2026-09-28 - City Council

00:00Okay, noting the presence of a quorum

00:03here in city hall as well as councelor

00:05Mcnite online, we will go ahead and call

00:07the order the Burlington City Council

00:09meeting on Monday, September 28th at

00:116:05 p.m.

00:14With respect to our agenda, there is a

00:17uh motion to adopt the agenda uh as

00:20amended as follows. Removed from the

00:22agenda item 7.3, a special event outdoor

00:25entertainment permit application, one

00:26day only. Poutine Fest, USA, 377 Pine

00:30Street, October 4th, 2026, 11:30 a.m. to

00:334:30 p.m. Is there a motion to adopt the

00:36agenda as amended?

00:38>> So moved.

00:39>> Thank you, Councelor Shar. Is there a

00:40second?

00:41>> Second.

00:42>> Thank you, Councelor Singh. All in favor

00:44of the amended agenda, please say I.

00:46>> I.

00:46>> I. Any opposed?

00:48>> That carries unanimously. uh before

00:51public forum, which is warned for a time

00:53certain of 6:30 p.m., we do have an

00:55anticipated executive session here, as

00:58is our practice. I will turn the floor

01:00over to our city attorney to provide

01:02some factual context for the need for an

01:04executive session.

01:05>> Thank you, Council President Traverse.

01:07Um, this executive session was requested

01:09to discuss a confidential personnel

01:13matter that is exempted from the open

01:16meeting law requirements. um as general

01:20public knowledge of this confidential

01:22personnel matter would place the city at

01:25a disadvantage.

01:30>> Thank you, city attorney Brown. Uh

01:31before any discussion on that, I would

01:33ask for councelor Singh to please make

01:34the first of two motions on the

01:36executive session.

01:38>> Thank you. Move that the council find

01:40that premature general public knowledge

01:42of a confidential personnel matter would

01:44clearly place the city at a

01:45disadvantage.

01:47Thank you. Is there a second to that?

01:51Thank you, Councelor Bergman. Any

01:52discussion on that item?

01:55All in favor, then please say I.

01:57>> I.

01:58>> Any opposed?

01:59>> I.

02:00>> That is unanimous. And then councelor

02:02Sing, could I ask you for the second

02:04motion, please? Based upon that finding

02:07move that the council and

02:09representatives from the Burlington

02:10Police Department, Department of Finance

02:12Administration, City Attorney's Office,

02:13human resources, and the mayor's office

02:16enter executive session pursuant to 1BSA

02:20313A1F

02:22to receive confidential attorney client

02:24communications for the purpose of

02:26providing professional legal services to

02:28the body. 1 VSA 313A3

02:32to discuss the employment and evaluation

02:34of a city employee and one VSA 313 A6 to

02:39discuss the records exempt from public

02:41disclosure pursuant to 1 VSA 316.

02:46>> Thank you. Is there a second to that

02:47motion?

02:48>> Second.

02:48>> Thank you, Councelor Bergman. Any

02:50discussion on that item?

02:52All in favor then please say I.

02:54>> I.

02:54>> I. Any opposed? That carries

02:57unanimously. The council is now in

02:59executive session. Again, we have public

03:01warm uh public public forum warned for a

03:04time certain of 6:30 p.m. So, we will be

03:06back before then. Thank you. Okay. A

03:08couple other counselors are still making

03:10their way back, but I think we will go

03:12ahead and call the city council back to

03:14order. Appreciate the public's patience

03:17here as we wrapped up an important

03:19time-sensitive executive session. Uh,

03:22and we're a little bit behind for public

03:24forum, but we will go ahead now and open

03:27public forum at 6:40 p.m. I will mention

03:29that if anyone is tuned in for our local

03:31control commission meeting, which was

03:33warned for 6:15 p.m., we will turn to

03:35that immediately after public forum. Uh,

03:39as is our rule in practice, we will

03:41begin public forum with any Burlington

03:43residents who are signed up to speak

03:44here in City Hall. will then turn online

03:47to any Burlington residents who are

03:48online. Then come back here to city hall

03:50for any non- Burlington residents and

03:52repeat that same process online. As a

03:55reminder, in order to participate

03:56online, you need to have signed up at

03:57least an hour in advance of our time

04:00warn for public forum. Both speakers

04:03here in person and online will be

04:04provided two minutes. If you're here in

04:06person, please come to the table, pull

04:08the microphone close, hit the push

04:10button, and make sure the green light on

04:11the microphone is illuminated. If you

04:14are online, uh once you see the timer on

04:17the screen, uh you should be able to

04:19unmute yourself and go ahead at that

04:21point. Uh we ask that all speakers

04:23please direct their comments to me as

04:24the chair and not to any other

04:26individual. The council does not

04:27tolerate any individualized comments or

04:29attacks, particularly those based on any

04:32person's protected characteristics. Uh

04:35we also ask that comments please refrain

04:37from being unduly disruptive, loud, the

04:40use of profanity. It's important that

04:41city hall remain a safe place for those

04:44who serve, those in attendance, and

04:45those tuning in to our meeting. Uh, with

04:48that, again, we'll begin with our first

04:50Burlington resident here in City Hall,

04:52and that will be Bruce Wilson, who will

04:54be followed by Emily Holleran. Uh,

04:57Bruce, thank you for your patience.

05:13Hello, city council chair, honorable

05:16mayor. Thank you for letting me present

05:20my good um intern here with me, Emily.

