plane that had a fire, you'd have to do it just the same as if it were flooded. Anything that got damaged that needs to get replaced would have to meet the flood codes. >> Thank you. Any other questions, discussion, or debate on this topic? and then we'll take a vote. All right, seeing none, all in favor of um let me get this wording here. All in favor of approving the interim change uh to the rivered hazard area regulations say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? The motion unanimously passes. Thank you, Mr. Miller. Um >> I have a second part to that one now. Now, I need to have you for the letter. >> Approve the letter. >> For the record, if it's moved and passed, I'm very happy to sign this letter. Is there a motion? >> I move we authorize the mayor to sign this letter. >> Thank you. Is there a second? Any discussion or debate on the topic? All in favor of authorizing me to sign this letter, say I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? Unanimously passes. All right. Thank you for the reminder, Mr. Miller. I appreciate that. >> Thank you. >> All right. We are done with item number four. It is 6:42 and we are on to item number five. Open burning outdoor burning ordinance first reading. Senator Curry. >> Hi. So, um the fire rules changed at the state level and there are um two ordinances before you today in order to bring our codes in compliance with those. I want to offer my apology that um I forgot to link the language of the new ordinance in the packet for you. So, I've handed it out. Um I can understand that doesn't give you a whole lot of time to review it. This is scheduled to have a first and second reading. We could also continue the first reading and then do a second reading after that if you would like to have time um to read that. So, my apologies and Chief Libby can explain the details of why this has um what the details are, what this means for fire protection in the city. >> Thank you, Chief Libby. >> Thank you. So, recent changes um through legislation to Vermont statutes annotated brought some clear language into the open burning rules and laws in the state of Vermont. Our existing ordinance is three paragraphs and uh leaves a lot of interpretation. Um, one of the major changes in statute was the definition of different classes of fire. So, class one fire is now defined as under 36 in or smaller campfire. Um, where before our ordinance says if it's comfortable enough to be around that leaves a lot of interpretation, right? So, you'd see people sitting around large bonfires that were unpermitted because they were saying they were recreational. Um, it doesn't change procedurally anything in the city. We don't permit um class one fires or recreational fires. You're allowed to have them without a burn permit. um disposal fires. It clears up the the language a little bit from the existing ordinance into the proposed ordinance change. Um it just talks about landowner permission, the type of materials that can be burned. The materials have to be from the source property where the burning's occurring. You can't be taking stuff from all over the town and neighbors towns and bringing them here to burn. So really, this proposal just allows us to be in line with what the uh statutes are now that went into effect July 1st. >> Any Thank you, Chief Libby. Any clarifying questions from council? >> Uh councelor Doyle, is this maybe this is just something that I imagine, but does this uh what if there's snow on the ground? Does that make any difference >> in we permit when there's snow? You don't have to. Um in legislation, you don't need a permit. Traditionally, Mount Pillar has issued permits through year round. So, >> okay. >> But, >> so in this situation, we would still if snow's on the ground, you're still required to get a permit in Montpielar >> if someone Yeah. >> Yeah. >> You know, we would certainly encourage it. And you know, for for our point of view is it's a obviously much more densely packed area than >> burning in a smaller community. >> It's good to get out and take a look at it and make sure that it's, you know, safe practices are being followed and understanding that if nuisance smoke arises, we may come back and tell you to shut it down. So, >> we would still encourage permits year round. >> Thank you. >> Other questions from council? Okay, at this time we'll officially open uh the public hearing. Is there anyone in the room that would like to comment on this agenda item? Seeing none, is there anyone online that would like to comment on this agenda item? I don't see any hands. So, we'll officially close the public hearing. Um, and I believe I mean so at this point we're not trying to make a decision on this. It requires a second hearing in any case. So at this time I think we would entertain a motion to um well approve this and move to a second hearing. I can't make the motion myself. Councelor Sheridan. >> Sure. Um, I move to approve the ordinance amendment amendment regarding the outdoor burning on first reading and set the second reading and public hearing on September 23rd. >> Terrific. Second. >> I'll second that. >> Okay, we got a couple of seconds. Councilors Brown and Doyle both same time. Is there any discussion or debate on this topic? Not seeing any. Let's take a vote. All in favor of move of approving the ordinance amendment regarding outdoor burning on first reading and set for second reading and public hearing on September 23rd say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Any abstensions? Unanimously passes. Thank you very much and thank you Chief Libby for coming. >> Um all right, we're are moving on to item number six at 647. Building code ordinance first reading. Manager Curry. >> Sure. So, you got Mike and then Derek and I have Mike and Derek who are going to present an update to the building code which also aligns our ordinances with the recent um fire uh regulations that have been passed and address elevators and access to um elevators and keys to enter buildings. I'll turn this over to them. >> Great. Uh messes Miller and Libby, go ahead. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So the the state um as manager Curry mentioned recently changed some of the rules regarding fire departments in the city uh and need to incorporate them into our building codes so they can be properly enforced. One change is the requirement of NOX boxes on all buildings with monitored fire systems along with those with sprinkler systems. Uh and there's a second requirement applying to the size of elevators to fit EMS stretchers. Um, and this proposal codifies them into our building code enforcement. >> Anything to add, Chief? Okay, agreed. Great. Okay, >> he has the details. I just write the write the ordinance. >> Okay. Uh, thank you. And we are Hang on One second. This is also a public hearing, so this will require two hearings in any case. Correct. Right. So, just reminding everyone, we're not making decisions tonight other than to accept this and move on or otherwise. Are there clarifying questions from anyone on council? >> Councelor Doyle. >> Well, I just had a question about the one-year part of upgrading into one year. Is that is that coming from the state or is that like an internal decision that >> Okay. I mean, yeah, great. Thanks for the answering my question. Um, so a follow- on question to that. Um, are there I mean are there is there any language or room for waiverss if one year is particularly ownorous? Uh, or how does that work in practice? >> Certainly in practice there's opportunity to work with people to build a plan that moves the project forward, >> right? Yeah. Um, I think the key with the one year is to inspire people to come into compliance. Um, you know, with building codes and inspection, there's always ways to make timelines that fit the project. Um, you know, when you're talking about the key boxes, a standard key box is $700. Um, so it it's not a huge ask. Um, what the key boxes allow us is there's an electronic core on them. On the trucks, there's a individual coded combination box that each member has a separate code and it I can track who takes the key out to enter that Nox box. And we can see what time whatever box in the city was entered, who took the key out of the truck, what building they took the key out of, what time the box was reopened to put the key back, and what time the key to the city, if you will, was restored to the truck. So, it's a provides great accountability for the city and for the fire department, showing where the keys to the city are, but it also allows us to expeditiously investigate a fire, get into a medical call in a building, um, prevent a leaking sprinkler system for doing continuous damage to a building without having to hope that the building contact was updated through dispatch and that there within a reasonable amount of time to get to the scene. so that we're not forcing entry through a door and doing hopefully no damage but possibly more than the cost of the key box. >> Great. Okay. Thank you. Um Councelor Castello, >> um appreciate you coming in, Chief, and explaining this for us. Um how many elevators are we looking at in the city today that are less than 8 feet? how and how so I'm concerned about the cost that this could incur at a time where we're trying to grow the housing stock in the community and >> how many buildings um are required to have elevators that would I mean obviously we're not going back um >> to grandfa we'll be grandfathering but as we look to the future you know what how many buildings are we talking about and what's the cost differential that we might see >> it's already in the Vermont state building code that three stories or more you have to put in this elevator. >> This puts it into ordinance and allows some local enforcement of it. Um so there's no gain in expense to the requirement. Um if they have multiple elevators only one has to be of size and marked accordingly with star of life on it. >> Um but the size of it the stretcher is 84 by 24. Mhm. >> So, in order to get that in there with providers, we need to have >> Are you seeing a lot of challenge with that right now? Um there's certainly some elevators that are a challenge to get the stretcher in without jacking the patient up 90 degrees to ride down or >> you know. >> Okay. >> Which is okay a lot of times to provide care to set them up, but at other times it's not necessarily the best position for >> no >> their well-being. >> Well, and elevators weren't always designed with this requirement in mind. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thanks. Thank you. >> Oh, >> go ahead, Councelor Sheridan. Thank you. >> So, um, when somebody doesn't have one, what is the what is the route for them? >> Well, they are existing elevator and they don't have one, then they continue to be an existing elevator without that. And we do our best to keep the patient comfortable and move them down the elevator or carry them down from the third floor in a in a chair. >> What makes that have what makes them have to trigger that change? >> New construction. >> A 50% upgrade of a building. >> Okay. >> Is typically when the new when existing code or existing buildings have to be brought up to current code. Okay. >> Did you say that one more time? existing buildings that do a renovation of 50% or greater trigger current code to be in to be followed. >> I just would like to make a small guilty comment on the lock boxes. Uh it got me in back in my apartment once >> and I went over talked to the fire department. I said, "I know there's a box and I don't have a key. I don't know where it is. And they came and let me back in the apartment. So, it works for that, too. >> Yeah. Lockins and lock. >> But I was guilty of that. After that, I put one somewhere. >> Where is it? >> I'm I'm not in that apartment anymore. >> Key might be still there. I'm I'm just reading I'm going to read this uh section 202-2C just to make sure that I'm understanding. It says elevator standard elevator standards keys. All new and existing elevator firefire access. This is about keys but then oh this is about keys. >> Yeah. >> Where's the paragraph about the size? >> Anyway, I'll look further. Don't don't worry about that right now at this time. Uh do you guys have any >> I can just speak to the keys. Right. Currently there's numerous manufacturers of elevators and each has different keys to operate the controls for the elevator. And in the fire service we call them phase one and phase two. It allows us to recall the elevator or run the elevator, take control of the elevator. That little firefighter helmet you see in in the elevator car. The challenge is I have a key ring of about 20 plus keys or elevators, right? And if you don't have the right one and it's not in a key box which you hope they put on the building, then you have no means to take control of it. So this is a a standard to a what's called an FEO2 or FEO K1 key, which is a standard key that can be just retrofit into into elevators. >> Yeah, that's thank you for that. I was actually looking for the the elevator size part, but I I see now there is no language that says as soon as this goes in, all existing elevators have to be upgraded. That's what I was reading in paragraph C, but that's not the right topic. So, I withdraw the question. Thank you. Um, any other questions from council before we open the public hearing? At this time, we'd like to officially open the public hearing. Is there anyone in the room that would like to speak on this agenda item? Not seeing anyone. Is there anyone online that would like to speak on this agenda item? Going once, twice. All right, we're going to officially close the public hearing on this topic. Um, this will require another hearing in any case. So, do we have a motion to help us move this forward? >> Yes, sure. >> Council Sheridan, you've been doing a great job so far. I'm looking at you. >> Yeah. So, I'll uh move the first hearing and set the second hearing to the ne is it to the next meeting? >> September the 23rd. Yes, sir. >> Okay, great. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. Thank you, Councelor Conn. Is there any discussion or debate on this topic? Seeing none, all in favor of approving this at first reading and setting a second reading for public hearing on September 23rd, please say I. I. I. I. >> Any opposed? >> Any abstensions? unanimously approved. Thank you, Chief Libby. Thank you, Mr. Miller. And thank you, everyone. All right, we are now moving on to item number seven. We have completed the public hearing section of our agenda. We're moving on to formal consideration for which we will still uh take public comment. We're on item number seven. It's currently 6:58 p.m. Uh, Andrew Curry, take it away. So this is a topic that um you had visited a while ago earlier this year related to the zoning and building fee schedule that this board adopts and which sets the fees that get charged for a number of application steps um for developers who come to our planning and community development department to process their applications. So um in the past you had discussed um a proposal to increase the appeals fees which had been done earlier and a request by staff to consider adjustments to the fee schedule. The council asked staff to go back and do further research which they have done and are bringing back to you now at this time. Um they've discussed this proposal with the housing committee. The housing committee has um an alternate proposal for you to consider which you have received and the co-chair Lauren Hurl is here to um present and answer questions regarding that. I would say um regarding you know your considerations here is the um you know this is a decision for council to decide really whether you want to broadly spread out the cost for development applications across the community or to require um developers to pay their own way or some balance of both. Um and whatever you decide or whatever balance you create you know we will implement. Um, I think the, you know, the current budget as started on July 1st had a revenue projection of $35,000 for zoning fees and $100,000 for building fees. And we can um, as Mike walks through the proposed schedule, be very clear about which subsets of the fee schedule fall into zoning um, fees and which follow into building fees. And so um, you know, we'll just ask you to keep that in mind if we need to come up with some sort of revenue offset in the conversation. Um currently, you know, you have made progress. We have a number of housing projects that are in the pipeline that have paid the current um fee schedule as is. Um we also um there's been a request by the housing committee to consider pulling DPW fees for like water and sewer hookups. We had not prepared that for today. So we don't have the data that you might need to reflect on that conversation. And I would ask that if that's something you wish to consider that we would come back with a separate discussion about that fee schedule because that's not what Mike's department um handles and that was not the initiating sort of component of the conversation. But of course we can come back with um more conversation on that. While we um are seeing additional housing in the pipeline and we obviously anticipate, you know, close to 300 units at Country Club Road in the next decade, we do anticipate that we might have additional staffing needs related to building inspection. Um and so when we're looking out, we just I just would ask that we kind of keep that in mind because we will need to build in um additional fee collections either through our contract with Country Club Road and how we manage that and then pay um you know for those services moving forward to support the additional development that we all want to support your housing goal of 75 units per year. Um so with that I will turn it over to Mike and he can give a little bit more of the history and dive into more of the detail of your um proposal for today. >> Great. And just before we begin uh because the housing committee also has a representative here after you've had a chance to speak, we'll give the housing committee also a chance to sort of speak to us before we move to questions. Uh go ahead, Mr. Miller. >> Okay. So, I'm going to run through a quick um PowerPoint just so I can kind of get through a number of um topics that I wanted to address. Um, so just going to try to touch on a little bit the history, the review of the current and the proposed that I've put together and then um some municipal fee comparisons to other towns and then some mock project fees from various communities and us just just so we all have an understanding of what our fees are and how they compare to other places. Um, so the history is o in October of last year, we started our uh conversation on increasing appeal fees and in January of this year we proposed new appeal fees plus some other changes um from council and this was when we're in the middle of budget season. We're talking about how we can increase and find other fees to help balance the budgets. Um and so the proposal that was put forward in January was to to look at adding some additional um fees, permit fees because we have been running and I'll have a graph of this later um not meeting our expectations for the budgets for revenues for the planning department. And so we wanted to go through make some adjustments and um what happened what was the direction in January was to come back with a stripped down fee schedule for only appeals and a few other categories that were needed. And then uh a second request was to prepare a comparison of fee schedules with other communities and to bring that back and to also bring that to the housing committee. And so in February, we completed the first request and we have adopted and made those changes. And this is uh took a little longer than we had hoped, but we're now in uh getting to that second request. And our goal in this was really an effort to try to rightsize all of our fees to the amount of staff time and compare to other communities of similar scale. So that way you have the information to be able to make a decision on whether to adjust and increase or just adjust the fees. Um, this is showing Oh, see if I can get back. There we go. Um, so this is a graph that is showing the fees um that we've collected. The blue uh darker bar is building fees and the shorter orange bars are zoning. Um, and actually the 2019, so this is fiscal years, not calendar years. So these are fiscal years. 2019 was the first year we had our new zoning in place. Um, and actually that number that bar would be $100,000 $100,000 higher. So, we collected $243,000 in building fees in 2019. Um, but if I actually mapped that, we it would make all the other bars so small you really can't see them. So, I cut it down just to fit in make it fit a little better. So, we were collecting more than our 100,000. That's our budget for building and more than 35,000 for zoning. That was our budget then. Um, and obviously a lot has happened between now and then. Um, fiscal year 2020 really only caught the end of the or the start of COVID because it ended in June of 2020. So, we still had a pretty good year. Um, got $100,000 in building fees, but a lot less in zoning. Um, so the low short horizontal line is $20,000. So, if you look at the zoning fees, you'll notice they're um very often below that 20,000. So, we're supposed to be getting 35,000. We're not even making 20,000. Uh fiscal year 23, which of course ended 2 weeks before the flood. So, this this was not a flood year, even though it says fiscal year 23, we actually did um fairly well and did hit um our our budget just barely in both categories. So, um, and then 24 were again we're back down. Um, and then 25 for zoning permits again were down. And then in 26, which was this year, so when we met in January, we only had about $8,000 in fees. So, we were anticipating being $27,000 short that we were not going to make our zoning fees. When I met with you in January, we've had a very robust permitting year, and we actually did get the the other $27,000 in zoning permit fees this year to just barely hit the total. So, we did actually collect $35,000 in permits this year, just so people have a scale. This is what when I'm looking at this, trying to make sure that I'm meeting my expectations and budgets. This is this is what I see. Um, we used to collect a lot of fees 2019 and before and we're significantly not collecting as many fees now. Um, so >> can I ask a question before we leave that? Would you mind going back? You said that the the building fees in 2019 is actually $100,000 more, but the the zoning fees is is accurate for 2019. Is that correct? Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Um, so the uh, so the summary of changes. So what did what proposals are we making in those two fee schedules that we sent out to you? Um, rather than go through it, I'm just going to kind of highlight what are the the summary of the changes. We've reduced the building fees from $850 per thousand to $8 per thousand. And that's to match the state. So we've always pegged our permit fees for the building codes to the state. Um, and at some point the state adjusted their fees and we didn't catch that. So, uh, they must have lowered their fees. Um, so we're going to catch up to them and kind of drop the other 50 cents and get it down to eight $8 per thousand um to match what the state does. Uh, second, there's a shift to fixed cost for residential. And I'll take a half step back just to go through and say what I had Nick do in my office is he very carefully looked at how much time is spent on every single one of those line items and then started to review what would be an accurate way to make sure that we are collecting the right amount of money to reflect the amount of time we put in. Same thing we did for the appeals. This is how much time this is how much it costs to do an appeal. this is how much time it costs to do this single line item and in that way we can help to kind of have a fair cost. Um so the shift in residential it used to be by square foot um and dollars per square foot. So it would be 30 cents per square foot actually um for residential construction. And what we said is it really doesn't matter um if you're building a house um whether it's a single family unit, whether it's a thousand square foot single family home or a 5,000 foot single family home, it takes the same amount of time. So if we go by square footage, we're not accurately reflecting the amount of work. So shifting this to a fixed cost actually helps projects. Uh we'll get to this later. It turns out it helps out the residential projects later. Um, we also reduced fees for residential additions to 10 cents per square foot from the 30 cents because we were finding that that more accurately reflects the amount of work because again these were just numbers that had always been there. We now actually went through and said how much time does it take us to do this permit and how much effort does it take? >> Can I just ask a clarifying question on that? the the so it's fixed now whether it's a th00and square foot house or a 5,000 foot house but is that like per unit or like you know what I mean? What if you had a 5,000 foot duplex? Is it the same amount as it a 1,000 foot single family? >> Uh it would be $200 for the first unit and $150 for the next unit. So that would be a $350 permit for a duplex. >> Okay. >> Regardless of the size of the duplex. Um, and then a few of the other ones, commercial is fixed for for projects below a thousand square foot. There's just a fixed cost to it now as opposed to having it um rated. It used to be 30 cents per um square foot. And now commercial above that is 15 cents per square foot as opposed to uh 30 cents per square foot. So again, it's it's a reduction in costs. We by basically how much it costs us to do the work. We've basically been overcharging for a lot of these um smaller projects. Basically, uh rural hazard area nonsubstantial improvements. These are things that don't have to meet the flood codes because they're non-substantial improvements. It used to be the same cost as the the substantial improvements. So, it's less work. We reduce the cost. DRB fees, on the other hand, have increased to 250 from 100 because these are actually costing more. We have been undercharging people who go to the DRB and we have been overcharging people who are getting administrative permits. So, um, based on a review of how much time it takes us to issue a porch permit or a shed permit, we've been overcharging, but we've been undercharging everyone who goes to the DRB. And other DRB fees generally increased because there's a lot more work. When you go to the DRB, if you've ever gone to the DRB and seen how much work that Meredith puts into a staff report or into a decision, you absolutely say, "Yeah, there's a lot of effort going into those." Um, no change to the subdivisions because we actually had reviewed those um like last year to adjust those fees. So now that we had put together the two the the proposed fee schedule, we were like, "Okay, well, our initial proposal in February was, well, let's try to see if we're generating more revenues." We ran I told Nick to take all the permits we issued in May 25, all the ones from June 26, uh, and just going run them through and see if we gained or lost revenue. We actually ended up bringing in a little less revenue, but those particular months that we picked didn't have a lot of DRB, DRC applications. Those are the ones we would expect to be generating more. So, the fees are probably not going to increase tremendously, but we also just collected all the fees and matched what we need to. So, we're I'm a little less pushing the envelope of saying let's get more and more fees because we've got to meet our budget target. We did hit our budget target. Now it's a little bit more let's make sure we're being fair. Um and it looks like running this we're not significantly under we're not significantly over. We're running about the same with these um with these fees. Residential projects will be slightly less due to changes in administrative fees. As I said, that that adjustment from square footage to units surprised us on how much of an impact that would make in in costs. And you'll see that later on as well. So, how do we compare to other towns? And you'll hear a lot about this of how much cheaper it is to go and get permits in Berry Town and Barry City, but they're really um not necessarily comparable towns uh when it comes to the similarities. We're we're looking to be a tier 1A community. We are doing higher level zoning and planning. We have what we call robust permitting process. And so we are um we really need to be comparing ourselves to a lot of other communities, not just Barry City and Berry Town. So we did that. We compared you in your packet you had links to all the fee schedule, summaries of the fee schedules. I'm not going through all that. I'm just going to go through um some mock projects to kind of give you a sense of how the permits are similar or different. So, if we talk about a single family home of about 400,000, we have to put both in because some go based on dollars, some go based on square footage. So, if we had a single family home, $400,000, 1,500 square f feet. Under our old current um fee schedule, that would be $450. And for a new under the new system, it would be $200. If you were in Berry Town, Berry City, or Waterberry, that would be 120, 35, or $600. So, Waterberry charges more across the board than we do. Um, and if you start looking down at some of these other ones, Stow and then the rest of these are from Chittening County. Um, Stow, Shelurn, Colchester, that's 450, 750, and $4,851. A lot of Chittening County towns in their zoning fees, um, there are impact fees and we don't have impact fees. So, um, these other communities, if you go in to pull a permit for a single family home in Colchester, you will pay $4,851 for that permit. Uh, Burlington, South Burlington, and Essex are 8,000 for a single family home. 8,900, 8,800, and 2565 in Essex. So you can see we're charging $200. These are communities that are building and growing. So uh it's not like, you know, a lot of this is like, well, people won't build them up here. Our fees are too high. It's like they're building in Chitten County with these types of fees. >> Mike, are there any fees are there any communities outside of Chitten County that you know of that are collecting impact fees? >> Uh there yeah, there's quite a few. Um there generally tend to be you'd probably be up in Franklin County. Um but yeah, there's there are a number of communities around that do have impact fees. They were more common in the past. A number of communities have rescended them. We did. We had them until 2016 and we rescended them. >> Um and during this presentation, if counselors want to ask questions, just go ahead. Councelor Sheran. What are can you give an example of the impact fees that they ask for? >> Uh so an impact fee could be um >> I know some of them have education impact fees, some of them um have transportation or parks impact fees, recreation impact fees. So um the way and I won't go into big details, the way impact fees work is you you have to go through and say because of the new development we're going to be required. We don't have enough parks, let's say, and because of this new development, we're going to need to buy more land to make more parks. Therefore, we need $100,000, and we're going to charge $2,000 for each new single family home. And that money would go into a fund that we would then use to build a new park. And you could do that for you can't use it for maintenance. You can't use it for personnel, but you can use it. We need a new fire station. You know, we wouldn't need to build a new fire station if it wasn't for all the people moving into town. But because we have all these people moving into town, we're going to need to build a Baker fire station. It's going to cost X. So, we need to set aside this much money and levy on each permit that gets issued. >> Thank you. So, these were relatively um modest because these were single family homes. I'll go really quickly. A four-unit building that will probably cost a developer about $1.5 million to build a building like that. It'll be about 4,000 ft inside. That's a four-unit building. Our old zoning, our current zoning would cost $1,400 for that permit. Our new regulations would be 850. Remember how I mentioned that with this new system because the square, we're not going with square footage anymore. the costs drop and we hadn't expected that but we're like well it is what it is. This is what it came out to be. Um and because we're less pressed for revenue we're going to just leave the proposal as it is. Um but again you can see Berry City, Berry Town. Um Berry Town has an asterisk because there's is most other communities these would be allowed uses. It's only allowed in certain places in Berry Town. Um, but their fees obviously are um, ours are 850, theirs 335 and 210. Everybody else is more than us. Um, and in many cases by a lot 1700, Stow 1450, Shelurn, Colchester, you see the numbers for Colchester. Now, if you want to do that four-unit building, you're paying a $14,000 zoning fee, which includes the impact fee. And in Burlington, that would be a $35,000 fee. Um, so there's quite a lot of variability in the fees. Um, and the last one, if we were building a 10-unit building, again, everything just goes up by a factor. Um, in Montpielar, somebody's going to spend $4 million, we're going to charge them 2,000 for a zoning fee. So, these are not really um causing a significant damage. It's it's you know I think it was calculated to be like 1% of the total fees or total cost of the construction. So it's really a very small percentage. >> Oh sorryella has a question. >> Oh sorry >> Mike. Do developers when they approach the city complain about fees? >> Uh not usually when they're in the office but we get a lot when we do public comments and public input. I'm sure the housing committee will >> Yes, I've heard there's going to be some >> we'll have we'll have input, but yeah, we don't usually get people who will say, "Well, if that's the fees, I'm not going to do my project." >> What I've historically heard um developers complain about is inefficiency in decision making. I don't mean about Mount Pillar, but I mean in general when they're looking, they want clarity and they want rapid answers on zoning questions. And I I I'd love your perspective on how are we doing on that because I think in terms of developer friendly communities that that is very efficient and and lined up to support developers getting quick decisions and uh I wonder about how you your perspective on how Montilia is doing. >> Yeah, I mean without getting too far off off a field um it's I think we do extremely well. >> Um we've done a lot to make permits administrative. Um, we do have a a bad reputation and we just have a lot of that of difficulty getting rid of those perceptions. Uh, you know, we have policies in place. We have goals of issuing administrative permits within 5 days. Um, many of them within the same day and to issue anything that has to go to the DRB would be issued within 45 days. And every year at the end of the year um we do we we do the calculations and we actually cuz our permit software will track this to help us. Um probably the larger complaint we get now is the need for um the additional studies that sometimes get required because we have steep slopes requirements or we have other things and the planning commission and DPW and um the planning staff were all trying to work together to try to streamline some of those a little bit better. Um in some cases um there's a requirement for an engineered certificate and if it needs an engineered certificate it has to go to the DRB and our sense is well that should change if if it if if it's been put together by an engineer it's been reviewed by our engineer it doesn't have to. So we are do we are trying to be more efficient and all this will come to the council probably later this probably this winter um for a revision to the zoning to help clean some of those pieces up. so much. >> Mike, was there any comment from Dair why theirs are so low? >> I think they I don't know. I was the planning director in Barry City. These look like the same fees that we had 15 years ago when I was there. So, I I I don't know if there was just hasn't been an effort to >> look at them >> to to look at them. Yeah. Um, so the the last thing I just wanted to go through is is just to touch on what the staff recommendation and and I would ask that you approve the new fee schedule. I believe the fees that are proposed here are reasonable, do not cause a burden on developers. Um, the adjusted fees are fairer. Um, as I said, they reflect the staff time needed for administration. We've tried to really balance that. These are direct costs. Don't don't they don't have indirect costs. Um, we could have a much bigger discussion looking at Colchester and South Burlington. Their fees are designed to completely pay for their departments. So, there's no fees. There's no property taxes that go to support those departments. They're fully funded by their own fees. Our building department, technically our zoning is one department, building code enforcement is another. Um, historically, our code enforcement, um, Michelle's position has been fully, um, it pays for itself through its fees. That's the $100,000. It It's been running short, so we've had to have additional funds, but historically, that's meant to kind of pay for itself, but other communities also include their indirect costs and these other things. We were just looking at direct costs, which is why if you said, "Well, if we add the 35,000, it doesn't pay for our zoning administrator." Well, it won't because our zoning administrator does other things and our zoning administrator, we're not building into this health health insurance and all the other costs or paying for a portion of my time to supervise them or paying for a lot of other is just how much time does it take to do this? What's their hourly rate and there it goes. >> The fees are they um when are they collected upfront? >> Yes, they're collected up front. It is part of the application. And we don't move applications forward until we have the fees paid. >> Okay. So that that could possibly be adjusted that they might be collected when they actually start building something. >> It would be trickier to know. Would it be able to keep track of that? Um >> just ask them. >> Yep. I think it would be cleaner if they do it. We do have um for certain permits and certainly for building fees um we have a reconcil reconciliation process. So the building fees are a much bigger fee. These were smaller fees. We still spent the time to issue your permit even if you decided not to build that shed in your backyard. Um the building fees on the other hand include more uh the the additional money you get is because Michelle may have to come out to your property seven times because I has to inspect each one of the the foundation when it goes in and the walls and all the different pieces. So by having um if somebody were to say I want to build a house and I get my building permit and then I don't build the house, you can come back. there's a reconciliation process to come back and get your money back and we will issue you a check for that difference. Or if you say it's because it's based on estimated building cost, if you say it's going to cost 200,000 to build this house, I got it built for 180, you can come back, we will refund those $20,000 difference. So just we want to be fair to the applicant. You give us an estimate and then you give us the actual costs at the end. Rarely do people come back and tell us that they they underestimated. >> Thank you for that. Um, anything else before we would like to hear from the the housing committee. >> That's that that was a summary of what I what what we are trying to accomplish and what we would ask of council and I'll let >> Okay. Thank you for your recommendation, all of your work. Um, Miss Hurl, would you come on forward? I think you know how this works. Welcome. And uh counselors, I I appreciate those of you that are raising your hands. And for for this, let's just keep it loose. If you have a question, just ask the question. Thank you. >> Great. Hi everyone. Uh thank you so much for giving me a few minutes this evening. My name is Lauren Hurl and I am the vice chair of the Mont Pillar Housing Committee and I'm joined online by Sheamus Lombardo who has been doing a lot of the research and interviews with developers and other work that went into developing this proposal. So, shout out to Sheamus and depending on how uh detailed and wonky your questions get, I bet Sheamus will be the one to help answer them. Um, but I'm here representing uh on behalf of the housing committee. You know, we are the committee that you all have charged with looking for every possible avenue to encourage and support more housing development in our community given the urgent challenge of inadequate and expensive housing. And we know that housing is a top priority for city council, has been for many, many years. And our committee has conducted numerous discussions with small and large housing developers in the community. And the cost and unpredictability of city fees has come up repeatedly. Um it's something particularly for smaller developers, we've been told that these fees really are playing a meaningful factor in when they're deciding whether or not to move projects forward. Um and this feedback is part of a broader narrative that you know Paul was alluding to of you know people just viewing Mont Peelier as a harder and more expensive place to build than many of the surrounding communities. Um, you know, and we understand that city staff are looking to help ensure fees cover staff time in the planning department and are proposing the package of fees that Mike just walked through with that goal. And, you know, totally appreciate that approach and, you know, having been in you all's chairs for many years, understand how important every single dollar that we can bring into the city budget is. Um, and knowing how critical bringing more housing is online and what a priority it is, um, growing our grand list and adding housing is one of the best ways for us to bring in more overall tax revenue spread out over more properties. So, we're offering this proposal in that spirit aimed at doing everything we can to show housing developers that Mont Peelier, at least in the immediate term. This would probably not make sense as a long-term permanent proposal. Um, but right now, we're taking a range of meaningful steps to support more housing and are uh therefore proposing this housing development fee holiday concept. Um, you know, one approach could be a three-year fee holiday for most planning and DPW fees as part of an overall package targeted to incentivize more housing and change the perception of Montpelier's development environment. Uh, we recommend maintaining certain fees such as uh the appeal fee, fees for non-residential properties, fees for water hookups outside of Montpielar. Um I did email you all a table that included the recommendation that the um housing committee had looked at. Certainly of course you could look at any subset of fees as a possible proposal and you could similarly still send a signal to developers that there's a fee holiday for a certain amount or for certain fees to kind of accomplish this goal. Um obviously this proposal would have a revenue impact which is an important consideration for you all. We're also thinking about the longer term revenue benefits of increased housing development. Again, that new tax revenue, new students enrolled in our schools, foot traffic to our downtown businesses, and all those things that can come along for as we try to really do everything we can to incentivize more housing. Um, we also know that this feedback on the fees was uh perhaps the most acute again from the smaller developers and the revenue impacts of a fee holiday if you put it across the board could have much bigger impacts if you're getting into really big projects. And so I think um, you know, if this concept is something that you all are interested in exploring, it's something that you know you could certainly scale it. You could look at things like a cap on the total amount of the fee holiday. You could have different approaches for uh projects of different sizes. You know, any project going through a development agreement, for example, could have a negotiated fee that's not um subject to the same approach. So, I think the housing committee would be excited and happy to do additional work if this is a concept that is of interest to people to continue exploring to look at uh refining it based on the potential um concerns or considerations that you all would want us to look into. Um, you know, and again, overall, our committee is viewing this fee holiday proposal as part of a larger package of policies and incentives that you all have been approving, that the planning commission's looking at. Uh, Mike was just referencing some of those zoning changes, regulatory changes, uh, changes you all made to the housing trust fund. All of this we're seeing as part of a a collective package that you know each step might be small but collectively we can just show that Vermont is eager and excited to welcome developers to bring new housing. Um the housing committee also is offering its services to be um kind of packaging up and helping promote this information, doing outreach directly to developers to make sure if you do something like this, part of the goal of which is to send a signal that make sure that signal is reaching developers. And so that's something we would also be uh excited to help with. So that's what we're proposing. Appreciate you all listening and uh Sheamus and I would be happy to answer any questions. questions. Go ahead. >> Thank you so much. It's wonderful work that you're doing and we deeply appreciate and share probably all of us the the desire to build us a sense that this is an attractive city for developers and particularly for housing. Um when you when you described that you went out and talked to a lot of developers and potential developers, they they said that they that the fees were a big issue for them, but that also the uncertainty about fees was important to them. They are they aware that we're talking about a relatively small raises in fees and that that's significant to them or is the uncertainty more about permitting and having permit appeals and time dragging on? You know, some some housing developments in Vermont have been dragged on for eight years by constant appeals and process questions that have driven people crazy and undermine development significantly. And is that been an issue? >> Yeah, and I I see Sheamus's hand raised, so definitely want to hear from him. I I think all of those issues have come up in the conversations. Um, you know, so the fees were specifically named as something that again both, you know, it's just it's another cost and if you have a small project, it really does start to add up. Um, but also just that uncertainty, the timelines and, you know, the housing committee and working in partnership with the planning commission are really looking at, you know, are there ways to to shrink the timeline to make our, you know, so again looking at this as part of um a whole suite of things that the city can be doing. And so this would be a potential piece of this if this is of interest. But I don't know, >> Mr. Lombardo, as as part of the housing committee and maybe the person with the answer to some of these questions, I'd invite you to just go ahead and answer and not need to be recognized during this part of the discussion. >> All right. Thanks so much. I appreciate that. Um, yeah, it was summarized pretty well and I just want to emphasize that in these conversations with developers, all those concerns came up. you know, appeals, zoning, um some of the things that um Mike mentioned like professional hours that are incurred to comply with our analyses on things like steep slopes and others. Um but particularly for um smaller developers and we did speak to a range of larger and smaller developers and the larger ones were more concerned with that former category of issues than the fees. Um but particularly for the small developers like infill or you know a small multi-unit um they did really um bring up not only the unpredictability of the fees which was certainly brought up um and you know understanding how much you're going to have to pay throughout that process was a frequent concern but the actual cost of the fees was raised in these interviews by several small developers. And a key point that I want to make and here I'm just conveying the feedback of the developers