05:23Um so I just want to talk about straight

05:26talk. You all have I think you have a I

05:29think you have a like a copy of it in

05:31front of you. And um basically um I'm

05:34I'm going be um facilitating this

05:36program. over 500 people have have um

05:39attended this program and been a part of

05:41this program. I met with the charity

05:43Clark uh and um

05:46uh through the attorney general's office

05:47and Todd and they are support this

05:49program and they are um working with

05:52court diversions and community service

05:53opportunity service organizations and um

05:57you know to um to get more people

06:00involved. We want to do the program

06:02around the state. We already have this

06:04program. We already have a place in

06:06downtown Burlington. We're going to

06:07facilitate this program for individuals

06:09who um who who um might be um

06:13economically challenged, high-risisk

06:14environments, um might be risky

06:16behaviors, who might not know how to

06:19identify the thinking errors and

06:20patterns that they might fall under and

06:22learn with a with an intervention uh how

06:24to use interventions. And so that's the

06:26reason why I brought it back up because

06:28um you know a lot of these individuals

06:30is right here in the heart of downtown

06:31A4 where I live at and um and um so they

06:35just need opportunities and we're going

06:36to help them with their systemic needs

06:37and we're going to help them with u

06:39using our community partners and and

06:41everybody to help them with and we

06:43already have people involved in straight

06:45talk who's primarily living in the park

06:48that's now facilitating program. They've

06:50been a few city meetings with me and um

06:53taking those and and have a a position

06:55to help facilitate. They are they worth

06:58like 199 million PhDs because they've

07:01been there and done that. They they the

07:02people who who we um should be talking

07:04to the ones um

07:08um who knows what their goals and

07:10aspirations are. the ones who knows what

07:12they need areas are housing and and all

07:14the things that systemic things that all

07:16of us have and all of us need and all of

07:18us and um we all need it. We all need

07:21it, you know. So that's all they need.

07:23You know, if they're going to be in a

07:24high-risisk environment, guess what?

07:26It's always going to be high risk. Thank

07:28you.

07:29>> Thank you, Bruce.

07:30>> One more thing, one more thing. Um you

07:32got a real for um money for community

07:36justice center from the state and comp

07:39diversion. I think you should look at

07:41straight talk to help receive some of

07:43this this funding.

07:44>> Thank you, Bruce.

07:45>> Thanks.

07:46>> Uh, our next speaker is Emily Holleran,

07:48who will be followed by David Maher.

07:53>> My name is Emily Howerin. I've been

07:55working with Bruce Wilson to facilitate

07:57more youth on city boards. I'm aware

08:00that Burlington is very unique in the

08:02sense that they allow their youth to

08:04vote while on student board. Well, as

08:06students who sit on different boards and

08:09committees, I myself have experience

08:12being a student on a board back in my

08:13hometown of Bington, Rhode Island, where

08:16I was on the diversity, equity,

08:17inclusion board. However, I was not

08:19allowed to vote due to my age. So, I

08:22think it's so incredibly unique and so

08:24incredibly important that Burlington

08:27offers this ability. And I understand

08:29that it is because of Laura Sanchez that

08:33this happened and it has been

08:35facilitated and that this program was

08:37able to continue postco.

08:40It's just so important that students

08:42both high school and college students

08:44are able to get involved in their

08:45communities. Even if they're not going

08:47to stay here forever, the skills that

08:49are taught cannot be taught in the

08:51classroom. Civic engagement is one of

08:54the core tenets of America and what

08:57makes this country so great. And it is

08:58so important that we allow students to

09:01not only be able to sit on these boards

09:03and learn from older and more

09:05experienced people, but also be able to

09:07make their ideas and voices heard in all

09:10sorts of changes. be it on DEI boards,

09:13on the police commission, just whatever

09:16they're interested in, whatever they

09:17think that they can help with, this

09:19ability to be on boards as not just

09:23members, but voting members is so unique

09:25and so important. And what me and Bruce

09:28want to do is expand that across Vermont

09:31into ethics and Wooki so that way there

09:34can be more students, more people

09:36voting, and more people civically

09:38engaged. Thank you.

09:41Thank you. Our next speaker is David

09:44Maher, who will be followed by Chris

09:46McGrath.

09:48[clears throat]

09:56Good evening. My name is Dave Maher. I

09:58live in the New North End, Ward 4.

10:02I'd like to talk about City Hall Park a

10:04little bit. I like what the

10:06administration is doing with City Hall

10:08Park, but I have some additional

10:10suggestions to make the park more

10:12welcoming for everyone. First of all,

10:16I'd like to see flowers, lots of flowers

10:19planted all over the place. This will

10:21beautify the park, provide a sense of

10:23calm, and provide habitat for

10:25pollinators, which we all know is very

10:28important.

10:30I can see some of the green space in the

10:31park completely converted to flower

10:34gardens with paths through them so

10:37people can enjoy the beauty of the

10:39flowers. I see some green spaces boarded

10:42with flowers all the way around to

10:45preserve that green space and provide a

10:48beautiful habitat. I also see flower

10:51beds scattered around the other green

10:54areas in the park. And this is fall and

10:58fall is the time to plant perennials. So

11:01keep that in mind. And I have another

11:03suggestion. Park benches. We have too

11:06many and they're in the wrong places

11:09[snorts] right now. They are in the edge

11:11of pedestrian walkways and city streets.

11:15Who wants to sit down on a park bench

11:17and watch traffic cruising up and down

11:20College Street? Benches should be in the

11:23middle of the green spaces, far away

11:25from vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

11:28That way, people sitting in the park

11:30benches can enjoy peaceful, calming

11:32music, and watch pollinators buzz from

11:35flower to flower. So, let's go ahead and

11:39plant more flowers, reduce the number of

11:42park benches, and put the ones that

11:44remain in more strategic locations.

11:46Thank you.

11:49>> Thank you. Next speaker is Chris

11:51McGrath. Will be followed by Ed Baker.

12:01>> Good evening, city council. Um, today I

12:03just uh wanted to voice my support for

12:06uh the Vermont for Criminal Justice

12:07Reform and moving forward with a

12:09overdose prevention center. I know

12:11that's something that's on the uh

12:12deliberate deliberative agenda for

12:14tonight and um I think it's an important

12:16thing um specifically with Burlington

12:18and the way that uh traffic moves just

12:22around the city that downtown is an

12:24important um nexus of uh uh transit uh

12:29and that a lot of people who need the

12:31overdose prevention center sometimes do

12:33not have access to um uh their own forms

12:36of transportation. And so I know there's

12:38been a lot of debate especially between

12:40Burlington Forward and other things

12:41about the placement of an OPC and I

12:43would just like to voice that I would

12:45like to see one where it is accessible

12:46to people. Um I believe that is an

12:49important function of government at all

12:51levels and that is why the constitution

12:53starts with we the people because an

12:55important part of what the government uh

12:59the contract the government has with we

13:01the people is what services the

13:03government can provide and then

13:05obviously how we the people can support

13:06those. So, I would just like for you to

13:09keep that in mind during your

13:10deliberative session tonight. Thank you

13:11very much.

13:12>> Thank you, Chris. Our next speaker is Ed

13:15Baker will be followed by Brett Yates.

13:36Okay. So, hi everyone.

13:39I want to thank you as usual for your

13:41work.

13:43I'd like to first focus on the Vermont

13:46Department of Health's most recent

13:47report on drug overdose death right here

13:50in Chittenden County. There were 18

13:53tragic and untimely deaths in our county

13:56through June of this year. 18 in one

14:00half year. And this number may grow as

14:03additional data become clear. Should

14:06this trend continue, 2026

14:09will show an above 30% increase in death

14:13over 2025.

14:15[clears throat]

14:16According to the Vermont Social Autopsy,

14:19a high percentage of these people are

14:21socially isolated.

14:24More than onethird of these people die

14:26alone.

14:28no bystander.

14:30Onethird of these people have histories

14:33of prior overdose. A high percentage

14:36were people recently discharged from

14:39institutions, hospitals, or our carceral

14:43system. This is the population our

14:45overdose prevention center is designed

14:47to engage.

14:49Let's engage them. Let's open our

14:52overdose prevention center.

14:56Associated with this is Dr. Brandon

14:58Marshall's generous offer to present

15:01before the full city council on the

15:03science and efficacy of OPC.

15:06Dr. Marshall is a well-noted

15:08epidemiologist and researcher in this

15:10field at Brown University School of

15:13Public Health. I implore you to roll out

15:16your red carpet for him. Do not let this

15:20opportunity die on the vine. I'd like us

15:23to spend my remaining time in silence

15:25for those we've lost and those we are

15:28about to lose.

15:42Thank you, Ed.

15:43Our next speaker is Brett Yates who will

15:45be followed by Charlie Missing.

15:54Hello. Uh, I'm Brett Yates. I'm here as

15:57the um as the president of Partisan

16:00Film. Um, and we're here because uh we

16:03have a um our our special event

16:06application is on the agenda tonight.

16:08Um, as you may remember, we we we

16:11already have an indoor entertainment

16:13permit, but uh the proposed event takes

16:15place or or would take place um well

16:17outside of the our regular business

16:19hours which are listed on the permit. Um

16:22and so uh we we have applied for a

16:24special event permit. Um it's a uh a

16:27midnight screening of the Rocky Horror

16:28Picture Show on Halloween. Uh we've

16:30gotten a lot of requests for this. I

16:33think um Meryill's Roxy used to do it.

16:35Um uh and uh uh I I asked the uh we are

16:40part of a condominium building. I did

16:42ask the condo board about it and they

16:44they support it. Um we've had uh

16:46excellent uh relations with our

16:48neighbors because we we did a good job

16:50with the soundproofing. Um so uh uh I

16:55think that's you know I'll be around if

16:57you guys have any questions. Um thanks a

16:59lot. Bye.

17:00>> Thank you Brett. Uh, the last Burlington

17:03resident that we have here in person is

17:05Charlie Messing. We then have two

17:06Burlington residents who signed up

17:08online in Sharon Busher and Scott

17:10Newman. I do see Sharon online who we'll

17:13turn to after. Charlie, uh, I do not see

17:16Scott Newman online, but Scott, if

17:18you're here under a different name, if

17:19you could please use the raise hand

17:21function on Zoom, uh, so we can make

17:23sure that we get to you. Uh, but

17:25Charlie, we'll turn to you first.

17:27>> Howdy.

17:29Good evening.

17:33everybody.

17:34Um anyway, uh

17:38once more I bring up the crosswalks on

17:41Pine Street.

17:43I looked at them again.

17:45Some of the lights are quite bright and

17:48adequate. Some of them are dim,

17:52flickery,

17:54and um

17:56well, I think maybe they should be

17:58accompanied by a beep

18:01or some little noise,

18:04anything to attract people's attention

18:06because some people can't see them. They

18:11are distracted. They're going, they're

18:13thinking straight ahead and it's right

18:17over here in their peripheral vision.

18:19But if they're really uh concentrating

18:23or if they're on the phone or whatever,

18:28they might not see somebody. Now, of

18:30course, it's good to uh look both ways

18:33when you cross the street, even if you

18:35have the right away. Um enforcement.

18:40Uh, did I mention that there was a

18:43policeman who walked past somebody

18:46shooting up drugs in the park and walked

18:49up to a guy I know who was drinking a

18:52beer on Main Street and he took the beer

18:57and poured it in the gutter and then he

18:59gave the guy a ticket for $50.

19:04That $50 is imaginary.

19:08It was so stupid to give that guy a

19:10ticket.

19:12So,

19:14junk is free. Beer is $50.

19:18Not make sense.

19:21Uh I hope we're not cutting any bunch of

19:24trees this year. I hope we can get by

19:28planting a bunch. That would be good.

19:31There's not much you can say in three

19:33seconds.

19:36Thank you. Thank you, Charlie.

19:39Uh, we will now turn online. Our first

19:42online speaker is Sharon Busher. As

19:44mentioned, we then had Scott Newman

19:46signed up. I don't see Scott uh by that

19:48name, but Scott, if you're here under a

19:50different name, if you could you please

19:51use the raise hand function. If Scott's

19:53not here, then we'll come back to city

19:54hall with Chris Morash. Um, but Sharon,

19:57you should be able to go ahead as soon

19:58as you see the timer.

20:02>> Hi, good evening, President Travers. I'm

20:04going to pick up where Charlie left off

20:07um because I did want to speak to the

20:09vegetation ordinance which I think is is

20:12excellent because as it states in the

20:15memo it's been languishing there for

20:17years without an update. Um but one

20:21thing that is not addressed for as far

20:25as I'm concerned to my liking is um

20:29cutting of trees. Um and it says in the

20:33memo it depends on existing permits and

20:35the comprehensive development ordinance

20:37for tree cutting. Um in your vegetation

20:41ordinance you'll see that there are

20:43categories of trees. One is heritage

20:45tree where the statement is that we try

20:48to um assure that um inform the

20:53residents of the value of those trees.