that I interviewed was that even though the fees are a small fraction of the overall project cost, the way they view it is margin. Margin is what makes a project feasible, particularly for small developers that are planning to sell the units that they build rather than rent them. And these projects operate on very small margins. So even you know a relatively small overall percentage of the cost can affect whether a project is feasible or not. And so that's kind of the point that I would summarize on you know the fee values themselves. But then I would just echo what Lauren was saying that you know both this is proposed as part of an overall package and that package which would include other things is targeted at perception you know changing perception. It would be in part you know a PR thing limited time only kind of um incentive to you know change that perception. Um I I have a question. How would we how will we know when that perception is changed? If this has been a s let's let's say we we have a fee holiday for three years and the goal is to get more more housing built and to change that perception. How are we going to know that this that this was a successful experiment assuming that something like that were to go through? Any thoughts about that? I mean to me the most important thing are developers actually putting forward and moving projects which we you know are not seeing as much of as we'd like. We're starting to see you know some real movement which is exciting. I mean I think we actually collected a lot of written um data and interviews through this process the housing committee has been doing. So I think we could do a round of interviews again in a couple years and do a kind of you know informal assessment of if perceptions are changing if what we're doing is actually working you know it's a hard thing to measure and it's you know because it's if you know we move forward with this it's one of many things we're doing so which you know but you could try to get a sense of you know what are the most meaningful changes the city has made you know what are the ongoing barriers so I think you could you know it's a finite universe of developers that we're talking about we can we can talk to folks and get a sense, you know, over time, is this making a difference? Is it worth extending? Should we cut it short or whatever? So, I I don't know that you're going to get like a hard data answer, but >> thanks for that, Councelor Kong. >> Um, I think it is related with this one. Uh, maybe we can reach out the former developers uh who already did housing here and we can send them very short survey and ask them, right? Will you be not coming if to Montier if we have this increase because when Mike explained I can see the both perspectives and the 0.1 percentage is really not that high but I understand the margins too and uh that's why I think asking people who already did some development here can give us more concrete data just the estimation right we cannot say that this will be 100% happening and the second thing I was wondering if we give this uh holiday three year or whatever um time we decide there will be some uh gap right between the revenue and also uh like giving something away to those developers who is paying the gap like taxpayers, new developers and also the other thing if we provide this incentive to developers can we ask them okay if you go with this plan I'm just like making this up I don't know if it is legal or illegal could you please plant 50 trees in miel year or around your develop like something like that so they can also So uh give something back since they are using this incentive. So these are my first uh thoughts about the both sides. >> Well, councelor Sheridan to respond Sheamus. >> Oh, does he want to respond first? >> No, I'm just >> Yeah, I can just respond really briefly and say that a lot of the interviews that we conducted were with developers that have already completed projects. some of them were ongoing but many of them had already um completed their projects and so you know the points that I'm expressing on their concern about fees but also the other points and under the general umbrella of perception were conveyed to us um by folks who had completed their project and I want to um clarify that you know this project was not conducted in direct opposition to like the new development of raising fees. That's not actually something I brought up in my interview that the fees were going to go up. This was talking about the current like um status quo, not necessarily like changes that are actively under consideration, just kind of the general um perception. >> Go ahead, Lauren. just just in in answer to your question about the revenue this proposal and you know again you could scale it in a bunch of different ways but it would be a revenue hit to the city. So it would be something that in budget season. So you know presumably you would do this maybe for in the next budget and not midyear um when you've already approved a budget. Um but you would then be you know again having made the hard decisions about what to what to cut, what to keep, how to raise revenue. you know, it would be doing it because, you know, we're viewing housing as an urgent public good and that we're spreading it among taxpayers because it's this public need for the community and that we're prioritizing that cost over potentially other things in the budget. So, that's how you all would have to view it if you wanted to move it forward. >> Well, the hit is because I mean running the running the zoning and building functions has a fixed cost, right? And so, if we're not bringing in revenue to cover that cost, then we're on the hook. We the taxpayers are on the hook for that. Councelor Sheridan. >> Um yeah, I I want to talk about who pays I mean I want to talk about some of the things I've heard in your committee and one of them was well it's only $35,000. That's a drop in the bucket. You as a counselor know that's just one bucket we're going to have to deal with. I mean another bucket might be a h 100,000 of from some other group 50,000. Pretty soon all those buckets add up to a lot of money. Now I know your committee is just targeting one thing but Ben mentioned it and we have to look at the big picture. So, I would like you being a former counselor who knows that to kind of say to them, we're not going to be the only people asking for a reduction or more money. It's going to be a lot of people asking, as you know, and we're going to have to sort it out. And this is going to fall on the people. I'm concerned about putting money in big developers pockets who are richer than most everybody in town. And is there any guarantee that they're going to pass this on to the home buyers? No. That's how they got rich. Um, so I'm kind of concerned about the big developers getting money put in their pocket. It's creating more inequity in the overall in you know net worth of people and stuff like that. I kind of think we made a big step by offering 20 acres for a dollar. That seems to me to be quite an invitation. And um so I'm a little concerned about this especially for 3 years because you're just putting it on the back of taxpayers and this is a high tax city. Um I think we're seeing people pull back. There's a lot of houses. I looked on Zillow and Zillow is only one factor of the houses for sale. There's 29 units. There are a lot of apartments opening up. My girlfriend has been looking for them and I've looked at a lot of them. Things are changing in Montpillier that I haven't seen happen for a lot of years. I've been actually following housing since 1999 when I was original founder of the housing task force, which wasn't even under the city. And there hasn't been this many apartments available since the middle 90s. And there's a lot of them out there. Six just were put on front porch forum last night and I can't tell you how many we've looked at and I've talked to people and they say we used to have lists of people who wanted to get in our apartments. So when somebody left we just called them. Well, they're not their lists aren't there anymore and they're having to advertise. And so things are changing and I'm not sure what it is whether people are leaving the city or they're just saying that's too expensive your apartments or we're just not going to pay it. But it's changing from somebody who's watched this for a long time. It's definitely changing. So, I'm a I'm not quite sure that this is the kind of carrot that's going to make everybody get rid of that Friends of Sabin's Pasture bit that kind of started all this as far as I'm concerned. I was on the council during those years. So, I I I would be more open to trying it for a year and seeing what kind of feedback you get. I think 3 years is a big jump to ask people to, you know, come up with the money when I'm hearing from people when I went out and got signatures, soon as my kids are out of the schools, I'm out of here. So, we have to we have to think about that. And, you know, I like I say, as a former counselor, I hope you bring that up when they talk about it's just a drop in the bucket. It's just one of many drops in the bucket. Thank you. Thank you, councelor Sharon. I I expected a lot of conversation around this. We're we're starting to wait into the sort of discussion part. Councelor Pastello, did you have something to add? We do want to also get to public comment before we take a motion on this and then have, you know, more formal discussion and debate on it. We're already a little bit over the time. I'd already allotted. Just bring that to everybody's attention. >> If necessary, mayor. Thank you. Uh my question is, you know, I think we share Jim's desire to see open housing and potentially the rent goes down if we have enough on the market at one time that it becomes in the interest of landlords to look at their pricing. Um but as we look at our um the permitting costs and so forth, have we in the past done selective projectbased um cost reduction? So you know we we have a public interest potentially right now in the development at the country club. We could potentially have interests in what goes on at 87 State Street. We could have interests in other developments that come along where we might be requested to wave fees and it may be in the city's interest to wave fees. In that context, is there any setting there? Is have we waved fees in the past for individual projects? Um, and I think that we should think about that as we're thinking about this, whether we would want to wave the fee for a larger development and not wave the fee for a family developer who's building two houses or something. >> That question sounds like maybe it's more of a Mr. Miller question. >> Yes, I think so. >> And I'll jump in while Mike gets set set up. So, I was going to flag for you all as we move through this conversation. you know, with the country club road, this is a negotiated agreement with negotiated contract with the developer of which in our RFP, we um signaled that we would consider fee waiverss or some level of fee reduction as part of that. And so that is part of our active negotiations that will come to you in the letter of intent at the next meeting. Um and so, you know, that is something that this council had already expressed that they want to do. Um we additionally have offered through tax stabilization agreements for some affordable housing or you know levels of residential housing in the past as well which is separate from the fees to get there but also part of a broader package of incentives and offerings that the council has made um for delivery of housing. >> Let Mike talk about the past waivers. >> Go ahead and then um appreciate it and as brief as you can be while still being thorough please. Thank you. >> Yes. Quick. Uh, so the quick answer is um, no, we haven't. At least in the 14 years I've well more than whatever between the years I've been directors here in Barry, I haven't seen it with with one um asterisk, which is uh, post floods, whether it was Barry City or whether it was Montpillar. Um in both cases um there were permit fee holidays for any projects for flood recovery during that window. So >> we did wave those fees during that time just because people were in obviously in in really bad straits and um we wanted to make sure the permits got moving and people weren't held up because they didn't have the the money to move those projects forward. >> Just one quick thing before we go to councelor Doyle. There's no urgent time cliff to make this decision before such and such a date. Is that correct? If we wanted to continue this discussion, that is an option for us. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thanks, Councelor Doyle. >> Yeah. I would actually just like to bring it back to the distinction between Mike's proposal and the housing committee's proposal. >> Thank you for that. >> Right. And um so I think there's a distinction to be made there. And I guess I have a question for Lauren just I mean what you're asking for tonight is not that we institute a three-year uh fee holiday, right? I think it's that you're asking directionally is this something that the housing committee should potentially continue to pursue uh more information on and bring back a more baked proposal if it's something that the council's worth entertain interested in entertaining. >> Yeah, exactly. I think we were assuming and you know a number of the issues that have come up tonight also came up at the housing committee also the things that we were wrestling with. So I think it would be trying to further refine if there's interest from this body to you know put a more kind of detailed proposal forward to you all. I think you know changing the fee schedule you could do that and then consider a fee holiday for a set amount of time as as a signal you know so I think they are not even mutually exclusive proposals. Um, you know, we were hoping I think what Mike showed tonight at one point we were concerned of the optics of increasing fees on developers right now for housing. It doesn't seem like the current fee proposal like it looks like a lot of development it will go down or be kind of it's just moving around. So I think anyway I think they're they're separate parallel paths and do accomplish different things. I think what I'm really interested in is just like more um thought and work around the the connection between the strategy for meeting our housing goals and the fee structure, right? And like right now it feels like the conversation that we're getting, you know, Mike's proposal is really based on like meeting the orientation of that is like meeting a budget target, right? Which has a real revenue impact on the city, right? But, you know, this I think the thing I'm more interested in is the strategy conversation about growing the tax base over the long term through increasing our housing um goals. And like you know, Jim, I did raise this in the housing committee and I I I mean really what I want to know is is like uh is the juice worth the squeeze? Right? Like and I think can we get more analysis of that? If if we had a two or threeear holiday, what would be the you know what would be the financial impact? how much would that cost? And then the question is like is it is it worth it, right? Um and so I I would actually be very comfortable with the housing committee continuing to pursue this thought and trying to get some more data around it of like what the you know what the levers are that we could pull and thinking about you know additional kind of nuances to that of like maybe it's only for small developers, maybe it's for development that has an affordability component into it, right? what are the things ultimately that are going to make housing more accessible to members of our community and grow the tax base and like thinking about how to pull those levers in terms of you know Mike I really I mean this has been an ongoing conversation and I think I've been pretty clear with you and with of my fellow counselors about how I feel about it of just like what you know we're talking about right now or in the previous conversations I mean congratulations on hitting your budget target on it that's great um you know I think I think about a lot what is the cost of perception in this city, right? What does it cost us to have a perception that I think everybody will acknowledge we have a reputation of being a difficult place to develop in? Hopefully that's changing with some of the, you know, the goals that we've set, the strategies that we're implementing. Um, but you know, what is the cost to that perception? And to me, if housing is like literally our number one priority is, you know, do we want to send a signal like we're going to adjust our fee schedule to meet our budget target, you know, even if it's like $15,000. What is the perception of that? I I I would much rather be sending the message that we're doing a whole host of different things, which I believe that we are, and I think we need to celebrate a whole host of things to encourage people to build here and to change that perception that we >> Thank you. Um, manager Curry, you had your hand up. Sor Con also has her hand up. You want to go ahead? >> No, I didn't I didn't really have my hand my hand up, though. I do appreciate Lauren sort of framing the options for this relative to how you offset any costs because I do think that's a real question and if we were talking about some subset of zero to $135,000 in a budget conversation, it would be a hard conversation that we'd be having. Um, and I I do just want to take a moment and celebrate the city's current successes around housing because there are a number of multifamily um developments that are in the pipeline. you know, our 105 units in phase one of Country Club Road. Um, another 22 to 28 up on Northfield Street, you know, Isabel Circle that you've all just um authorized entering into the CHIP program with them. We have some multifamily being installed currently out on Elm Street. I know I'm missing others that I recently got a rundown from the planning department and which we will celebrate. Heaton Street, which we will celebrate when we check in on our strategic goals later this month. So um you know so I do think that the I will say the um clarity around application review and making applications more administratively approved has shifted the conditions at Montpillar for delivery of housing out of you know tough you know five tough years here and many several tough years just nationally for construction right um so I just wanted to stop and celebrate that a little bit and you know we can provide some more feedback on on how to maybe tee up these proposals based on direction that you know or line up the two different proposals based on direction that um you all give us moving forward. I might recommend that you still adopt the proposed schedule now because it does shift in a way that's improved from the current status quo. And so what Mike has, you know, laid forward has said like we're making this fairer. We're putting less burden on the smaller developers, which is a shared goal here. You can adopt this tonight and still work on um consideration for any type of fee holiday. And I just would I want to be very specific about this term because what I've seen from the housing committee is not a blanket fee holiday. It is a real carve out for incentivizing the type of residential development that is desired here. you know commercial development would still come in under the fee schedule. Certain largecale applications that go through the DRB would be expected to pay fees which you know is about 10% of projects that we see. So already a smaller subset. So if we're talking about you know using word holiday you know it is it is a narrow tailored request. So I don't want anyone any developers sitting out there thinking that they're hearing this incorrectly um or mis in a misconstrued way. Wow, nice reframe and clarification. Thank you, uh, Council Conn. And then after Councelor Con, we're going to open up for public comment and move forward in our process. >> So, um, my suggestion would be just, uh, going with the planning department proposal. I'm only talking for myself. Approve it and then our planning department because they have a some kind of city staff attending the housing committee meeting, right? Then maybe planning department and housing committee can create incentive programs based on this proposal with the fee structure because I know that we need to attract more developers but at the same time uh city budget is our priority too and I don't know if the council had a chance council members checked the uh work Kelly and are doing city physical stability work and if you look at that there are so many uh ro said like watch watch like we don't have very stable um budget for a long time unfortunately and also physical alliance foundation it's a nonprofit organization and they made a poll around the state because if we develop houses we are planning to attract more people right it will be around the state and out of state in verman 61% of population says that their salary doesn't go high up as the fees taxes and other costs so like let's build uh homes who will buy it 61 of the Vermont population says that they cannot they cannot afford living here anymore so that's why Maybe yeah let's change the fees structure but at the same time let's work to create some incentives and also promote them for the perception right maybe short videos do you think your expenses will increase developers actually no it will go down like Mike showed us uh I think we can as Laura was saying we can do everything at the same time like a farrell of things >> great thank you um uh At this time, I would like to I'd like to invite both of you to stay in the room, of course, but um we'd like to invite any member of the public who would like to speak on this agenda item uh to come forth. We'll start in the room and then we will go online. Um just in the event we doesn't get said again, Mr. Miller, thank you for your time and being here. Miss Hurl and Mr. Lombardo also just for being here to answer our questions. Is there anyone in the room that would like to speak on this topic? Mr. Whitaker, Steve Whitaker. Uh, sorry to interrupt you before I start. We'll we'll have two minutes on these topic on to during the agenda. And just to to make it convenient for signal, I've brought these cards back out. So when the yellow one goes up, you've hit half >> your time. >> When the yellow card goes up, that means that you've you've hit your halfway mark at one minute. And when the red card goes up, you've you've got about 10 seconds left and please do your best to wrap up. Uh Mr. Whitaker, >> again, this gohead participation in these types of planning is statutoily protected and your two-minute agree uh timeline after letting these long-winded presentations go on indefinitely is absurd and uh not not flattering to your uh understanding of democracy. Uh what's missing in Mike's presentation is what other towns appeal fees are. It's any comparison of appeal fees. I think that you're whatever savings or incentive you might get uh in lowering the fees to try to encourage uh more builders to overcome the long list of perceptions of dysfunctional government. uh would be probably lost in necessary if necessary litigation. I think you need to get counsel to advise you because there is no statutory basis for our our $1,500 appeal fee. It's it was designed to discourage people's ability to appeal and it is has no basis in law and if necessary it will be appealed uh through the court and struck down. So I think you need to look at that and look at and listen to the recordings of the committees talking about its purpose, its intention to be punitively high and discourage appeals. And that's not not uh there's no authority in statute for that $1,500 appeal. It's another overreach. um developers do like it and planning commission and housing committee members who don't understand the law like it because it serves as an obstacle. Um again, consult council on it. But the perception you're trying to overcome is our recurring purchasing policy violations, our open meeting law and public records law, scoff law treatment, and our unlawful parking appeal process, our homeless harassment without a a an ordinance to back it up, and our sensitive areas. >> Thank you, Mr. Whitaker. Is there anyone else in the room that would like to speak on this topic? >> Thank you all for uh discussing this this evening. I'm uh Rob Goodwin um resident mom killer. Um I'm here representing myself this evening. I've served on the development of your board since uh 2019. I just wanted to comment briefly on the conversation around fees. Um, you know, I think I don't see any issue with the planning department proposal. Um, I, um, you know, I think that, um, the larger conversation around housing and fees, uh, you know, it needs needs needs more to it. Um, I think the council has enough information to, um, really make a decision on this package. I like the idea of housing committee coming together with a package. I think that to get rid of the perception, we do need a comprehensive package to message um, that you're serious about inviting development. Um but um I I also want to echo the uh you know the successes. Yeah. In the last two months we've approved more housing units in since two months since 2019. You know all of those applications actually uh came through the DRB uh in some way or form um and weren't because of the administrative approval. Um in since 2019, I've never had anyone testify to my knowledge before the DRP that they had issue with the fees at which they were paying to get their permit. they just want their permit. Um they just want clarity that uh they you know are asking the question as when they can get started. Um and um I think I I maybe uh you know close with a little uh you know first perspective on uh you know the fees you know permitting zoning the real estate process. Um the the standard for a real estate agency taking about 5% every time a property sells on a $500,000 home, like that is thousands and thousands of dollars. Like if we want to talk about what is like raising the cost of housing uh and making things go up and up, like it's that process that it is. It's not the $200 fee to get a permit. What people want is they want consistency. Like they want a permit process that's 21st century. like they want to come in and know that like someone's going to professionally give them advice of how they get through and get their permit. Like that's what they want. And we're not going to invest in that new updated system if we don't have the fees and the budget to do it. And right now we've pushed more administrative efforts on a zoning administrator that doesn't even get paid to work more than 32 hours a week. So I think it the zoning department needs more money in order to service the developers and the community because they have a role of doing both and um yeah we need we really dig into it. So thank you. >> Thank you very much Mr. Anyone else in the room that would like to speak on this topic? >> Is there anyone online that would like to speak on this topic? I thought I saw a hand and I don't see one now. All right. Not seeing any more um in there. Uh we'll close public comment at this time. Um does someone have a clear idea of a motion that they would like to make? I think there have been a lot of a lot of ideas thrown around. It does seem that we could um we have the option to delay this. That doesn't seem to be the desire of staff or anybody on council that I can see. We have the option to um adopt these fees as presented and still continue down a path of exploring what a holiday or if even if that's not the right word um might look like with some guidance. So is there a motion on the for us? Councelor Sheridan, >> keep it going. Um I'll move that we approve the fees seeing how they mostly reduce. It seems like a no-brainer and I'll move that. And I just would like to make a quick comment to Steve when I sat during that friends of Sabin's pasture thing and this is for something to take to the housing committee. It was not the fees that were the problem. It was the resistance to them. I mean that group said that they would not allow one structure put in Sabin's pasture. That's where we got our bad reputation. Not the fees. It was the fact that everything was fought. And I can tell you, I won't now, but I could tell you two stories of single family homes in single family neighborhoods that were so fought because people who live there said, "Well, it's always been open. I didn't buy this to have that filled. So, it's not the fees, it is the fight that is against everything that is proposed. That's the main problem. >> Thank you, Councelor Sheridan. The there is a motion, not yet a second, to um approve the reision revisions to the zoning and building fee schedule. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Councelor Cohen, there's a second. Is there further discussion on or debate on this topic before we take a vote? Seeing none, we'll take a vote. The motion is to approve the revisions to the zoning and building fee schedule. Uh all in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? All right, that passes unanimously. Uh thank you for your work, Mr. Miller. Is there a further discussion or motion to direct the housing committee to pursue this further? Councelor Castello, >> I um for my part, I really appreciate the work of the housing committee. I think we do want to send signals. I think we need to look at a rational visible signature that tells developers we're open for housing business. Um I think that your point about the cost of time is what really bothers developers the most. The in the asurances that we can make around efficiency of time for development decisions and action are are essential. But I I think it would be terrific if the committee could look at this and articulate a clear, simple, direct, and obvious statement that would make that signal a big green sign um but maybe not get into all the complexity of all the different aspects or do a 100% um across the board uh cut. So, you come back with something that we would um pay attention to and I don't think we need a motion on that, Mayor, but I but that'd be you'd like a motion. >> No, I I I would agree that we don't necessarily need a motion. Are there any objections to this general uh councelor Doyle, you're making a face? >> Well, no. I just I would love to hear I'd like to hear more clarity about exactly what we're asking them to do, right? Directionally, like what are we asking the housing committee to do? And you know what I would like to see them do is come back to us with um a series of proposals that look at the strategy around fees to think if there's a way in which we can incentivize more housing. >> That seems pretty clear. Councelor Con, >> can we email uh Mike or Kelly all our ideas? Then we can craft something like I suggest something Ben suggest. I'm sorry. Counselors suggest is it okay to just like not to decide tonight? I have some ideas. Uh just tomorrow or uh Friday, not that. >> Sure. Let's get a sense of who the right recipient would be. Miss Hurl, do you want to chime in on that? >> Ideas would be great. Send any and all ideas. The housing committee would love to receive any of them. I I think I don't have total clarity on um based on what uh councelor Costello said are fees specifically like we are working on a whole range of package of ideas around like the timeline for approvals and things you know very much to you know are there ways to build more certainty in and things so I think that is definitely coming do you all want us to specifically look at fee related proposals and should we do more work on that or should we continue work on other things I feel like I don't have clarity >> for my part. I'm interested to hear this whole package that you're talking about and fees sound like they're an important part of that package. Um that's that's one voice. I I think for you know as a liaison to the housing committee they are looking at a whole series of strategies right whether it's vacancy tax or you know regulations related to permitting all these kinds of things right and I I think this is what we've asked them to do is constantly be like looking at different items that they can bring back to us with specific proposals and I feel like what you've done tonight is come to us and say hey this is an area where we think that there's a opportunity to potentially make some movement on and they're looking for direction an approval from us to go and pursue that more to come back with a concrete proposal so that they're not wasting their time, right? Like the last thing we want them to do is go do a bunch of work and do a deep dive on it and have them come back and be like, "Well, we're not really interested in that." They might come back and we might say, "Now that we have this information, we're not interested in that." But, you know, I think um I think it's really important to be very specific on the direction because they're they're asking for it. >> Yeah. Councelor Khan, go ahead. >> So, I know Carrie is on the housing committee, too. Maybe again maybe we can send you and K our ideas as a li city liazison on you can create some kind of language then whole council said yeah that's the direction not very long long thing just a list list because you are being with them every single meeting you know what they are working on oh we are already doing this so I don't I don't want to create more job for both of you But I think it will be better because you know pausing commit the work you know console part. So would it be something you want to do at least I will send my ideas both in just like trying to find the best way. Yeah. I think we would love to hear your ideas and I think if you want to send them to Carrie myself or I think you could send them directly but like absolutely I I mean I think that is our job is to hear input from the council and bring it to the the committee and like be able to help them gut check a little bit of like let's not spend time on this when we know there's not the political will at council. Sorry to like really stick to this, but like I think the committee is looking for direction right now on whether or not they should continue to investigate strategies related to fees. >> I'm I'm hearing broad support for that as a as part of this this complete package. Am I wrong? Somebody disabuse me if I'm wrong about that. >> But different angles. That's why we're trying to figure out which angles we want you to look at. >> Council Brown. Um, yeah, I agree with that and I and I feel like I would love to hear more about this. Um, I've been a little bit quiet during this whole discussion because every single person who said something has made me go, "Oh, yeah." And I'm like putting it all together. So, there's a lot more to to process about this. And I think it would be fantastic if counselors have specific ideas for things that they would like to see more of. Yeah. Email, you know, either the housing committee directly or me and Ben. I think that's a that's a wonderful idea. >> I might just throw out to as you're thinking about this of sort of framing some thinking about, you know, the types of the types of things that you want to inscent. You know, for example, when I look at like the full schedule of fees, I might personally recommend to you we don't wave any fees that have to do with some sort of safety condition, right? like river hazard regulation or slopes or something like that as just potentially one way to think about which ones might you wave and might you not wave. You know, you might also want to inscent like unit numbers as opposed to square foot sizes. You know, if you're looking for actual like numbers of bedrooms to add to the inventory, like that's that that's a way to kind of focus in on how do we get more out of what we're offering. Um, so those are just some initial ideas I have for feedback to the schedule, at least I've received from the housing committee. And then there's just some fees we just can't wave. Um, you know, and again, I think part of this package also, you know, there's been conversation around like a a master development agreement that we would kind of put some of these things in that you might say, hey, we're willing to consider caps for certain types or sizes of developments in certain ways. Um, so I'm just throwing that out there as some additional detailed ways to kind of be looking at these schedules and thinking about why you might want to bring some things um in for everybody and not for types of development that you'd want. >> U Miss Hurle, did you want to respond directly to that? And then we'll go to councelor Brown. Then I'm going to say something. We're going to move on to the next thing. >> Go ahead. I I mean just I feel like I have clarity now to bring back to council or to to the committee that um there's interest in exploring some options around fees as an incentive tool for housing development and that is part of a bigger package of other ideas we are also pursuing. >> Thank you councelor Brown. Anything else? Um just a a sort of an overarching thing for me this is is bringing up the idea of what's our philosophy behind fees across the board and you know and the question about who should be paying is it taxpayers is it the developers what are we getting out of them impact fees is it fair to have a you know one one housing development pay for all of its impact when the rest of us are sharing the impact I know we don't have impact fees but it it brings all of that up and I and I think that Um, manager Kerry made a really good point about being able to look at what are we trying to use these what are we trying to accomplish with these fees. It's not just about putting some money in the bank account. It's about incentivizing. It's about um equitably distributing the costs of things. It's about, you know, um trying to ensure safety. All of these things are are what and I think the housing committee is working some on this, but uh just flagging that. >> Great. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Um and then not specific to this, but I know that in previous years there's been often a sort of struggle about appreciation, who's being heard, who's being listened to, who's being ignored, who's being asked to do things. And I think this is a good example of where we are respecting and listening to the recommendations of staff and understanding the needs of those and also really appreciative of the work of the committees uh and the housing committee specifically. And what we've done tonight is not a rejection of the proposal but asking for refinement and development while still moving forward with the city. And so thank you and thank you everybody on the housing committee for all your work and the planning department as well. with that. >> Just one man. >> What's your question? Just one. I know. >> All right. Miller, you got you got we're really moving >> quick. Really quick. Last word. Um there have been a lot of comments on about the unpredictability of fees and so I did want to acknowledge Sheamus and Lauren and the the committee has been working on this. My presentation to you is very narrow on the zoning and the building fees. And so some of the unpredictability that they were talking about really isn't that these fees were unpredictable. You could go in and ask us. could tell you what a number of the builders had as surprises were the fact that they didn't realize after that there was going to be a fee from the DPW for the excavation and for the curb cut and for the water and sewer hookup fees and for the so there are a number of other things outside of this box that for an inexperienced developer didn't realize I thought I was already done with all the fees and suddenly they're not and so I think we'll we'll have a bigger picture I think when we work planning department works with the housing committee. There's a bigger box to be talking about, not just the zoning and building fees that we talked about tonight. There's a there's more fees outside of this that I wanted you all just to know in the back of your mind. There's more to this than just what I presented tonight. Tonight's presentation was to meet an objective that had been started last October and we're now wrapped that up. So, thank you all >> and we will be back. >> Miller, thank you Miss Hurl. Thank you, Mr. Lombardo. Uh there was some good quiet approval feedback in Zoom there. All right, we are it is now 8:21. Um not that anybody else cares, but we're about 40 minutes behind my aspirational target. I want to thank the members of the public who are going to who are here to speak on this next item for being so patient. Uh we're moving on to the bow hunting question. Manager Curry, will you tee this up for us, please? Uh >> it was just noted that actually wasn't the Pope. >> There's a question. >> Yes. On the >> It was the 5 Z. >> It was >> it was there was there was no vote on the on giving more more guidance to to the housing committee, but there was a vote on the on the adoption of that. >> Yeah. Thanks for that. Okay. >> Okay. Um so you have in years past and this year you have received individual requests for permission to um bow hunt on the country club road property. And so um that is what we'll discuss now. Your use policy for the country club road um it says it prohibits hunting unless express expressly permitted. And so, um, that is what I'm bringing forward to you now. I went back and I viewed the video from last year's conversation around this where there was some direction to staff to investigate and it doesn't look like it was brought back when it would have been relevant in the hunting season. So, we're at the ahead of the hunting season this year. The conversation at that time um was, you know, for bow hunting only um during the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. in order to, you know, prevent any conflict for when the child care is out roaming um the property with the children. Um and then some additional conditions that I've put in here that make sense for the the request um include a hunter must have a proper state license. The dates would be the hunting season, which this year is September 15th to December 15th. And then the uh use policy also says that with permission, hunting would occur in the designated area. An area had not previously been designated. And so that's why we attached a proposed map for 2026 bow hunting on Country Club Road. And that involves the areas that are forested with a 200 um foot buffer from any of the open areas. And because the property is sort of shaped like a rectangle, it really creates hunting authority around the two sides um as opposed to the top because that quickly runs into private property. Um and so that's the request before you. The recommendation is to um you know approve this if you wish for ex for express specific individuals who request permission and that would be processed by me um and I would track who who makes those requests. Um sorry that was a little clunky but I hope I covered all the relevant information. Okay. >> Understandably the last agenda item had a lot of a lot of discussion that went on. We sort of got away from our process at this time. Are there not discussion debate but clarifying questions from anybody in council? Councelor Brown. >> Uh yes. My question is about the distances um on this map that we're looking at. You said that the buffer is 200 ft from any open area. >> Is that Yeah. >> Okay. And so how many feet from what's the shortest distance between an area designated for hunting and a building? I don't know the answer to that >> because I'm wondering about how some of these bows can travel really really far and um I'm not sure how far exactly but I'm just wondering about safety of the folks in the building. >> Okay, good. >> Maybe a bow hunter can answer that. I think I was told 40 >> I don't know 40 feet or 40 yards. >> Mr. Lacele has raised his hand. Do you have an answer to that question? >> Anecdotal answer. Um, >> oh yeah, please come to the the mic. Sorry, this is a little bit out of but yeah, go ahead. >> But yeah, basically the furthest you take a shot is 40 yards on a deer and >> 120 ft. >> Yeah. And um and then typically it's dawn and dusk. >> So not when people would be in a building, >> right? That that's helpful. And also >> generally maybe maybe dusk is >> a different thing but >> and the the map is 200 feet from the edge of the wooded area and there are no buildings inside of the wooded area. Right. >> So it does seem that they're all at least 120 ft away. Great. >> Thank you for the question. Any other clarifying questions? Not seeing any. Is there anyone in the room that would like to speak on Oh, councelor Brown. Sorry. Go ahead. >> Question about the the timing of it. I I I thought I I think we said it was be it would be allowed between 9 and 1. 9:00 am and >> be prohibited. >> Okay. Okay. Great. That makes more sense. Great. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> All right. Anyone in the room that would like to speak on this topic? Mr. Mr. Whitaker. Go ahead. And then Mr. Martineau. All right. Mr. Martino, go ahead. Maurice Martin Script Street Mothe. I brought it forth every year. Um frustrated in that you have an abundance of deer. I live just at Scribner Street. I can call I can count 15 deer in my backyard. And you're not aware that how many people are also living across the railroad tracks over there because I did some scouting the last couple weeks. There's about eight tents in there where I hunt. So I'm not hunting there anymore anyways. But I just wanted to make this statement that basically you you've taken it completely away from hunting and that's okay. Uh but it irks me the fact that I voted against purchasing this property. I find it very difficult to see that it's, you know, it's going to be it should be developed and I and I agree with that. Um, however, it's it's it's going to be very very expensive to get two outlets, get a second way for the fire department to get in there. and you're going to have to cut off a lot of land. >> If you could just keep your comments to the bow hunting issue though. >> I'm done that. I mean, >> okay. I >> I didn't realize it was going to be I've never even seen or heard about this map. Uh and I asked last year and got permission. Was never told about a map. I don't know. I'm just I'm I'm frustrated with not getting communication. That's all. >> Manager Curry, would you like to address that? >> Sure. Yeah, the map is being proposed for the first time as part of this discussion because the use policy requires a designated area and so this is a proposal that staff is making to designate what that area is for council's consideration >> and I have nothing else to say. Councelor Brown, did you have a question? >> Yeah, I do have a question for the member of the public. Thank you. Um, uh, you said that to you this looks like it's just basically taking away hunting from that that property is not what I want to see happen at all. And so I'm wondering is it is that because of the designated areas that are too small? >> Well, you're also taking away 9 to one, which is also, you know, I could live with that if I had to. That that's not it. However, it's the property now is being peacemeal up already by people living there. I mean, for green update, I emptied and cleaned three sites over there. There's there was two left that were huge and there's three more. I don't want to tell you about them. They don't even bury their they don't even take care of their needs. I would love to see you guys put a dumpster and a porta potty down there. >> You're talking about encampments out there now. >> Yeah. I mean, it's disgusting. You can't even walk a dog. You can't walk a person in there anymore. >> Okay. Um, other questions for Mr. >> Martell going to hunt there anyways. Um, and I understand the safety. That's that's the most important thing is those children. But it's it it's it scares me what's going on down by the railroad tracks. There's a lot of stuff going on there. And I've sent pictures to you and uh Mr. Sheridan. Uh that's when I saw them when I was and I'm talking I realize people are struggling and that's fine, but take care of your waist. That's all I ask. Thank you. You know, when I go hunting, I take something out of the woods. Always. And it's always trash legally. And that's frustrating. >> All right. Thank you. Um, and we'll be taking a break shortly and then there'll be general general business and public comment on any topic if you'd like to come back. Um, thank you very much for coming. Is there anyone else in the room that would like to speak on this topic? So, >> uh, Steve Whitaker, a year ago on October 8th, the the meeting where you violated your open meeting law and soul source policy, etc., the council took no