20:56I'm saying that any mature healthy tree

20:59on personal property should be should be

21:04valued and environmentally it's really

21:07important. So I hope that when it goes

21:10to the um ordinance committee there can

21:13be a discussion about next steps. Um the

21:17other thing I wanted to address was the

21:19F-35. Um recent um this year two have

21:25crashed during training and I wondered

21:28if our National Guard gets any

21:31information from any insights of what

21:34happened. I feel that one of the issues

21:37that was really important to everybody

21:39and still remains is how close the

21:42landing and takeoff are to residential

21:46homes and if indeed there are some

21:49safety enhancements that need to be

21:51implemented. I think that would be

21:53really important to know and to reach

21:55out to the guard and say um you know

21:59could you inform us of any proposed

22:01changes that might make it safer for

22:04takeoff and landing. So thank you. Thank

22:08you Sharon. Uh our next speaker was

22:11Scott Newman. Scott do not see you

22:13online. Again one last opportunity to

22:15use the raise hand if you're under a

22:16different name.

22:19I do not see Scott. So we'll come back

22:20here to city hall. Our last speaker will

22:22be Chris Marahash.

22:28Hello. How y'all doing tonight?

22:32I want to read over this. It says,

22:34"Hello, my name is Chris Morage. I'm

22:37addressing city council. I'm the

22:39petitioner of the petitioner of free the

22:40music free the art. I addressed the city

22:42council back in August about how this

22:44church street in Burlington is

22:45overreaching our freedom of speech such

22:48as background checks, rehearsals, and

22:49amendments. These violations constitute

22:52against our first amendment rights and

22:54an unconstitutional contentbased

22:55discrimination. All our forms of freedom

22:58of speech are allowed. Church Street is

22:59a public place. I filed a binding

23:01petition with the city clerk at the end

23:03of August and got a response response on

23:06August 31st. I made it clear the

23:08municipality and the clerk and the city

23:10council this was supposed to be an

23:11amendment charter change petition.

23:13Nobody refuted this matter. I tried

23:15setting up a meeting with the mayor

23:17about this matter. She agreed in a mayor

23:19meet up that she would have this

23:22meeting. She told me to have a meeting

23:24and but her only opinion was it would

23:26cost the city money, but I don't believe

23:28anybody's civil rights have a price on

23:30them. She disregarded the meeting when I

23:32asked her about it in another media

23:33meeting up. She didn't want to talk. She

23:36questioned me about if I was a citizen

23:38and if um I told her I could change my

23:41address. She told me that there's 40,000

23:435,000 people in this town that need to

23:45be tended to and there's plenty of data

23:46points on my position petition. All I

23:50wanted to do was have a meeting and get

23:52opinion. I also contacted you with an

23:55email and I didn't get any response from

23:57you. I started collecting citruses on

23:59September 2nd. I finished the signatures

24:021500 on September 9th. They handed it

24:04back to me four uh 5 days later on

24:07Friday. supposed to be 24 hours

24:10according to 1726 of the Vermont law.

24:14Over 24 hours have passed. Um I got an

24:18email back from the city attorney days

24:22later with a backed email to the 9th and

24:25she refuted it again today to the 24th,

24:28but it was the 23rd when she sent on me.

24:30So I'm still confused what day it's

24:31actually supposed to be handed to. I'm

24:33just trying to figure this out.

24:35Everybody else who's backing me wants to

24:37know, too.

24:39>> Um, thank you.

24:40>> Thank you.

24:45>> That was the last uh speaker that we had

24:47signed up for public forum. We will now

24:48go ahead and close public forum at 7:01

24:51p.m. Uh before turning to item four on

24:53our agenda, which is Mayor General City

24:55Affairs, we had warned our local control

24:56commission to meet at 6:15 p.m. And so

24:59we will recess the city council meeting

25:01at 7:02 p.m. and call to order the local

25:04control commission and would ask for a

25:06motion on our local control commission

25:08agenda.

25:09>> Move to adopt the agenda.

25:11>> Thank you, Commissioner Broadick. Is

25:12there a second?

25:15>> Second.

25:16>> Thank you, Commissioner Singh. All in

25:17favor, please say I.

25:19>> I.

25:20>> Any opposed? That is unanimous. We'll

25:23now turn to our consent agenda. And

25:25Commissioner Broadderick, as as chair of

25:27our license committee, I'll be turning

25:28to you for motions on these items.

25:30>> Move to adopt the consent agenda and

25:32take the actions indicated.

25:34>> Thank you. Is there a second?

25:36>> Second.

25:36>> Thank you, Commissioner Singh. Is there

25:38any discussion on this item?

25:40All in favor, then please say I. I.

25:43>> I.

25:44>> Any opposed? That is unanimous. Uh, and

25:47then there's one deliberative item.

25:49Commissioner Broadderick,

25:51>> I move to approve the 2026 2027 first

25:55class liquor license application for the

25:57boardroom 3 mil street contingent upon

26:00fire marshall approval and with all

26:01standard conditions.

26:02>> Thank you. Is there a second?

26:05>> Second.

26:06>> Thank you, Commissioner Singh. Any

26:07discussion on this item?

26:10>> All in favor then please say I.

26:12>> I.

26:13>> Any opposed? That is unanimous. Seeing

26:16no other business before the local

26:17control commission, we will adjourn that

26:19meeting at 7:03 p.m. and resume our city

26:22council meeting which we are now at

26:24mayor general city affairs. And mayor,

26:26when you're prepared, we'll turn the

26:27floor to you.