action on hunting on Country Club Road because you but you didn't just decline to decide. You specifically directed the acting city manager at the time, Kelly Murphy, to research whether hunting hours could be restricted through a use policy or would require an ordinance or whether the property would instead need to be formally posted and to bring that research back to you in writing. That research was never returned. Miss Murphy left the position two months later in the 20 May 27th packet, three months into the current manager's tenure. It was still listed as unresolved under quote long-term in the city's tracking document. It remains undelivered tonight. What in front of you instead is not that research. It's a request to skip the entire skip that entirely and hand the whole question who hunts when under what conditions to the city manager's individual discretion with no hours restriction written into the policy itself. I ask you not to delegate away something that probably needs to be done by ordinance if it's going to be enforceable and have any penalties and a decision that you specifically ask staff to do research and help bring back real information until that information actually exists. I'm not opposed to hunting. I'm I think it's ironic that y'all's flagrant neglect of the homeless and hygiene issue has come to infect this process. But, uh, I think there's room for all of these things done with dignity and with respect, but with a lot higher level of professionality than we're seeing here. >> Professionality. Anyone else in the room that would like to speak on this topic? I do see one hand up online. Uh Mr. Goodwin, different Mr. Goodwin. >> Yes. My name is Walt Goodwin. Can you hear me? Okay. >> Yes, sir. Please go ahead. >> Okay. Um, I've had a hunting bow stand at the Elks Club for over 50 years now. And and it's still there. And I I was wondering if you could extend the bow hunting boundaries a little bit because where my bow hunting stand is, it's not in the not in the area that you can hunt it. So, I was wondering if there was a possibility of, you know, because I've been here so long to be able to allow me to still hunt there because if if not, I got to go tomorrow and pull the stand out. >> That's it. >> Right. Thank you for the question, Ed. Do you have a >> This is squarely up to you. I don't know where the stand would be. >> Yeah, Mr. Mr. Goodwin, unfortunately, without any without without more specific knowledge of of that, I'm not sure how we would be equipped to answer that question specifically. Um, do you want to clarify? You've still got some time. >> Uh, do you want me to clarify where the stand is? >> Um, well, yes, sir. If I mean if if you're if you're asking us to consider altering the the map, knowing where the stand is would help us a lot in knowing what would be required to satisfy that if it were an option. >> Okay. It's you know where the maintenance shed. It's it's about 100 yards in the woods from there. >> From where? Sorry. Say again. >> The maintenance shed. There's a maintenance shed up there and it's about 100 yards in the woods from there. And you know, I I've never had a problem up there with anybody. I I go in early. I get out early when I hunt at night. You know, it's just before dark. I've never never had an issue with anything. It's It's just going to be kind of sad to not to be able to hunt there anymore. >> All right. Thank you for your for your comment. Um, is there anyone else online or in the room that would like to speak on this? All right. Um, I guess we're at a spot for a motion. Councelor Doyle. >> Well, I think I'm I'm going to make a motion, but maybe I just can I offer a comment before I do. >> Um, >> or no. >> You know, why don't you make a motion? We'll have a second and then make all the discussion and debate you like. I move to authorize the city manager to approve individual requests to vote hunt on country club road with the following conditions. >> Okay. >> Second. >> We have a second. All right. Is there any discussion or debate? Councelor Doyle? >> Yeah. Um, you know, I think it's really um I feel like this is a challenge across Vermont and like the tradition of being able to hunt on on land and and yet it's always been a kind of balance with individual land owners. And I think in this particular parcel, it's a parcel in transition of having to balance a lot of different needs of our community. You know, we're going to later on we're going to look at a request for people who want to camp there. You know, we've got a child care there. We've got a housing development there. I've I've been meeting with some kids who want to put a rope tow there. Like there's a a whole series of and that's a wonderful thing in terms of like everybody in the community starting to see this property as a place where they want to be. And there's people that have been there for 50 years as part of a tradition. And I'm really sympathetic to that. But also, I feel like as a community, we're going to need to have this conversation around balancing needs. And I feel like the proposal that the city manager has put forward is really thoughtful in doing that. It does allow the opportunity to hunt. I think it keeps people safe and I think, you know, it's always going to be a compromise and I feel like this strikes the right balance. >> Okay. Thank you for that other discussion and debate, councelor Brown. >> Yeah. And my only concern is about this about the map and about the designated areas. And I'm I'm not a hunter. Um I don't so I don't know the answers to these questions. But is that enough space? Are those the areas that people want to hunt in? Is that I mean are we in a is it are we restricting it so much geographically that it's not really a place to hunt anymore? I don't I don't know. And I'm wondering if we've heard from hunters about this. I also um just I I would like to see um just in general more access to hunting in just in general purposes. Um and I think that there's probably part of this that's on the other side away from Turtle Island and away from where there are buildings that perhaps could be opened up to hunting as well with proper signage and warning and everything. I mean, there's there's lots of places where you go walking during hunting season in Vermont. You got to wear orange and you know, you know where you can go and where you can't go. So, I really agree with this idea that we got to be balancing needs and this is a for a very short time of the year. So, I would I I've okay with voting for this particular motion, but I think I would rather see continued work on whether it's possible to expand the designated area. And I'll just offer so um I I put this out for discussion with staff. So the map was based on input from um you know our parks and trees director and our recck director and um included the police chief as well for this. Um so that was the you know the buffer that was offered. um some additional hours had been offered you know or had been suggested to even restrict access further that you know I carried forward what was discussed last year um rather than that so you know I'm open to what you need to move you know to do what you want here if you want to move this forward and just sort of direct how this will be adjusted as one of the conditions which we would then post at the public entry points at country club road and sign for the duration of the hunting period Um but that's how we conceived of this map. >> It occurs to me also that the um the the dates I mean are coming up between now and the next meeting. So if people want to hunt, we we would need to we would need to approve this now even if there's a request to look at potentially amending the map or whatever that future request might be. Uh Councelor Sheridan, you had your hand up. Um, does anybody know where this shed is that he was talking about? >> It's off to the west, right? It's >> right. Right here. >> Right here. >> The, you know, kind of >> Oh, in that forested area there. >> And I believe he said, and Mr. Goodwin, if you want to correct me if I'm wrong, I think you said it was about a hundred yards in from there. >> That is correct. >> Thank you. I do know that if anybody who lives in neighborhoods, there's too many deer. They're eating my trees. There's too many bear. >> We have bears in our neighborhood almost every day. I I would like to suggest that if there is going to be any alteration to the map, it's not going to be because the the six of us are discussing feet from some structure here tonight and that that would be better handled uh perhaps with input from hunters to the manager's office and the manager come back with a a a changed map if that is the course that we want to to take. But the motion before us is to authorize the city manager to approve individual requests to bow hunt on Country Club Road with the conditions that are listed in the memo. >> Uh further discussion >> with the qualification you've made about having an ongoing discussion. I'm supportive of the motion. I agree that we we have an overpopulation deer in the area. A lot of hunters look for mixed land that has open field and woods so they get clear shots and so forth and deer like that too, but that's not what we're doing because as Ben points out really well, I think this is a land in trans transition. We're developing this property. We're looking at multiple uses. We're going to have a denser population there. And what even though arrows are a a very effective hunting tool, they can go errant and 40 yards is your targeting distance, but a an arrow can fly ricochet and it it's you don't really want them to come into the clear areas. So, I think that we do need to be conservative about the where these zones are. I think we're close to getting it perfect, but not maybe quite there yet. So at anyway, I I support the the gists of this motion for now, knowing that uh you'll be talking to hunters and we may be able to adjust the boundaries slightly. >> You're making a face, manager Furry. >> Yes. Um, you know, you all have the authority to designate the area and so I'm unclear on what degree of flexibility you would like me to, you know, exhibit here. I I mean, I will say, you know, we do have staff that are actively using that maintenance shed. Um, you know, so I'm not sure I would propose alterations to this map. If you have specific like areas you want to include and a buffer from certain things, we can redraw it. >> Yeah, I think Ben's motion is to accept the map and >> and that that's what we're voting on, but that there could be further dialogue and you could come back to us, >> right? So to clarify, the motion before us is to accept this map as it is now and if there need to be alterations to the map, that would be something back >> meetings for the rest of hunting season so I can come back. >> Great. Okay. So with that, all in favor of approving the city authorizing the city manager to approve individual requests to Bow Hunt on Country Club Road with the stated conditions in the memo, say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? All right. 5 to zero. The motion passes. Uh, thank you for that. If anyone wants to um to chime in on how that map might be done, please follow up with the city manager's office at another time. Um, it is currently 8:44. We do have one more item, but we really should take a break. And I believe that is something that, you know, that's it's outlined in the agenda, but we can move the break to wherever we are. So, at this point, what's Yeah. So, at this point, we will take a break. We're in recess for 10 minutes. We'll come back at 8:54. >> 854 on Wednesday, September 9th, 2026. This meeting of the Montilia City Council is called back to order from recess. I guess I had a gabble. Hey official, we are on to item number nine, the resolution to opt into tier 1B areas for act 250 exemption. Would you guys like to tee this up, manager Curry? And then >> I'll turn it over to Mike. I think it should be pretty straightforward. Okay, this yeah, if uh you've been paying attention to the all of the conversations that have been going on at the state about the act 250 exemptions tied to the future land use map at the regional planning commission. There's been a lot of meetings and conversations going on. Um but what the the state law did was created two sets of categories. one for tier one categories which would get exemptions from act 250 and tier three categories that would have additional requirements a later bill removed the the tier 3es um so that that category no longer exists but the tier one category still exists tier 1A being a higher bar where you would get um complete act 250 exemption for all projects and a lower bar which is is the tier 1B and that is what resolution you have in front of you. Now the regional planning commission is going through and submitting their application as a part of that application. They can also include municipal requests to be included in the tier 1B category which would be the downtown uh and the planned growth areas that were on those maps. Um, and we don't know the final maps yet because they are uh still in development, but whatever is in those categories on those maps would be my recommendation recommendation to include into the our tier 1B areas. This would be highly beneficial to our housing developers that we just talked about. It exempts up to, I believe, 80 80 some units, 84 86 units. So, uh, a lot of our small developers will be able to do projects within our plan growth area without having to get act 250. Uh, this will not help the largest projects. So, this will probably not help a country club road, which would have more than 86 housing units. So, that's the the summary. I'm uh I would recommend that the municipality participate in tier 1B and put in the resolution at this time. >> Okay. So, just question to counselors. Has everyone had a chance to review this resolution or do we feel like we need to have it read out loud to us now? Any Nobody. Okay, great. So, >> via email. >> All right. So, it it has come to us via email. Um, is there any clarifying questions from council on this? Council Doyle. >> I do have just on that last part. Mike, is it so under tier 1B you've got exemption up to 80 minutes? I thought it was fewer, but it's 80. >> I believe it's uh up to Well, because it was Yeah. I mean, there was the the requirements. I didn't look up the number today, but it it it always surprised me how high the number was that they made it. Um, I would have probably made it lower, but I believe >> Okay, >> I can confirm with it is it but it's it's a high enough number that it really makes a significant difference for the smaller developers. >> Uh, and just to that last part of it, probably not helping with Country Club Road. It it could conceivably in the sense that if it was phased and they did a development that had up to that number of units, they could move forward on that project before we got tier 1A status. >> Corre correct? If they if we shrunk our um the project currently DAW is proposing is 108 or 105 units. So would be for phase one. So if they made the face smaller, there would be a question of whether that would qualify, but yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Other questions from council before we go to public comment on this? We are still in the public comment section. I'm not seeing any other clarifying questions. We'll we'll take public comment. Then we'll have a motion and then we'll have discussion, debate, and take a vote. Is there anyone in the room who would like to speak on this? Mr. Whitaker, please come forward. Thank Uh my information says it's 50 units is the threshold, but I question a couple things. the if the tier 1B is piggybacking on the planned growth area that's in the current map being requested. Uh there are serious questions with the representations that certain areas that are in the planned growth area proposal have water, sewer, bike paths, uh sidewalks, etc. Uh so the second to the last whereas clause is factually questionable. Um the second whereas clause is on appeal. So and the regional plan is not going to be adopted until by the regional planning commission until October. So, the September 17th date in here is inaccurate as well. >> All right. Thank you for those comments. Is there anyone else in the room that would like to comment on this topic? Is there anyone online that would like to comment on this topic? Councelor Doyle, do you want to say something? >> Sorry, I just I do think there might be some confusion about the numbers. Like when I look at AC site, maybe I'm reading it wrong, Mike, but it's a tier 1B areas back 250 exemption for housing development of 50 or fewer units on an acre on a lot of 10 acres or less. >> Okay. Yeah. So that's what it would be. I was going to try to print out the fact sheet before I got here and I got tied up on >> No worries. Just want to make sure that we're all understand. But I I'll also just say like to me this is we we should do this button, >> right? Whether it's 50 or 84, we should do it, right? Um, okay. Any other Sorry that I didn't see any hands online, so we're done with public comment here. Uh, is there a motion for us to discuss and debate? >> Jim's going to let somebody else have a turn. Jim, I appreciate your your enthusiasm today. Anybody else? Go ahead. >> I I want to approve the resolution authorizing the CVRPC to include eligible tier 1B areas in the city of Melier in the regional plan and future regional land use map. >> Great. Any second? >> Second. >> All right. Um uh any discussion or debate on the topic? Councelor Con? So I think it is related what will happen with the tier 1A? So will this affect that one or are they different uh process? >> It's a different process. Um our our plan is to uh start working on that once the regional plan is approved which we would expect to be in January. And so then we've got an official map that we can work with to develop the tier 1A application. >> Okay. So they will not affect each other, right? So what tier 1B we have this then uh we will just like approve the will be something then the other is >> yeah the tier 1 A would supersede the tier 1B and the tier 1 A is going to be an application. So I would bring back to council an application and said will you authorize the application so I can move this forward. >> Great. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other questions, discussion, debate? >> All in favor of approving the resolution authorizing the CVRPC to include eligible tier 1B areas in the city of Montpielar in the regional plan and future regional land use map. Please say I. I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? Five to zero. It passes. Thank you very much. We're done with item number nine. Thank you. >> It is currently Thank you, Mr. Miller. Again, uh carrying a lot of weight today. Um we're moving on to uh general public comment. At this time, we'd like to invite um anyone in the room or online to speak on uh any topic. I don't believe there's any public comment after this point. So, um five minutes Anything you like? Anyone in the room? Mr. Whitaker, welcome back. >> Miss me? >> You hardly give me a chance. >> So, Kelly mentioned the staff activity using that shed. The Department of Environmental Conservation has recently required that that shed at Country Club Road be fenced off because of the brownfield toxicity. Um, I won't go into details. I want to correct something I said to a few of you last meeting on the record. Uh, it wasn't on the record. Um, I said Kelly had signed a $60,000 contract with CBRPC for grant administration. That was wrong. It was Mike Miller that signed it on June 15th. The city manager signature, it was on the end northern borders grant, not the But with that corrected, the problems worse. The purchasing policy this council adopted in August 24 requires prior council approval for any purchase over 20,000. That's capital or unbudgeted. Mr. Miller had no authority to sign a $60,000 contract. No council approves approval exists for the record. The soul no sole source determination exists. The only thing on record is a CVRPC staffer email saying that they are the only LDD local at the moment, which isn't true. We could have used Loyal County. CBEDC was temporarily out of the economic development. No competitive proposals were solicited or accepted. And because it's federal money, it independently violates 2CFR 2000 319320. Secondly, over Labor Day weekend, the recck department closed the entire 133 acre Country Club Road property to the public for a private golf tournament. Folks that use that property regularly said that they were uh forcibly accosted by uh told to leave our our property. Um, the use policy this council adopted unanimously in 2024 names G disc golf specifically as requiring council or designated authority approval and requires any limiting event in quotes limited event be approved by council. No such approval is on any agenda that I've located. I filed a records request for who authorized it and whether showers, restrooms, overnight camping were allowed or provided. They're claiming that's not going to get to me till September 22nd. I haven't counted the days, but that's suspicious. Uh, separately on June 9th, Alec Ellsworth asked for permission to put in new tea, plywood astroturf covered TE's for the disc golf. Uh June 12th, DEEC said, "We need a full soil management plan first." Alex asks back on the 12th, "Can we just have one more exception? We violated the rules so many times already, as you have heard, whether you believe it or not, Doyle." Uh they were told no, they they hold until the soil management plan is completed. Uh, I went up there on June 23rd. The TE's were installed. The soil management plan hasn't yet been approved. It's been delivered in a on August 18th. No, August 18th, they said nine revisions are required. So basically it appears from the photos that I have that our parks director again ignored a direct order from DEEC not to put these platforms in for the disc golf and it was probably being driven by this tournament upcoming tournament. Uh that merits digging into uh because it's a repeating habit. Uh third, on Monday, September 7th, the city hall city posted city hall plaza as a high sensitivity area and gave the people c camping out front notice to leave by the next morning under threat of seizure of their property or potentially arrest. That wasn't on the notice, though. Uh as you've heard, an encampment policy is not enforcable. It's not an ordinance. You cannot arrest people or find people for using public land. That same day, I put the city on formal notice that a policy document isn't an ordinance and asked what specific law authorizes removing someone from public plaza who hasn't violated any law. No response. How how typical. On June 15th of this year, the state's brownfield program told the city in writing that further soil disturbances I think I've covered that one. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Whitaker. That's your five minutes. Um, I would like to point out that you said that uh forcible removal or seizure of property was not in the notice and so >> removal of property is in the notice. >> I Anyway, I disagree with your characterization of the notice that was there, but that's >> it's intimidating people under color of law and it's harassment and it's illegal. >> Thank you for your comments. All right. Is there anyone else in the room that would like to speak on any topic for five minutes? I prom we're getting to you as quickly as we can. Thank you so much for your patience in the back. >> I am because you guys have been here the whole time and I Okay. All right. Well, that's that's helpful. Uh Mr. Bellini is online with your hand raised. Go ahead. Uh you have got five minutes. >> Hello. >> Hello. There's been a shift in the force of the universe of Montpielar. I can feel it and it's a good thing. So, I just think the things are on the upswing. I'd like to share that with you. Uh, the streets are looking better. Forest Drive, Robin Hood Circle, outstanding job. Pioneer Street Bridge, outstanding job. Also want to mention there's like the beginning of a sinkhole in front of 20 Liberty Street and it's marked with a uh an orange cone. So maybe sometime before it snows you guys are going to you could fix that. Um other than that I know I'm getting to know everybody at city hall. Just say hello and everybody's doing a great job. Thanks very much. Thank you, Mr. Bellini, for the good vibes. And for anybody who's not here, if you feel like shooting off an email to DPW, just to say good job and know that they would appreciate that as well. Anyone else online or in the room that would like to speak before we move on from general public comment? Great. All right. Uh, thank you, Mr. Whitaker. Thank you, Mr. Bellini. We're done with item number 10, general public comment. We're going to move on to item number 11. It is currently 9:10. Um the see if I get this right. Central Vermont Solid Waste Management was D department. >> District. Thank you. All right. Manager Curry, tee this up for us, please. >> Yes. So, >> welcome. Um this was precipitated by a um announcement that the current appointee who has represented the city of Montpillar on this um regional government. I would point out um has is stepping down from her role and so the city has the opportunity to appoint someone to this um role. We've not yet received any applications but um you know there was a request to come and present to you all and get an update about the work of the solid waste management district and so welcome and thank you for being here. >> Yes, Mr. Lace Leaper. Thank you. >> Thank you for having me. So yes, as you said, Lisa, who has served on our board for a number of years and before that as an employee of the district, has is leaving some big shoes to fill. Uh she has been a member of the executive board and has been instrumental in in many of our projects, including the recent uh Eco Depot facility that we opened in November. So, we are looking for a candidate to serve on the board of representatives for a monthly meeting, and we're looking for somebody who is interested in solid waste management matters, who will show up and and engage in in those conversations, whether it's dealing with landfill capacity planning for the state or extended producer responsibility programs to help fund disposal of problematic items or emergency debris management planning. So, and also generally just to represent the interests of Montpillar and through us in you know work with the legislature, conduct outreach to businesses, schools, um other organizations. So, that's that's what we're looking for. um hap happy to meet with with candidates or representatives as as you see fit and and provide more information as as you need. >> As we look around possibly, could you tell us when that meeting is once a month? >> The first Wednesday of every month, 6:30 p.m. >> Okay. Well, it's very specific and helpful. >> Yeah. Um and apart from the the sort of willingness and the desire to be to be part of that is there a particular skill set or background that would be really helpful? So generally planning or municipal government uh if there's background in solid waste or or that kind of stuff that's that's also great. engineering. I mean, any really any any walk of life. Our board is made up of people from all different careers and backgrounds. And it's it's great to have everybody who's who's interested in it and willing to to join. Um, I will say that we have, you know, conflict of interest policy. You can't actively be, you know, running a solid waste business of any kind or a family member, that kind of thing. >> Okay. So, somebody from Cassella or Myers or whatever is probably not the best candidate. >> That would be a conflict of interest. >> Sure. Yeah. >> All right. Um, any questions from council? There's no decision for us to make here tonight. This is a discussion item. Um, >> councelor Doyles, thanks for your work. Super important. Appreciate your work. >> Uh, so that that was one. I do have a couple other brief items if if I may. I wanted to give you all an update on our new facility, the Eco Depot in Berlin. Uh we last year relocated our office from Barry Street in Montpillar up the hill to to the depot and our facility from Barry, the additional recyclables collection center. We we shut down and we opened this new facility, the Eco Depot, specifically for household hazardous waste, as well as the extended producer responsibility items, the electronics, batteries, mercury containing bulbs and devices and and all those things that we're trying to keep out of the general waste stream. We're open by appointment and and kind of just a comparison, we used to hold the annual hazardous waste event at the Department of Labor in Montpillar. We were seeing about 250 participants at that event, 80 of which were Montpilar residents. In the 10 months that we've been open, we've seen 390 Millia residents come through and five businesses. Uh, and we've significantly reduced the the cost and made everything more efficient. It's it's all running smoothly and be happy to give you all a tour sometime if you're interested in stopping by, but wanted to make sure everybody's aware that that facility is open for appointments and and running now. Um, and then I I sent this in the packet, but we also have some grants available for our municipal members. So, please have a look at those. Those are related to general solid waste projects, infrastructure, uh, planning activities, or emergency cleanup of of um whether that be disaster debris or illegal dumping or that kind of thing. Speaking of disaster debris, that's another project that I that we're taking on moving forward is working with all of our member municipalities on putting together a plan for what do we do with all the stuff that washes up the next time a flood hits? Um how do we segregate it to protect solid waste workers? Um separating out the hazardous items, the potentially dangerous items. um and and where are we going to put the basically the three different classes of materials? We have the hazardous materials, we have the general trash and debris, and we have the clean wood and vegetative debris. And I would like to set up a a meeting and offer our support in putting that plan together and essentially designating specific sites that that we can help identify for the staging and collection of those materials so that they can be properly cleaned up and you know get back to normal operations. Um, if you remember in 2023, we did set up right here at the in the parking lot uh next to city hall and and had a ongoing collection and and sorting operation there that that you know was was a good stop gap. But I think we can we can make some improvements from there and and keep working on on setting these these systems in place so that we have a plan to respond when the next disaster hits. unfortunately. So, >> yeah. Terrific. Thank Yeah. Thank you for coming and sharing all that. That does seem like important work going forward. Is are there any other questions from council on this? Councilor Sheridan. >> Um, so I got a vacuum in back a seat of my car. That's where I bring it. >> We could take the vacuum. Yeah, pretty much any electronic. We do ask for an appointment because we're dealing with a lot of participation. >> I won't ask I won't ask you to take it out of my car. >> Throw it out back. But >> but is there a charge? So I'll know >> there there are charges for certain items. Uh vacuum would have a charge. >> Okay. >> Um other items are covered under state programs >> like a laptop. >> For example, a laptop. Yeah. >> All right. So I'll have to make an appointment sometime. I think I've seen your number and the thing. So, thank you. >> And I even have a flyer here I can give you if you like. >> Thank you. >> And if we want to know more, I assume we can find it at cvsswmd.org. >> Yes. >> Great. >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you so much for for coming and uh we'll work on trying to find someone to fill that spot. >> Great. Thank you. And and I'll follow up. Um I'm not sure what the correct contact would be. Maybe uh city manager as far as those debris planning activities. Okay. Excellent. >> All right. Thanks. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are moving forward. Let's say a final thank you to Mr. Lace Sleeper for coming to uh to to talk to us. We're moving on to item number 12, the appointment of the capital complex commission. It is 9:19. >> M Creed. >> Okay. So, so the capital complex commission is established under um state statute and the city of Montpillar appoints a member to that commission. Uh that appointment has been expired since 2024 and the um current individual who has been serving in that role does not wish to be reappointed. And so um I just found that out. We thought we were going to potentially be having a conversation about reappointing him, but um now the conversation is around opening that up for application. And I would recommend that uh we handle that similarly to how we handled um application for like the CBRPC. You wanted some specific questions around um that particular role that we included in the application. Otherwise, we always have our generic kind of committees form that we use um for all of our other appointments. And so, they were hoping to have a meeting at the end of the month. I don't know the exact date. I'm not sure we'll be able to recruit candidates and have you make an appointment at the next meeting for that to happen on time on the timeline of the commission. Um, so I that's the direction I'm looking for from you all today and we can get it open quickly. >> I will say that I heard this and I immediately thought, "Oh, I want to do that and I realized me wanting to do that is not the best qualification for appointing somebody." So, um, I think we we probably want to open this up and find some candidates. Councelor Doyle. Yeah, I just want to say uh first of all, I appreciate Tim's long tenure on the committee and other representatives for the city, including John Holler, who serve on that. And this uh I actually think that like this moment right now is probably the most important moment for the capital complex of of a generation between the rebuilding from um you know, from the storm in or the flood in 2023 and you know, the matter they're considering now in terms of an addition to the state house. There's an enormous it's really important and so I'm I'm glad that we actually have an opportunity to open it up and I really appreciate your suggestion manager Curry around really digging into the qualifications of what are we looking for in an individual that can be effective in this role and uh and I think frankly like be a strong voice for the city you know they they surprised to see that the capital complex hasn't met in a year and I think it's important that they meet regularly particularly during this time of real transition for the complex Great. Um, >> yeah, and I would just say I you could appoint someone from the council. The I think restrictions on the appointments um based in statute says that uh a member shall not be an exempt employee of the state of Vermont or a state legislator. So those are your restrictions. >> Um I'll move the appointment of Mark. I I I appreciate that. Um although I think that there is a more qualified and probably better um better experienced person to to serve in that role. Um >> good learning. >> Good learning. I I do I mean I I agree with councelor Doyle that this we are at a I mean the the whole that there's so much work that's going on there with all the um the the parking lots along the river, those flood damaged properties on the south side of of State Street. Um there's there's still a huge ongoing I I don't know if they're called negotiations or whatever with FEMA and how that's all going to be paid for. And I think that what is going to happen to that space is super important for the capital complex and therefore for our our whole city. And I think that whoever gets in there needs to be a good advocate for the interests of our community, which I think I could be, but it really should be someone with more experience in uh architecture, history, landscape, all of the things that are relevant to to what they're talking about. Um, as much as I would love to do that, I I don't I I appreciate that, Jim, but I don't think I'm the best person for that. So, I I think what we want to do is to open it up and for all of us to actively, you know, scrape our brains and the brains of other experienced people that we know to to try to recruit candidates for our consideration. Councelor Costello, >> I agree with the importance of this role. I I do think it's a negotiating position for Montpielar to have someone represented there that can uh be very proactive in advocating for our interests around the future of the downtown and the city. Um and I do think that the mayor would be a great candidate. I think it's more more about leadership than it is about engineering expertise. It's really about working with that team to to drive Milar's interest forward. Um, that said, I think that having an applications process where we can review a number of candidates, maybe there's someone on the council who'd be interested in doing it, but I'd rather see a review where we would look at a number of names together and judge by qualifications. >> I think that would be important. Um, and you know, if if if we have to meet if they have to meet, then we'll maybe figure out something. But I think it would be more appropriate maybe to ask them to wait and say like, "Well, we need a we need a couple more weeks to try and recruit people and try to make a decision." Is that something we can do? I I I would uh I would encourage that to ask them to wait, you know, that uh recognizing it's going to take us a little bit longer because we're going to have a robust process, but like if they can wait, if they if they really can't wait and there's a sense of urg and I know that there is a sense of urgency particularly around the addition that they're contemplating that maybe we could authorize Mark to or the mayor to if >> in a short in a short-term process in the interimm basis to represent u represent the city's interest on the capital complex committee until we have a permanent member. >> That would be that would be ideal. >> And would you like to would you like us to put this out at the basis of a form with some specific questions for what we'd like to recruit or we can simply ask for people to submit a letter of interest and resume? How would you like to evaluate candidates? I mean the current process that we're using across the board for appointments of all types is is a form where or with a with a letter of interest in a resume. Correct. Or it's one or the other. >> One or it's generally one or the other. >> I I >> you can submit supporting documents, but a lot of our applicants just answer the questions that >> honestly I' I'd prefer for something like this. It's it's more akin to replacing Adrian's seat that that a letter of interest in a resume feels maybe a little bit more thorough since we are looking for maybe folks with a particular skill sets or qualifications. That's just one person's opinion. >> So, councelor Sheridan, >> when are they hoping to meet? >> They said end of the month, but what's the specific date? >> Because I'm thinking that we should have if they do meet, we should have somebody there. >> Think it I agree and I think I think it should be Martin. >> Yeah, it sounds like the mayor's willing to do it in the interim. So, yeah, that's ideal. >> Well, that's why I made the motion because we should have somebody there. >> Yes. All right. Well, let's why don't we move on that, but then um also >> Yeah. >> move forward with a more robust process. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Can I I I actually like when we did the thing for um the regional planning commission and we asked like some real some really det I don't know that we asked some targeted questions based upon their qualifications. I think it would be ideal if we did something similar for this as well. And I think as Paul said somebody who has experience in public process or negotiation, land use policy, uh preservation I do think is important. Um kind of issues like that. And and I you know I think this the city manager and the staff I think that's an appropriate level of direction for them to come up with some questions that could help us evaluate candidates. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I think if you know they have a title that's just going to give more weight you know like mayor or city counselor or something like that. Um, >> I would proceed. That's I'm confused to explain. >> You know, if you can't go to when they have a meeting, I think we should have an alternate and um I think I could passionately represent us there. I certainly know the history of this town. >> All right. So, is are there motions for this or what? Councelor Sheridan has made a motion to appoint you. >> Okay. Is there a second for that motion? And this is a temporary appointment while we're in a in a robust >> Is that the way you looking at it, Jim? As temporary until we win. >> Yeah. Yeah. But we if they're going to meet, we should have somebody there. I'll second that. That that we >> need to change. It should It should say >> Would you like to amend the motion? >> Yep. >> Okay. So >> in interim. >> Okay, >> great. All right. So the the motion and resc is to appoint the mayor as the interim person to to the capital complex commission while we're in this search process. >> A question. >> Okay. >> Can we just vote? >> Yes. All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Okay. Thank you for doing that. Uh any opposed? Any abstensions? Okay. I'm >> I would just like to seek some clarity. Um when we opened the CVRPC process, um I came back with a form for your approval. Would you like me to do that for this on the 23rd before we open the application process or I have criteria that I think you all have told me that we can work with? >> Okay. >> Yeah, I I think you're you're you have a good sense of it. Just go ahead. Any objections to that? >> No. >> Okay. Great. Thank you. >> Um, thank you for that. All right. I think then we are moving on from item 12 to item 13, the complete street committee charge. It is 9:30. We're now only 30 minutes behind my aspirational. You're going to catch up. We love you for it. Thank you. Um, Major Curry, do you want to say a word to tee this up or should we just pass it off? Yeah, I just would welcome um you know Holly Ber the chair of the complete streets committee and Corey Lang who's the staff liaison um to that committee as well and they would like to present an update to you all on the work of the hard work that they've all been doing and also um request approval of amendment to the language of their charge. >> Thank you both very much for coming. Take it away. >> It's here. It's already should be the >> uh as um Kelly said, my name's Corey Line with public works. Um I'm the staff representative for the complete streets committee. Um Holly Fowler is with us. She's the current chair of the committee. She has a presentation to um to go over what the committee's been up to and what's on the horizon. Um, and as Kelly said, there's some language that you've been provided, uh, some charge amendment. Um, uh, as you're aware, the transportation advisory committee has since dissolved. So, the council doesn't really have a transportation advisory committee anymore. So, the language would uh, put that under the purview of the complete streets committee. Um, yeah. Why don't you >> Why don't I go ahead? >> Yeah. Well, thank you to the council members, uh, the mayor and city manager. I never seem to have any competition on the committee to sit in front of you for this update. And I think it's because they just don't know what they're missing. Right. >> Is it? >> I think I think it could be because I find this an incredible civic privilege to be among you. So, thank you very much. >> Thank you. Um, so, uh, as Corey said, we just want to give you an update. So, this is the fun part of the meeting, and it will be highly visual as well because I had you in mind as I created it. Uh, complete streets. I won't read all of this, but basically, it's a comprehensive approach to planning and is not just about bicyclists or pedestrians. It is about all users and meant to support all users and all abilities uh, sharing the street. Uh that's the definition from the US Department of Transportation. Um we also just included for your reference the legislation that was enacted in 2011 that underpins this uh for us as a municipality. Basically um I won't read this again but basically have highlighted and bolded the areas that are kind of most critical to understanding what this is about. Uh the state does continue to update this and provide resources that support it uh online in terms of guidelines and a toolkit and things like that as well which we reference. Uh Montil you're in motion is the city's official policy framework. So we've gone national to state to local now if you're watching my build. Uh and this basically is our framework that guides bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements since uh 2015. There are specific goals um one of which is uh obviously to maintain a record of zero walker or bicyclist deaths in the city along with some specific quantifiable uh goals. The actual uh work outlines 35 priority and longer term recommendations. I did not do the analysis of how we are doing against all of those, but I think that that's work that our committee could do with DPW. Um but basically a lot of those uh suggestions focus on sidewalk improvements, expansion of the bicycle network, some of which we have done, and bike parking, which I know is an active conversation. And I'll talk a little bit about how our committee is engaging on each of those topics. So um our committee was formed in 2016 uh and traditionally have been in the role of advocacy and promotion education through events and outreach uh and lots of partner partnering. This is the municipal charge that we are suggesting uh that we change our mission statement to um to incorporate the responsibilities that Corey outlined as having been left by the former uh Montpielar in um >> it was it was Mtech and but most recently it was MTech and most recently MTC >> infrastructure >> infrastructure committee. Uh this is our current committee and we do benefit we're listed here by when our terms come up next. Basically that is as you try to understand if we're alphabetical we're not. Uh and we voted as the city was contemplating the merger and consolidation of committees to expand our committee to nine members. So we have seven voting members and nine uh with our two alternates plus we have space for students um where we have had uh robust participation in the past um from Merrick Moden uh you know before he ran for office and went off to college uh he was a member of our committee for a long time and this is great we benefit from a lot of longterm engagement a lot of diverse uh professional expertise on our committee. Uh, and we like to think of ourselves as being pretty high functioning. Uh, so if anyone is seeking an alternate position looking around the room, um, please come join us. You do not have to be a resident of Montpielar to be on our committee. Um, we also enjoy participation from S, who unfortunately is not here this evening, but he is our council liaison. And I don't know what we would do without Corey Line from DPW who has consistently served as a great staff leison to our committee. So I credit part of our success to having great engagement from both staff and council. So we appreciate that. Um and we meet the first Wednesdays if anyone has any spare time and really want to know more about what's happening in our meetings. Uh recent success. Uh I we can't take any credit for this. This is something that happened a long time ago. Uh but I wanted to acknowledge that it's done. Uh because I think I've presented on it to you a couple of times over the years. Uh but the Berry Street path was completed in the summer of 2026 finally. Thank you. Uh we have acknowledged that uh it might not be perfect yet and probably needs painting and signage for which uh there was not a a budget but in terms of thinking about just the safety and helping people understand uh how it works um we're thinking that it probably needs painting and signage. Uh some of the things that we do uh we have produced two very successful youth bike rodeos. We moved these to an every other year schedule because they're quite intensive to participate uh to to plan. We also thought having a year uh between helps maintain participation as kids kind of come in at different times. They don't necessarily need the rodeo every single