26:28>> Great. Thank you very much, President

26:30Traverse. Good evening, everyone. Last

26:33week, I held a press conference

26:34alongside my housing team within CEDO to

26:37share important progress on my second

26:39major priority as mayor, which is the

26:42creation of ample and safe uh ample and

26:44safe affordable housing. We launched the

26:46city of Burlington's three-part housing

26:48strategy earlier this year in January to

26:51expand housing, strengthen

26:53affordability, and put public assets to

26:55work for Burlington residents. You can

26:57see tonight's on uh tonight's city

26:59council meeting on posted on civic clerk

27:01a full outline of where we're headed and

27:03what I'm going to cover in the next

27:04couple minutes here in terms of the

27:06housing strategy goals and our

27:07objectives and how we're going to

27:09measure success. The strategy is

27:11designed to to do more than meet housing

27:13production targets. It seeks to

27:15reinvigorate Burlington's long history

27:18of treating housing as a public

27:19responsibility and public good while

27:22using new approaches to create

27:24affordable, sustainable, and thriving

27:26neighborhoods. That's because Burlington

27:28is at a critical juncture. We need to

27:31think differently about how we build

27:32homes, how we use our land and

27:34resources, and how we work together. We

27:38need to reimagine what affordable,

27:39sustainable, and thriving communities

27:41look like and active activate our city

27:44in new ways to get us there. We need to

27:46continue leading with creativity,

27:48vision, and values that have inspired

27:50communities across the country. And most

27:52importantly, we have to put people back

27:54at the center of Burlington's housing

27:56future. The complex economic conditions

27:59we face are unlike anything we've seen

28:01in the housing field. Construction costs

28:04are now so expensive that they

28:05jeopardize any kind of housing

28:07development. The tariffs and economic

28:10policies of the Trump administration

28:11only worsen this already difficult

28:14reality. Complex regulatory systems,

28:17limited land in Burlington, and labor

28:19shortages have become perennial

28:21challenges. Rents and home prices have

28:24risen far faster than wages. And nearly

28:27one in three renters are repaying more

28:29than half of their income to keep a roof

28:32over their heads. Just a friendly

28:34reminder, a definition of affordable

28:36housing is for someone a household to

28:38pay no more than 30% of their income for

28:41their housing expenses. And as we saw in

28:44this past legislative session, we keep

28:46stalling on badly needed policies that

28:48protect and support renters and giving

28:51working verters a simple break in the

28:53housing crisis. All of this and more has

28:56created a housing crisis that affects

28:58our workforce, our economy, and the

29:00ability for people to put down roots

29:02here. It hurts affordability and

29:04threatens to limit how we plan and grow

29:06our communities. Our three-prong

29:08approach guides how we are activating

29:10our city in new ways to build more

29:12housing of all types here in the Queen

29:14City. For the first pillar, we are

29:16revitalizing two major h legacy tools

29:20that we have used in the city of

29:21Burlington related to housing. This

29:23includes our inclusionary zoning

29:25ordinance and our housing trust fund. We

29:28are doing so to meet today's housing

29:29challenges and support affordable

29:31housing investments citywide. This work

29:34will keep inclusionary zoning effective

29:36at producing permanently affordable

29:38housing under current market conditions

29:40and will also grow the housing trust

29:42fund's financial capacity and strategic

29:44impact to leverage more affordable

29:46housing investments. In the past 35

29:49years, the city produced approximately

29:52400 h affordable housing units through

29:54the IZ rules within new buildings and

29:57supported another 2,200 affordable units

30:00through the housing trust fund. We will

30:02double the number of affordable units

30:04built build in the next we will double

30:06the number of affordable units built in

30:08the last 35 years within the next 10

30:10years under our strategy. Now for the

30:13second housing pillar, we are activating

30:14neighborhood code by removing barriers

30:16and increasing public awareness to

30:18support inclusive neighborhoods through

30:21more infill housing. This work is dem

30:24democra de democratizing housing by

30:26helping residents take full advantage of

30:28neighborhood codes opportunities and

30:30realize its full vision. Since

30:33neighborhood code was adopted, the city

30:35has received approximately 45

30:37applications proposing roughly about 70

30:40housing units with approximately nine

30:42units built to date. The

30:44administration's goal is to double both

30:46applications and completed units over

30:49the next year because simply that is not

30:51nearly enough for us to get where we

30:52need to go. And for the third pillar, we

30:55are reclaiming the public sector's role

30:57as a housing leader, strategically using

30:59the city's authority and its land to

31:02reduce construction cost, create

31:04long-term public wealth, and ensure

31:06housing investments advance community

31:08priorities around affordability, equity,

31:10well-being, and the climate. This work

31:13will make underutilized public land

31:15available for mixed income housing

31:17through public private partnerships. We

31:20will also use the city's participation

31:21in the CHIP program known as the

31:23community housing and an infrastructure

31:25program through the state to build

31:27housing. And we will also maximize our

31:29current housing stock by holding owners

31:31of vacant properties accountable and

31:33using city resources to rehab aging

31:36housing. Across these three pillars, we

31:39are testing new tools, learning what

31:41works, and scaling successful

31:43approaches. This spirit is at the heart

31:45of my housing strategy, finding

31:47practical ways to move projects forward

31:49and deliver results for our community.

31:52Since January, my administration has

31:54evaluated the production and impact of

31:56the current IS policy and research

31:58approaches used by our peer communities

32:00across the country and we're looking at

32:02proposed amendments to increase

32:04permanently affordable housing and we

32:05expect that to come to the city council

32:07and planning commission later this

32:09calendar year. The city has also

32:11strengthened the housing trust fund by

32:13directing 9% of short-term rental tax

32:16revenue to the housing trust fund

32:18beginning July 1st of 2026 and is

32:21expanding outreach and exploring new

32:23ways to use these resources to preserve

32:25and create affordable homes and support

32:28residents facing housing instability.

32:31The city has advanced additional zoning

32:33changes uh to enable row houses, town

32:36houses, pocket neighborhoods, and other

32:38forms of infill housing while expanding

32:41public education, improving and the

32:43permitting experience, and working

32:44across departments to identify and

32:46remove barriers to prevent residents

32:48from turning housing ideas into actual

32:50reality. These efforts have already

32:53increased applications utilizing the

32:55pathways created by the neighborhood

32:57code, including a new 16-unit project on

33:00North Avenue. In the months ahead, the

33:03city will work with the state ACCD,

33:05which is the Agency of Community

33:07Commerce and Community Development, uh,

33:08and their staff toward a local pre a

33:11pre-approval process for 802 homes, a

33:13readyto build program to spur additional

33:15infill housing. The city has signed the

33:18CCORD phase 1 development agreement

33:20advancing 205 new homes with a goal of

33:23approximately 33% affordable units. This

33:26will be located in the south end. This

33:28project shows that we don't have to

33:30accept the status quo when it comes to

33:32housing. By thinking differently and

33:34trying new approaches, we can find new

33:37ways to tackle our housing challenges.