year. Uh but 33 cyclists ages three and a half to 11. Um and we have enjoyed a lot of community support for this event from those listed. And that's a little bit about what it looks like in action. So if you missed it, you'll have to make it the next time. Uh it is really enjoyable for all of us. It's probably the thing I'm most proud of uh for what we do on our committee. Uh Nancy Schultz on our committee has also been responsible for organizing uh what have been very successful bicycle workshop series for adults. Um and the description is there. Uh we paused these this this year as participation seemed to have declined, but I think this is something we'd like to continue and pick up again. It's just a cycle of if you've done it and we've captured everyone, then we need a break and then we'll bring it back basically when the time is right for the next group of adults. Um be bright at night. This is uh the extension of um a campaign that's been going on for a long time. It used to be really creepy. We used to ask, it really was uh when I joined the committee, we would get donations from different businesses and then we would kind of stock people actually wearing lights around town and walk up and randomly hand them gift certificates. The gift certificates were very random amounts. Um after co uh it didn't feel right to be asking our businesses who were already struggling to donate to to this. Plus, it was really strange to lurk around corners and offer somebody a gift certificate for a massage. So, we changed it and now we do the glow series. And uh we have grown these events over time. We do a glow ride around Halloween, which has I think this year will be the fourth time that we've done it or maybe we've done it fourth and this will be the fifth year. We've grown to about 60 participants. It's really fun. Uh people dress up in costumes and all ages are there. We do the glow run. We like to do this when it's basically the coldest, darkest time to really know who the true runners are in the community. Um you're all welcome. You can join us. Uh and we do the glow walk. Uh and each time that we've done the glow run and walk recently, we've also tried to incorporate the bridges and be a partner with Montpillar Alive and celebrating what we think is a really great and unique thing about our city. Um so we use this as an educational opportunity, not just for us, but for other things happening in the city. Other things that you may see us talking to you about or having Corey talk to folks about as we go, uh, we are responsible for the furniture zone, which is, uh, the area of the sidewalk. So, thinking about sandwich boards, not competing with people's way as they move around the sidewalks, trash receptacles and making sure that those are tended to on a regular basis. Um, we try to identify areas like the warning surfaces that are important for accessibility and mobility. Signage, we've been talking about the fact that we do need better signage probably at the gateways to the city and also helping people understand that there's a 4-foot law for walkers and pedestrians and things like that. So, we're always looking at these things. We've supported DPW in identifying uh where there were outdated grates that needed to be fixed, where crosswalks need paint and lighting, where bike lanes are requested. Uh for sidewalks, we often talk about clearing vegetation, um clearing for flooding and water events that tend to put people, these are things that put walkers and bicyclists out into the street, which is not safe. um and accessibility in terms of um the sidewalk, especially for people trying to use wheelchairs. And before Red Hen was uh where it is, there was already a bike parking problem. I wanted to give Bohemian Bakery a chance where they also have a lot of bikes. And uh you can see in the middle are actually hitches uh that we had um requested that were purchased and uh put up around the city. But um then due to the flood I think we did not we were not able to complete the purchase of the five other hitches. This was these were originally supposed to be 10. But we're actively working on and support uh bike parking. And then we do a lot in terms of community engagement here. We have tabled at the farmers market. We have toured local motion in our city. We represent on the country club road subcommittee when um when needed. Uh and we support other community events. Um we haven't had a budget in a long time. When we did, it certainly helped us to leverage uh and do more, which is important. Um the things that you've seen in the slide have been funded entirely uh with the exception of a $250 sponsorship from Kowanas entirely by members of the complete streets committee. So personally we are committed to doing this to the extent that we are paying to make sure these things still happen in our city because we think that they're that important. Um uh I will acknowledge that Corey in particular has been uh offering the inkind support of DPW to help us when we need it. uh cones and things like that. So, I do want to acknowledge that. But, uh with with a budget, we could do more. Councelor Sheridan, I take your point of it's a little bit, but it's from a lot of places. Um so, yes, we are one of those little places, you know, another one asking for a little bit. >> A whole thousand. >> A whole thousand. Um how about some more good news? I feel like I'm not going as fast as I intended to, but um in January of 2026, the city of Montpielar was reertified as a bronze level bicycle friendly community. Uh it means uh that we're maintaining uh because we had been bronze, but we have room to improve. Um and fortunately, we also have a report card from the League of American Bicyclists and feedback from 77 of our neighbors to let us know what we could be doing to improve those. So, those are guides for us as a as a committee as well. Um, next up for us is uh because we're not afraid of third rails uh hosting an author on parking on October 23rd uh to have that discussion. He is very entertaining and very objective. So, I hope that it's an opportunity to have a conversation in a different way for us as a community than typically happens around parking. So, this is hopefully to set a new tone for that. Um, and hopefully we'll have the Glow Series and the Youth Bike Rodeo coming in 2027. You'll probably hear more from our committee on all of the other things listed there around infrastructure and advocacy. Um, and hopefully working hard with you on the last bullet point, which is to help our community seek grant opportunities for doing this work. >> Thank you. >> Any questions? um >> standing ovation plus >> sort of that. Thank you very much. I I will say that um >> this is this is very very helpful and informative, but it is all good news and as I was alluding to before, there hasn't always been >> great relations either between council and staff or council and committees who are trying to do that on the ground work, making recommendations and really putting in a lot of time and their own funds to do things. So the question I have I guess is where are the challenges or frustrations one I guess and more importantly what can council do to support your work in a better way than we have done in the past. >> He's also not afraid of third rails. >> I would say that the largest challenge that we had most recently was the the the challenge around East Street. Yeah. >> Yeah. We really felt undermined uh not by Corey but by how that was presented and the information that was given. And uh I would say I mean I know that it led to at least one resignation from our committee which is unfortunate because it was a very engaged long-term member as well. >> I didn't see his name on that list. >> Yeah. And uh so it cost us and I feel very protective of this committee because we do work hard. We do think it's important that civic engagement be, you know, worth worthwhile. And I think we felt very undermined uh in that process by miscommunications. And so, um I think Sal is doing a good job of showing up. Corey is in a particularly difficult situation, I think, sometimes. And so, uh because people ask a lot of DPW, we ask a lot of Corey. Um, but he's always responsive and yeah, I think it's not always easy, but we have a very committed group and a very informed expert team in our committee who is committed to working through, not working around. And so, uh, thank you for asking the question. Uh, I think that was a recent challenge, but as you can see, we're committed to moving forward. Councelor Castello, >> really appreciate your work. Thank you so much for all your time and volunteerism and everything the committee is doing for the city. It looks like you're asking for an amendment to your mission statement and that requires council action. Um, I noticed that this is a significant policy decision that we're asking you to take on leadership to report to us with recommendations around the transportation infrastructure in general, not just bicycles and so forth. Um, and I I personally am for that. I I think you're a strong group of people and you've got good insight and would be useful to us. Um, as I look at the mission statement, I notice that it iterates in the third line, especially pedestrians and bicycles. And then then at the end it says supports pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motorists alike, ultimately enhancing public health. And I to me I'm a wordssmith a little bit and it feels like we're you're saying something twice when it would be cleaner and better public policy if you sort of spoke to the overall mission of transportation and took out that those few words. That's just my gut. >> I think it was suggested and we >> we thought it should be in there because we felt like they're under reppresented. >> Okay. So m Mr. Mayor, with your with your uh Okay, I would make a motion to approve the mission change as stated. >> Is there a second >> to start conversation? >> Second. >> Okay. And now we'll have discussion and debate on the topic. But um councelor Doyle, you're >> Yeah. just a um clarific clarifying question and but first like thank you for all the the work that you folks do and the serious seriousness with which you do it. You know like the East States street that was a challenge but I just really appreciated how informed you all were and the thoughtfulness you brought to it. I just had a question about the cler I just want to clarify this like on the on the mission statement please sheet committee advises the city council on overall planning policy and programming for the city's infrastructure and transportation network but can you tell me more about like the infrastructure part of that clause like does that refer specifically to transportation infrastructure or we talking about like your excuse me like weighing in on district heat or water systems or like you know what I mean what how big of an infrastructure thing are you talking about there >> this is specifically where I Corey asked us if we wanted to amend it. Uh I mean, we're trying to be realistic. We don't expect that you're going to come to us for things that don't impact complete streets, but some things do. Um you know, I would say Country Club Road is an example of a major infrastructure project. Yes, it also has a lot to do with complete streets both within and connecting to and from that area. Uh so that's an an example. Um I think you would you would have good judgment as a council to to know I think >> when to >> when to tap us and or to respect that if you didn't tap us that we would come to you with a concern uh about something. But it does have to do with things like bridges and >> we we acknowledge that it is a big task. Uh we had Donna Bait who was the former remaining member uh come uh to a couple of our committee members uh to our meetings during the transition period. We were fairly familiar because we'd always had a liaison and hanife Nazarelli to MTech. So we were always informed in any case of what was happening uh thanks to that connective tissue between that committee. So I feel like we are going in eyes wide open to this as a committee and have discussed it at length and verified that we feel like we have the expertise among the professionals on the committee as well to offer real credible advice to you. >> Yeah. >> Go ahead, Mr. SL. I think you you had mentioned it uh councelor Doyle earlier um with the housing committee being as specific and as detailed as possible as far as the council giving guidance to the committees in general and I would just reiterate that for this committee as well given everything Holly just said. Yeah, I I would just respond to both of those like I actually like it that is a clarifying answer in terms of it is a pretty broad thing, right? Like if when I ask like district heat, there are situations, right, in which we're digging up the street or something like that and it becomes an you know and and I think um I think it probably behooves us actually to be a little bit broad in that sense and but to also use judgment about there are a lot of different factors that are going to be in play in in a situation like that, right? and but you know that the committee feel empowered when they do feel like they have a point of view that's worth the council's attention that maybe we haven't considered to bring it forward. >> Yeah, I think it infra this is about how people move around this city. Uh and that is walking, biking in a wheelchair using public transportation. So it's we understand this is asking for a lot. It was part of the reason why we also determined early to expand our committee knowing that we would need more capacity than what we were currently operating with. And I'm very happy that we have two recent members and we have continued participation. And so um where other committees may not be having a lot of participation, we seem super solid in in a growth uh mode. >> Yeah. to hopefully support what's coming for our community >> and also just recognize that I'd say I recognize that um you because of the subject matter must be a committee that is very forward thinking and doing things um or making suggestions that are not always easy for everyone to who just drives a car from destination A to B to really see the value of and I know that's an extra struggle Yeah. I mean, I think it's a popular misconception that our committee or people who are advocating for the things that we advocate for who might not be members of the committee are somehow anti-motorists. And yet, I live on Bliss Road. I live a half mile from where the sidewalk ends. Um, it's not safe to walk. I never run that road uh if I don't have to. Uh, and so I drive my car. I drove my car tonight. like this is definitely thinking about how all people move around our city and how it services them. >> Okay. Um shall we move to a vote? Is there Yeah. So all in favor of adopting the mission statement as presented say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? 5 to one does pass. >> Thank you very much. We will look forward to seeing a lot more of you. >> I do want to let you know we still have an opening on the transportation advisory committee at the CVRPC. So that application is still live on our website manager. >> Yes. >> Always looking for dedicated volunteers at all levels. >> It's it's fair since you kind of called out Rob Goodwin and you Well done. Thank you very much for thanks for the positivity and for the straight talk as well. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, moving on from number 13 to number 14. It is currently 9:55. Appointment to the Rightsville Beach Recreation Board of Directors. Manager Curry or not a lot to describe here. >> Yes. You um also another example of a regional district. you appoint two people to the rightsville Beach Recreation District board of directors and recently John Copan stepped down um and so there is a vacancy uh Jackie Casino has applied and she answered a number of questions in the application for your consideration. >> Okay. Um >> here >> she is I don't see her online. Okay, >> I'll move her appointment. >> Okay, we have Okay, we have a motion, a second. Is there any discussion or debate? >> She's eminently qualified. Yes, >> seems so. Yes. >> I would say that I've worked with her in the past and her role at VRN's doing she did a better connections program. Fantastic. >> Great. >> Great. Any other discussion, debate on this? All in fo, all in favor of appointing Jackie Casino to the Ritsville uh board of directors say I. I. I. Any opposed? Any abstensions? >> I'm sorry. >> Just one last thing. I just want to say I just want to acknowledge John Copan's service I think seven years. Uh which is a lot and he does a lot for our community. So I just want to acknowledge John. >> Yeah. Good work. Thanks, John. Okay. Thank Thank you, Councelor Doyle. Okay. Uh moving on to the next item. It is now 9:56. Um this is the item 15, the VCT voting delegate appointment. Uh, manager Curry, do you want to lead us? >> Sure. So, the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, um, they, you know, they meet all the time, but every two years they adopt their, um, municipal policy as part of the legislative bienium in advance of that schedule. And so, at their um, annual meeting day on October 6th, they will vote on this policy. and for Montpilliard to participate. We are a member and can delegate a voting delegate to that. Um, in the past it has been city staff. It does not need to be. It can be a counselor. I know Carrie has been involved with them. Um, but I did want to bring that forward so that we can have someone who is eligible to vote at the town meeting um or their annual meeting on October 6th. >> Okay. Okay. So, I think this is a sort of nomination in motion. Sort of if it has traditionally been the city manager, do you have a particular desire and or bandwidth to fulfill this or are you >> I'm happy to serve at your pleasure or to support whoever you choose to serve. >> Okay. I think councelor Doyle >> I think I don't I have not talked to her about this in advance so I apologize in advance Carrie but like you've been serving as a policy person uh liaison to VCT and so to me I think it would make a lot of sense to have a counselor involved in it and given your current role with VCT I I would be uh well I'll just go ahead and do it you can decline I would nominate uh Carrie Brown for that role. >> I'll second the nomination. >> Okay. Councelor Brown do you have anything to say about that? I would be happy to do it. Um, I should make sure that I can actually be there on October 6th, but >> I think it's 1 to three over Zoom or 1 to 3:30. >> Oh, okay. So, I would have be it'll be fine. Yeah. >> Okay. Um, >> I would be happy to do that. I would love it. >> Do you do you have anything to add on to to this as we discuss and debate? >> No. Happy to support Carrie in the role and let me know how I can do that. Any other discussion or debate on this topic? Okay. In that case, all in favor of appointing uh councelor Brown as the delegate to vote at the annual meeting of VLCT say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? Five to zero. Great. Um, thank you very much for your willingness to serve and thank you for your support. Um, all right. Item number 16. It is 9:59 um appointment to the tree board. >> Okay. You have a vacancy on the um tree board and so Vicki Kuscowski has applied to that um has included information about her interest and relevant skills. >> Any any clarifying questions? >> I'll move. I'll second. >> Okay. We had a I'm sorry. I was distracted. You said there was a motion to approve to a point and a second. Any discussion or debate on this topic? >> I saw Vicki today and she's very excited to serve in this role and I thanked her for her leadership. >> Nice. Any other discussion or debate? All in favor of appointing Vicki Kuskowski to the tree board, please say I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? 5 approved. Uh on to item number 17. It is 10:00. Um the CCR utiliz utilization for Super 8 Pike Packers authorization. >> I should say bike packers. >> Bike Packers. Yeah. Okay. I wondered about that. Go ahead. Um, so there has been a a request for city council to authorize the use of Country Club Road in support of um a statewide gravel biking race. I'll note that our um parks director uh let's see, Alec Ellsworth was on >> Oh, he's still there. No, he's there. >> Hi, Mr. Ellsworth. So they, you know, the information is, I think, clearly spelled out in the in the cover sheet, but this is a um, you know, a multi-day gravel biking um, bike packing event around Vermont that starts and figurates through and then ends again in Montpillar. And so to support that event, they have requested use of Country Club Road to camp overnight on the days that they will be starting, looping through, and ending at um, in Mont Pillar. and Alec is willing to support kind of managing how that use occurs and I'll turn it over to him to provide additional detail. >> Mr. Ellsworth, thank you and thank you for your patience. Go ahead when you're ready. >> Thanks. Um I think Kelly summed it up great. I don't need to add anything unless there are specific questions other than I think it's a good opportunity to support outdoor recreation as part of our strategic plan. Um, and are are there any questions from council about this? >> I'm prepared to make the motion to support this proposal. >> Okay. So, we have a motion to support this proposal. Um, I take that as a motion to authorize the Vermont bike packers um to support this proposal. That that seems enough. Is there Thank you. Is there a second? Is there a discussion or debate on this topic? >> Um, all in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose. >> Any abstensions? 5. Mr. Ellsworth, thank you for hanging out all night uh for that. We we really appreciate you and thank you for your your leadership and commitment to doing this. Um I think it's largely because you you brought this forward and you're you've demonstrated that you're such a competent person that we all feel really confident about this. If any member Yeah. Thank you. >> And also just quick thank you to the bike packers Daniel Jordan who just gave some hearts to the meeting. >> They came. I told them they didn't have to come but they sat it out anyway. They came just in case there were questions for them too. So I appreciate them coming. >> Thank you, Mr. Jordan. Um, all right. Um, great. All right. So, we'll move on from this item. We are on to other business. The consent agenda. It is currently 10:03. Um, Councelor Doyle, >> I'm sorry to do this. I know it's preferred that we noticed in advance, but I did recently notice that something in the minutes that I'd like to discuss. So, I'd ask that we pull the minutes off the consent agenda. >> Okay. >> Is that okay? Without objection. All right. There's there's no objection. So, we'll pull the minutes off. How about we handle the rest of the consent agenda first and then we'll come to the minutes. Um, I have a motion to accept the consent agenda with the exception of the minutes. >> Good. >> I need I'm not allowed to make a motion. So, >> I was saying what's happening? Usually, he doesn't mean >> Yeah. No, I I would I would entertain a motion. >> So moved. >> Uh I think John would like us to say the words. >> I I'm sorry. We I move that we approve the consent agenda with the exception of the minutes. >> Thank you. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Discussion and debate. >> All in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? All right. Thanks for letting me be a stickler there about that, Ben. Um All right. Let's talk about the um the minutes. What were your >> Yeah, just I you know on the part about the responsible employer ordinance, I remember that being a particularly like torturous and circular conversation, but I think John actually repeated something twice in the minutes. It didn't happen twice. I think it just was repeated twice. So like part says, councelor Doyle moved that we hold a third reading of the repeal on November 11th and continue the public hearing a day as well. Councelor Brown seconded. The motion was then withdrawn by unanimous consent and then immediately the next paragraph is the same thing. And again, there was a lot of that, but I don't think we did that twice. I think we just did that. >> Councelor Brown. >> Well, maybe I'll I should I Okay. I think that um the city clerk spent a lot of time going over the recording and, >> you know, repeating things and and getting input from other people in city hall. Maybe the deputy can speak to that a little bit more than I can. But I have not gone back and looked at it myself, but just from conversation that I've had, I I would trust this. >> Okay. >> But >> that Thank you for that clarification. I just wanted to make sure it wasn't a typo. >> I haven't I didn't go back and watch it. Okay. So, if you're telling me uh it was accurate, I I believe you based on the conversations you've had. >> Understandable. And it's identical language. >> It was a brainstorming conversation. Bounced and bounced. So he took it twice. >> Okay. >> So do we have a motion to accept the minutes? >> I move that we accept the minutes. >> Second. >> We have a second. Any discussion or debate? All in favor of accepting the minutes as presented say I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? 