33:39This project also shows what happens

33:41when city hall helps unlock the

33:43potential of a strong partnership. The

33:46city saw the potential in this

33:47opportunity, brought partners together,

33:49and helped accelerate the project from

33:51idea to action. We are pursuing a public

33:54land study to identify additional

33:56opportunities for housing on city-owned

33:58property. And the city is also

34:00coordinating efforts to address vacant

34:02and problem properties, rehabilitate

34:05aging housing, and establish a framework

34:07for for participating in the state

34:09housing infrastructure programs. Our

34:12Department of Permitting Inspections

34:13recently launched a new web page with

34:15the top 10 non-compliant vacant

34:18properties in Burlington in order to

34:20update the community and to hopefully

34:22encourage property owners to bring their

34:24properties into compliance or to

34:26increase occupancy.

34:28Next month, my administration will be

34:30sharing exciting updates on our pro

34:32problem initiative which has been

34:34underway for the last nine months or so.

34:36So stay tuned for some more progress on

34:38this important cross department work.

34:41All told, the city has many major

34:43housing projects that are complete,

34:45under construction, or moving through

34:46the development process. Based on

34:48currently known proposals,

34:50approximately, 1100 or more housing

34:53units could come online by the end of

34:552028.

34:57Our housing strategy is driving us

34:59towards our target of creating 7,000

35:01units by 2050. This is Burlington's

35:04stated target to meet our proportion of

35:06the state's housing growth goals. We'll

35:09get more in depth to looking into uh

35:11this at the upcoming community open

35:13house for plan BTV 2050 on November 5th.

35:17This event at our wonderful new

35:19Burlington High School is an opportunity

35:21for residents to check uh check in on

35:23this new vision for Burlington's future

35:25and to ask fundamental questions. How

35:28can we including how can we accommodate

35:29the unprecedented but absolutely

35:31necessary housing growth in ways that

35:33support our local economy? steward our

35:35love of parks and open spaces and the

35:38waterfront and guarantee that all

35:40residents the right guarantee all

35:42residents the right to move freely and

35:43safely. Join us in early November and

35:46we'll share how we think we can reach

35:48our housing target while continuing to

35:50make Burlington the best place it could

35:52be. I really want to appreciate our

35:54entire housing team within CEDO also um

35:57peer partners in the department of

35:58peritting inspections as well as many

36:00community partners and housing advocates

36:02and housing developers who've been part

36:04of these conversations as we built the

36:06strategy over the last nine months.

36:08Switching to a different topic briefly

36:10tonight on your agenda. You also have a

36:12work session on the tax fairness or tax

36:14fairness policy and I appreciate you

36:16having a work uh work session tonight to

36:19identify and update the public on the

36:20work of this group. Of course, I've uh

36:23it's been built off of the 2025 workg

36:25group that I uh I convened um that year

36:29and asked that community group as well

36:30as city staff to produce a report and we

36:33posted that under the mayor update so

36:35folks can see the history of this work

36:37and hopefully the work that you've built

36:38uh this recent iteration of a work group

36:41uh upon and there was also a

36:42presentation we posted from 2025 from

36:45that first initial group. Finally, to

36:48wrap up, just a few highlights of

36:49community events that have happened

36:50recently in Burlington. In no particular

36:53order, I just want to um acknowledge we

36:55had a really joyful and wonderful Latin

36:57American connections event on September

36:5919th. Uh included a parade down Church

37:02Street and a celebration in the park all

37:04afternoon long into the evening. I want

37:06to again thank uh Councelor Sanchez

37:08Parkinson for her leadership and her

37:10partnership with many community partners

37:12who've long led this work. Um, and I

37:14hope this continues to be a good and

37:15strong annual event here in the city of

37:17Burlington. There was also a great

37:20partnership event with the Flynn. I

37:21think I mentioned this at the last

37:23council meeting, but it's an event

37:24called Playing Fields Burlington. I

37:26don't know if we were the last stop, but

37:27one of the last stops of a statewide

37:29tour that was a great free event held at

37:31the Flynn Elementary School in the in

37:33their playing fields, no pun intended.

37:35And it was a pretty magical event if

37:37folks went or you saw images. It was an

37:39immersive event. Um there was a lot of

37:42joyful children running in and outside,

37:44very large puppetry happening. Um and it

37:46was just a great example of not only

37:48bringing community together, but

37:49exposing our young people and families

37:51to the power of the arts and performance

37:53arts at that in particular. And then

37:56finally, last week I participated in a

37:58press conference hosted here in

38:00Burlington with a number of members of a

38:02coalition on public transportation. Uh

38:05the new campaign is called Ride Public

38:07and it's an attempt uh for

38:09municipalities as well as of of advocacy

38:12organizations to call on a statewide

38:14effort to improve public transit. That

38:17includes not only the funding and

38:19mechanisms to make sure it's

38:20sustainable, but to make sure there's

38:22adequate routes and that we move in the

38:24direction of encouraging more folks to

38:26participate in public transit versus

38:28not. and we were joined by the mayor of

38:30Wooki, UVM Health Network, ARP, VNRC,

38:34just to name a few. Uh, and it was great

38:36to be able to stand in solidarity and

38:37speak on behalf of the city for our

38:39continued support of GMT and in general

38:42continuing to strengthen our public

38:43transit system. With that, I'll turn it

38:45back to you.

38:47>> Thank you, mayor. Uh, we'll turn now to

38:49item number five, which is committee

38:51reports. Is there any council with a

38:52committee report?

38:55Councelor Bergman.

38:57Thank you. Uh the ordinance committee

39:00will be meeting uh this Friday uh

39:04October 1st at 2:00 downstairs in the

39:06Busher conference room to talk about the

39:09uh trespass hearing time issue that

39:12we've been referred to. It's been

39:13referred to us by the public safety

39:16committee. Um and we'll take a look at

39:18that and hopefully be able to move it

39:21promptly back as was requested. And the

39:24last thing I just want to mention um is

39:26that uh our ordinance committee works um

39:31collaboratively with the entire planning

39:34commission on the inclusionary zoning um

39:37updates and uh we have been meeting

39:39diligently for many months and we'll

39:43meet again on the 13th of October. Uh I

39:47think that we are getting close. There

39:50are still some places, some some uh

39:54divides that we need to uh to bridge,

39:56but I think that uh um I'm confident

39:59that we will easily make uh the deadline

40:03uh mayor by the end of uh this calendar

40:06year, if not significantly before. So,

40:09thank you.

40:11>> Thank you. We'll go councelor Singh and

40:12then councelor Barlo.

40:14>> Uh thank you, council president. Um the

40:16public safety committee met last

40:18Thursday 9:24 and we had CIO Scott

40:21Barker uh in our meeting speaking about

40:25uh cameras in the city uh that we

40:28currently have and how that technology

40:30is used. Uh it was a very technical

40:32discussion, but there was a lot of

40:34questions brought up on the committee on

40:35how we're using these and how it

40:37interfaces um with BPD and when they do

40:41investigations and their dispatch. Um, I

40:44looked and the media files are not up

40:46yet, but I'd encourage everybody to

40:48watch that to get a better understanding

40:50of, you know, how many cameras he has,

40:52how we how we deploy them currently. Um,

40:55and it was a great discussion by the

40:57committee.

40:59>> Thank you, Councelor S. Councelor Barlo.

41:01>> Thank you, President Travers. Um, the

41:03Transportation, Energy, and Utility

41:05Committee will be meeting tomorrow uh at

41:086:45 Pine Street and we'll be meeting at

41:115:30. Um, and the one

41:14substantive item we have on our agenda

41:16is a discussion around proposed changes

41:18to the solid waste generation tax.

41:20>> Thank you, Councelor Shakar.

41:23>> Thank you. Just a quick flag that we

41:25have a parks, arts, and culture

41:26committee meeting uh next Tuesday,

41:29October 6th at noon at the Fletcher Free

41:31Library. Um and we'll be uh continuing

41:34to discuss how to eliminate barriers to

41:37uh more events happening in and around

41:39our city. um as well as an interesting

41:41presentation from the sailing center.

41:43Thanks.

41:44>> Thank you. Any other counselors with a

41:47committee report? Councelor Grant.

41:49>> Um I would just add that once the uh

41:52meeting media is uploaded

41:55um the public safety committee also

41:58heard from our chiefs and we we hadn't

42:00had the detailed reports uh reviewed by

42:03them in a couple of months. So there's a

42:05lot of interesting data there um

42:08including a conversation around the idea

42:11of how we track incidents in the city in

42:15terms of where uh exactly incidents are

42:19occurring. Um we've used heat maps in

42:21the past which have been great. uh but

42:24we're now looking at uh what are called

42:26hexagon or tile

42:29uh type of maps and those give more

42:32specific information with regards to the

42:35number of incidents that occur in

42:38specific areas and I think um our

42:41residents would find that to be uh very

42:43interesting. Thank you.

42:45>> Thank you councelor Grant. Councelor

42:47Sanchez Parkinson.

42:48>> Thank you. Um, our next racial equity,

42:51inclusion, and belonging uh committee

42:52will be October 20th, and we are

42:54beginning to explore ways that we can

42:57improve uh engaging youth voices and um

43:00the experiences of young adults. So, for

43:02those who are interested, welcome you to

43:04join us October 20th.

43:06>> Thank you. I do not see any other

43:08counselors for a committee report.

43:11So, we will move on now to our consent

43:13agenda. Is there a motion to adopt our

43:15consent agenda and take the actions

43:16indicated?

43:18>> So moved. Thank you, Councelor Shaker.

43:20Is there a second?

43:22>> Thank you, Councelor Bergman. Any

43:23discussion on this item? All in favor,

43:26then please say I.

43:27>> I.

43:27>> I. Any opposed? That carries

43:30unanimously. So, we now turn to our

43:33deliberative agenda as mentioned by one

43:35of our public forum speakers. The first

43:37couple items on our agenda are some

43:40indoor or or otherwise special event

43:42entertainment permits. Uh on item 7.1,

43:46Council Broadick, could I ask you for a

43:48motion?

43:50>> I move to approve the 2026 2027 indoor

43:53entertainment permit application for

43:55things from Yah 152 Cherry Street with

43:59all standard conditions.

44:00>> Thank you. Is there a second?

44:02>> Second.

44:03>> Thank you, Councelor Grant. Is there any

44:05discussion on this item or is the

44:07applicant here and would like to speak

44:08to it?

44:12We'll go to a vote then. All in favor,

44:13please say I.

44:14>> I.

44:15>> I. Any opposed. That is unanimous. We'll

44:18turn now to item 7.2, please. Councelor

44:20Broadderick.

44:22>> I move to approve the one-day only

44:25special event outdoor entertainment

44:26permit application for Citizen Cider,

44:28October 3rd, 2026,

44:30180 Flynn Avenue, 2 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

44:34Ciderfest.

44:37>> Thank you. Is there a second to that?

44:41>> Second. Okay. Thank you, Councelor

44:43Sanchez Parkinson. Any discussion on

44:44this item or is the applicant here and

44:46would like to speak to it?

44:49We'll go to a vote then. All in favor,

44:51please say I.

44:52>> I.

44:53>> Any opposed?

44:54>> That is unanimous. Item 7.3 was

44:56regarding Poutine Fest USA. It was

44:59removed from the agenda, but hopefully

45:00we'll be back. Uh, so we'll turn to item

45:037.4. Um, and Council Broad, we'll ask

45:07you for a motion on this item. I move to

45:10approve the one-day only special event

45:12indoor entertainment permit application

45:14for Partisan Film, Inc. 2:30 College

45:17Street, October 31st, 2026, 11:59 p.m.

45:22to November 1st, 2026, 1:45 a.m. Late

45:28night showing of the Rocky Horror

45:29Picture Show.

45:31>> Thank you. Is there a second to that

45:32motion?

45:34>> Second.

45:34>> Thank you, Councelor Grant. Is there any

45:36discussion on this item?

45:41Yep. Council Bergman.

45:42>> Sorry. Is this a partisan?

45:44>> Oh, you need to recuse yourself.

45:46>> Yes. Understood. You are a member of the

45:49co-op.