5. Minutes are accepted. >> Great. Thank you for that. All right. We're on now to item 19. It is 10:06. Um, manager Curry, >> we are up to the homelessness update. Um, sorry, my apologies. Normally, we have our sort of tracking cover sheet that we include for this, but I have two updates I want to bring forward. Um, one is I met recently with the board of the Montier um, cold emergency cold weather shelter and to discuss winter planning. They are looking at a number of properties and investigating kind of the viability of those properties for potential winter shelter. It is possible that they're they have requested an additional extension of the um waiver at the Unitarian Church to use that again um even though their three-year waiver has already expired at this point. They have just submitted to me today a formal request of this board to use the downstairs space um for emergency cold weather shelter under the same conditions that they used it last year. Um this is meaningful because we had committed to making a you know investment in putting in a second egress door down there pending receipt of a request to use and manage that space. Um, so that has been received and so I'd like to just check in with you all and about that and we will move forward and begin to make those um, amendments to the basement. >> Is that something that if it moves forward would then be brought back for us to formally approve or we you're asking before authorization to just move forward with the conversation? Can you clarify? >> So um, direction from you all to continue down this path. um we would enter into I would enter into anou with them again as we did last year for the use of the space under the same terms. I believe I presented to you all in earlier meetings the letter we received from the fire warden giving us the conditional approval for um the space that had the same conditions as last year. The amount that we expect to spend would not require council approval. We expect it to be $5,000 or less roughly. Um and so that doesn't trigger council authorization. And so really this is just if if you don't want me to do that, now's the time. Otherwise, we're going to move forward towards anou and the expenditure. >> In my mind, it seems like it's settled business, but councelor Sheridan, go ahead. >> Um, what is the um cuto off temperature? >> It was 10 degrees. Um, >> yeah, I think that's a little low to be honest with you. I'd like to see it 20. >> I mean, you can you can make that adjustment. that was um I think they would be happy to take additional time pending their ability to staff and manage it which was why they said >> but honestly >> I've lived in Vermont all my life and I always thought anything below 20 starts to feel cold >> starts it's cold yeah um all right uh >> if you would like I can bring back a draftou for approval but >> I would do you feel like you need a motion or I mean I feel like you have I I think we all are excited by this direction and >> yes it seems like this was discussed and decided at previous meetings. So >> yeah I mean you all gave me that direction when we met on the 29th and you know as one of your um action items to move forward with. So, um, and then I just also want to check in again. You know, we're continuing to have conversations related to the, um, vacant office property that is, you know, up for lease at 148 State Street. So, that's the corner of Bailey and State. Um, you know, we've been talking to the property owner, Jesse Jacobs, who, you know, is looking to lease that space. We're in conversations with Capstone about um you know their interest in creating more of a permanent emergency shelter there that could potentially provide day use space. Um there is office space on the second floor that we could also potentially you know could also be rented out to other um users in that space which I would imagine would need to be sort of you know have related uses um for that. it. When I spoke with um our zoning administrator, it doesn't it doesn't appear to need a um they could do an administrative permit for use right now because it's been unoccupied for 12 months. It would need to get a change of use approval that does not go to this board or um any of the development review boards. And I just want to sort of make sure that we should continue exploring this opportunity. I think that we have some considerations of how we would um you know the the the conversation is around the city being a master lessor of the space from Jesse Jacobs and then entering into a subleasase because the you know he is looking for a multi-year lease. Capstone is um you know their funding isn't always secure from a year-to-year basis and so there is some hesitancy about that. So, we would need to figure out kind of how to mitigate risk to the city if that was the role that we were to play. Um, we could potentially open up, you know, that space for subleasase through an RFP process. I think there's a number of different paths to take, but I want to just check in with you all because, you know, we have um we paid a little bit of money to do a mold investigation. There's a little bit of mold that would need to be remediated in the basement, but otherwise not throughout the rest of the building. like it is viable for use. Um, but because these conversations are very, you know, public, I think it's important for you all to weigh in and direct whether we should keep exploring and if there's any specific kind of stop gaps or critical criteria that you would like us to consider in that exploration. It would be helpful to understand that. >> Questions on this topic? see a lot of faces thinking the >> councelor Brown. >> Um so I don't know if I missed this before um but I'm but I'm learning now about this master lessor idea because I've been um trying to sort of think about well what would the city's role in this be and what do we have to actually decide and what what what risks might we be taking what responsibilities might we be taking on. So that's a pretty big one. Um, and I don't I would love to learn more about that. I don't have any guidance or opinions at this point, but um, if we're going to take on the responsibility of leasing the property, that means that we're going to be obligated to pay the rent on it for a certain amount of time regardless of whether um, you know, what what are the what happens in that building. And so that's something that we just have to know more about and think more about. I don't I don't know what that would be exactly, but yeah, let me hear about it. >> Councelor Doyle, >> um I definitely think we need we should learn more information. I mean, I think like a really good obvious like check-in point would be lease terms, right? Um a term sheet for the for a master lease. But I will also say that like I do think there are ways that we can mitigate the risk to the city on this and that you know if it if it works as it potentially could right there's limited cost to the city um given that Capstone's funding would be doing I mean it is there would be a calculated risk the city would do but I think if you know the alternative is us operating a shelter or something like that this is a much uh better way to go and I actually think is um really an appropriate role for the kind partnership role that the city could play in trying to, you know, help facilitate something for Capstone to fulfill their mission more successfully that helps all of our community. And so I agree with Carrie like really want to get the details on like what is the risk to the city and how do we mitigate that risk but I you're already keyed into that and I just want to I personally feel like we should definitely pursue this as an opportunity assuming we can mitigate that risk >> and having you pursue learning more about this is not the same as assuming that role at this point correct >> no it's not I mean obvious all of this would come forward in you know further conversation and detail and um you know approval by you all to enter into such a lease. But you know I there's a lot of opinions around this topic and a lot you know so it just I think makes sense to be kind of coming back to you frequently with um check-ins about it. And then um what some of the questions I would have will have not really necessarily asking you right now are are sort of um what what uh leverage or control or input does that allow us to have that is greater less than or equal to if we did not do this. for example, if they didn't need somebody to have a master lesser sort of role, would is this something that they would I mean they'd be able to move ahead with and then would still go through the same sort of process as as anyone else occupying that space? Is um is our involvement or voice greater, lesser or indifferent to this? That's something I'll probably ask about later as we get forward. So, sounds like you have the guidance that you need. Are there any objections to this course of councelor Castello? >> Not not I'm not objections to anything you want to say. >> No, I I'm very much in favor of the course. Um I think it's essential that the city's involved and takes leadership. Um, I would like to see the provision of services that would be available to people there and what what that list is that's that Capstone will provide or their partners might um and and potentially be interesting to think about collocation of services in that upstairs office and what those might be. Uh, I also would like to see the outlines and provisions for accountability in the use of the building in terms of how they're going to manage the the the facility. And um, I think we have to be accountable ourselves to know those things as we get into this kind of an agreement. But I'm I'm in favor of moving forward. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you for your leadership, Kelly, and working on it. I just want to report that we haven't had a meeting of the homeless committee because our meeting night was Labor Day. So, we're meeting next Monday. So, we have we had nothing to report on that. >> Thank you. Um, anything else on this topic? Yeah, just one thing just because I know I think the homelessness committee is going to talk about the lockers since we last talked about that two weeks ago and in further conversation with staff. The >> um the sort of feeling around it was that the program just kind of fizzled out from lack of use um as opposed to some other intentional you know action around it doesn't mean the demand won't be there now and we'll wait to hear what the recommendation is from the committee. Okay. Um, well, and I have a question, but I'm not sure if it goes in this or the next. So, if there's nothing else on this topic, let's move to the next agenda item. We're on to item 20, the future agendas. It's currently 10:18. >> Great. Thank you. Um, this has been made available to the public packet as well. >> Yes. So, this is um kind of a new item we're discussing here in our newly reformatted agenda. And so, um, proposing things that we have for future agendas, looking to the board if there's additional items that you wish to bring back for conversation to give a heads up to staff and discuss among yourselves. Um, so looking ahead to the September 23rd meeting, we'll have a number of second readings from today's first readings. I have scratched out the River Hazard amendment. That was my mistake, as you heard Mike Miller say, because it was an interim amendment. It passed on first reading. Um and then uh the country club road letter of intent with DEW. We are actively negotiating that and we'll plan have plan to bring that back at that time. Um the tax stabilization policy. This is something staff has been working on since since the springtime um after our conversation when we you know had granted a tax stabilization agreement um to improve that and to set some conditions and standards relative to it and create it more like a contract and so we'll bring that back for conversation and approval. uh the transit center lease renewal discussion. I know you've all been interested in that. So, I just wanted to bring a update on the those conversations um and how those are progressing. Uh let's see. Down street Housing and Community Development, they um want to come and give an update and and request support for a specific grant. And then the Capitol Complex Commission, we've appointed the mayor this evening, but we if there are applications and then we will bring those back at that time, too. um the city council mini retreat. So, initially we talked about having this on um September 30th. I know that not everyone is available that day. So, I was hoping we could try and find a different date. Um the following Wednesday, I know the mayor is unavailable. And so, if you don't mind, I'd love to take some time now to see if we can find, you know, it doesn't need to be on a Wednesday, if there's another um evening that we could all find where we might be able to hold that. And again, the intended conversation there is to have a check-in on the strategic plan and then discuss allocation of the local um options tax. Um so >> you have October 8th as a potential date there. That works for me. Should we throw that out first? >> That's a Thursday. >> Oh, that's that should be that's the wrong date. Sorry. Keep going. October 8th could be for our strategic retreat. If folks are available, I can be available. Would that work? >> Sorry, that second one should say October 14th. I have my date wrong. >> Second one. >> Lot of errors today. Um, yes. So, we're looking at October 8th for a strategic >> planning Thursday. >> Thursday evening. I think it is okay for me. Ben's got a goofy look on his face. He's gonna say he can't, but it's because it's something maybe. Um, I'll say yes. Yes. >> Appreciate your willingness. >> Are you all available? Okay, I'll double check with S. >> One condition. Yeah. October 6 is my birthday. So, if you have a party, then >> I know >> you can have a cake even. Um, we can make or get a cake. Paul, does that date work for you? >> Okay. All right. We'll we'll look at that and I look forward to that conversation. I'll bring in a proposed um agenda for that. Um, I'll probably circulate one by email and then bring it again for the next meeting. And then, sorry, the next date should say October 14th. Um, I have pushed our boards and commissions administration policy one meeting to give more time for committees to provide input on that. And then I'd like to do an initial discussion of our legislative agenda. And I know Carrie and Palin and Mark, you all are waiting for me to send out a date. Um, so I'm sorry. I'll look at my email with that locked in. And that is what I have for future agendas. there's anything you think I'm missing or would like to bring forward. >> So, question I had was just sort of take everybody's pulse on this. Um, we we had decided it that we were going to have um that the homelessness update was going to be a standing agenda item on on everything. And in some ways, it's very helpful for us to discuss it as a group. In some ways, a lot of the update could be delivered to us through email or in the city manager's report. I just wanted to feel out the room and see how everybody feels. Is this something we we want to maintain as a standing item on its own or is it something that can be addressed in other ways? >> Um, since this update is also for the public, I think we should keep it, but it is only for us. Yeah. email updates will be also good. So we need to decide the aim the goal of this agenda. >> Do you have a thought about that? What it what it should be in your opinion? So again if we are giving this update to inform the public I think we should keep it the agenda but if our goal is just to inform each other the council then it is okay via email or with the homeless committee updates. So I'm just like I think asking council do you want to update public? I I think it's good that we actually talk and interact about it even if it's not an hour in the agenda and I think it's good for the public and good for us. >> Councelor Brown. >> Yeah, I think it is largely for the public um as well as for us. So I would like to keep doing it maybe not forever but for the foreseeable future. >> It sounds to me like there's enough of a desire to keep it that let's just settle that as we'll keep it. >> Yeah. I I would just add that I think the way that we've got our agenda set up now I I really like this format. So I I think like um I think it lends itself to getting an update that's informative for the public for us to have some conversation but also doesn't consume the entire meeting. >> Great. All right. Thank you. Um anyone else have items for future agendas that we want to bring up now? I mean we all bring them up then via email and meetings and such anyway. All right. Great. Well, with that, let's move on to items 21 through 25. It is currently 10:25. City council reports. Let's start with councelor Alfano. Not here. Okay. Let's go to councelor Doyle. >> No report other than thank you for the wendleberry this to start the meeting. I believe that. >> Okay. Councelor Con. >> Yeah. I have one uh thing to share. Um I've heard very um good and positive feedback about what Evelyn and Tanya are doing at the senior center. So I just want to thank them and it was very nice like uh people are talking to me and mentioning your name uh Tanya's name and also Kelly too. Uh but this time I think Evelyn and Tanya got more because they could as so thank you. That's all. >> Councelor Sheridan, >> uh, we did have a kind of emergency meeting for the senior center LA last night and we did have nobody from the city there. Um, it's basically being run by volunteers now. They're doing all the heavy lifting. I mean, the uh the one worker that's still there, she's going through cancer treatments and she can't do a lot. and Kim's trying, but she talked about how it's overwhelming with her other job. So, we're just continuing to find volunteers who can do certain things and um >> going forward and I would like to say at some point when it's done, we got a director. I'd like to bring us a bunch of names so that we could have Mark honor them in one of his resolutions because some of them are really pulling above and beyond their weight. >> I'd be happy to accept your draft or list of names or whatever. >> That's all I got. >> Great. Thank you, Councelor Brown. >> Uh, no report, but I will thank you for the Gloria Steinum. The Gloria Steinum. Oh, >> councelor, >> really briefly, the the foundation for resilient moleure um convened about two months ago and people put their ideas on the table and prioritized a few different directions um of work that citizen committees are leading now, including one that is looking to boost volunteerism. And they've got great energy. They've got great ideas. They're talking about doing a volunteer fair for all the different organizations that need volunteers to connect people. And they're also going to do a monthly activity to invite all citizens of Milia across the board to get to know each other and and be engaged in proposive activity in service to the community. Um, and this this month is going to be on Saturday where um they're inviting people to participate in the river cleanup starting at 8:30 in the morning. wear mucky boots and long pants and be prepared to get wet, but also do a real service to the river. And I I don't know if you noticed that after the flood, the river was a a terrible disaster with trash in it really badly. And it's come a long way, but we've still got digging to do to to do the next stage. So, encourage anyone who's interested in serving the common good to be there. >> I'll just jump out of order. That was also on my list. I've done it for the past couple of years. It is a terrific day. You get to see the city from a different vantage point that walking in the river that you normally don't see. You'll be amazed at how much crap gets pulled out of the river that you it's there all the time. There's tires and large pieces of sheet metal. And you get to walk up and down the river with some member of the community that you didn't plan to spend your morning with. And that's been a terrific opportunity to connect with people. So, I just sort of second that plug. Um, thank you, Councelor Costello. Uh, clerk's report. >> Um, filling in for John tonight. Um, I think it's safe to say we are definitely gearing up for the election. The ballots go out um this month. The state sending them out. We have a lot of anxiety from people calling about their ballots and the registrations, the stuff in the news. But anyway, um, that's all I'll say. Thanks. >> Thank you for that. Super important work. manager's report. >> Okay. I don't have a lot of detailed things to bring forward to you. I'm focused a lot on back of house things right now. Grant variety of grant administration tasks um hiring, budget prep, those kinds of things, union negotiations, all happening um right now. And so that's been a lot of my focus. >> Okay. Uh last is the mayor's report. I'll try to be brief. I'm going to start with some things I'm not proud of and then move to some things I'm happy about and we'll close out there. Um, first I uh was supposed to present and speak to the Hunger Mountain Co-op board yesterday and well Tuesdays in particular are the hardest school night and I just completely spaced it and I'm embarrassed to say that I did not go to their meeting as promised. They were graceful about it and we'll figure something out. But I want to apologize to Hunger Mountain Co-op. We're, you know, as a community, we're so lucky to have them and I should have done better and I apologize. Um, also I did get some feedback about how we're running meetings and um, I'm hearing, you know, in some ways that, you know, that things are going better, but I'm also hearing that in some ways I can come down too hard, too fast on some things. And I just want everyone to know that I'm still learning in this role. I'm taking the good feedback, the critical feedback. I'm trying to process all of it and always be a little bit better at making sure we have fair, inclusive, and thorough conversations around every topic. Um, I so onto some things that I well before the so the happy I cannot believe that Friday will be 25 years since 911 happened. Um, I mean it still feels like it was yesterday and yet it was like a whole graduate a graduate degree program person's life ago. Is that about how long it takes? Anyway, whatever. Um, quarter of a century ago. I'm a little bit floored by that. Um, but I have heard so much good feedback um from people about DPW's work and I'm just encouraging all of them. If you really mean it, please just send off an email and hopefully, you know, because DPW, like all the city departments and all of us, we get our fair amount of negative feedback and positive feedback goes a really long way to giving some good gas for people to just keep going through that stuff. Um, and where I heard a lot of it was, uh, we did a ribbon cutting for the Berlin Street, um, uh, sewer project completion. So, hooray for that. Um, Berlin Street looks as good as I've ever seen it in the 5 years that I've lived here. And I just want to thank Evelyn for always floating up these sort of like groundbreings and ribbon cutings. Even if 10 things are going or are challenges for us, there's always one that's worth celebrating. and we can always choose to celebrate that thing and I'm having a great time doing that. So, thank you Evelyn. Thank you everybody. And with that, it is 10:33. This meeting of my city council is adjourned.