45:49>> A member of the co-op.

45:50>> Yes.

45:51>> Oh, then I guess I can't. Second.

45:54>> Okay. Uh, do you need to recuse yourself

45:56as well, Councelor Grant?

45:58>> I guess I do. I wouldn't think I do, but

46:02if Jean's doing it, what the heck? I'll

46:04do it, too.

46:04>> Okay. Uh so

46:07>> but I love partisan counselors Grant and

46:09Bergman are recused from this item then

46:11and so there is no second for this

46:13motion. Will another counselor second

46:15please?

46:16>> Thank you councelor Singh.

46:17>> Um and Brett was there anything further

46:19you wanted to say to this item? If you

46:21could come to the microphone if you

46:22don't mind. Yeah.

46:26>> Actually you know I was just wondering

46:27about like do you guys recuse yourself

46:29when City Market comes up here? It it

46:32just uh you know procedurally I was

46:35curious because I feel like that could

46:37become a problem eventually. You guys

46:38all might be partisan film members. You

46:40know, [laughter]

46:42>> that's a good point. We we'll cross that

46:43bridge when we come to it. Uh but for

46:45now, I suspect this likely will not be

46:47an issue. Um any discussion or further

46:51comments on this item?

46:53All right. All in favor then please say

46:56I.

46:56>> I.

46:58>> Any opposed? Right. That's unanimous

47:00among those voting. But good point,

47:02Brett. So, we'll follow up on that. Um,

47:06okay. That brings us now to item 7.5.

47:08This is a proposed ordinance on uh the

47:11vegetation ordinance. And on this item,

47:13it appears we have city arborist VJ Kai

47:16as well as our land steward Dan Cahill.

47:19And Dan or VJ, are you going to lead the

47:23discussion on introducing this item?

47:24>> Uh, yeah, I will.

47:26>> Great.

47:31All right, good evening everyone.

47:33So, uh, Burlington's original vegetation

47:36ordinance, uh, was written in 1962, then

47:40nom nominally updated in 1995.

47:43Uh, updating this outdated and

47:46inadequate ordinance was one of the top

47:48recommended implementation actions of

47:50the open space plan that was adopted in

47:53December of 2025 by council. So once we

47:57adopted the open space plan, uh this was

48:00one of the first actions we jumped right

48:01into. Um, and under the leadership of

48:03Scott Gustin, uh, from DPI, uh, we

48:07jumped into, I guess, a a working group

48:10that was comp has been comprised of

48:13myself, um, city land steward, VJ Kai,

48:17city arborist, Sophie Sove, the planning

48:20division director at parks and wreck,

48:22Elise Shadler, who's the director of the

48:24Vermont urban and community forestry

48:26program, and Jacob Holsburg Pill, he's

48:29the current president of Branch Out

48:31Burlington. and a Burlington resident.

48:34So that all started early in 2026.

48:38Um and once we felt we had a good draft,

48:41we went to the ordinance committee for

48:43early feedback. Um then we went on to

48:46park commission and conservation board

48:48twice

48:50for review and between any all those

48:53different public meetings we met as

48:54committees to integrate any of the

48:56feedback and discussions that happened

48:58in those bodies. So, at this time, we

49:01feel that the ordinance is ready to go

49:03uh to the ordinance committee for a deep

49:06dive, and we're just really excited.

49:08This is a big step for Burlington.

49:12>> Thank you, Dan. PJ, no pressure, but

49:15anything else to add or

49:17>> uh I I don't really have anything to add

49:20except that we did have a public uh

49:22information meeting about a week ago at

49:24Keelick Park.

49:27So great.

49:29>> Uh, thank you for all the work on it.

49:31It's a super group of people you put

49:33together. So, um, councelor Bergman, as

49:36chair of the ordinance committee, could

49:37I ask you for a motion on the

49:40recommended action?

49:41>> Yes. So, I'd move to wave the first

49:44reading and refer it to the ordinance

49:46committee where we will be happy to take

49:48it up.

49:50>> Thank you. Is there a second to that

49:52motion?

49:53>> Second by councelor Barlo. Uh, councelor

49:56Bergman, did you want to speak to the

49:57item at all?

49:59>> Only to say we did have a first uh look

50:01through, made some suggestions. Um, and

50:05uh we'll do the uh the line by line that

50:09we do with these ordinances. And so uh

50:12just encourage everybody who is

50:13interested in uh not only vegetation

50:17generally but climate change and

50:19assorted other essential things that get

50:21wrapped around this to um to come and

50:24participate in that. So thank you.

50:28>> Thank you.

50:28>> Thank you.

50:30>> Any counselors have other questions or

50:32comments on this item?

50:35Council Broadick.

50:37>> Thank you. Um, for the sake of the

50:40public, um, would you want to, uh, give

50:43a run through of the the highlights of

50:45the amendments that you're seeking to be

50:47made to the ordinance?

50:50>> Sure.

50:53>> So, um, the first thing that the

50:55ordinance does is to lay out a bunch of

50:58definitions so things are clearly

51:00defined. Uh the previous ordinance

51:04did not speak at all to a a critical

51:07component of our urban forest which is

51:10our conserved wildlands and woodlands

51:13and the unique vegetation that exists

51:15there. So this has rolled into that. It

51:18clearly defines my role as city arborist

51:21as well as Dan's role as city land

51:25steward respective to

51:28the properties that we or the parts of

51:31the city that we each manage. Um

51:36not as far as uh

51:40well we can get down in the details.

51:42Pull it up if if you really want to hear

51:44it.

51:45Another thing that this ordinance does

51:48is has a definitions area. Um, so that's

51:52new. Um, also

51:56this isn't new, but something of note

51:58which is interesting is that the

52:00original ordinance does prohibit tying

52:03horses to trees and we decided to keep

52:05that.

52:09It also clearly

52:12it also clearly addresses issues

52:15pertaining to uh vegetation on private

52:19properties that are encroaching on city

52:21rightways. So, as city arborist, I

52:24routinely get cclick fixes or viewwork

52:27requests for, you know, sidewalks being

52:29partially blocked by somebody's hedge or

52:32private vegetation. And that causes

52:34safety issues, sighteline issues at

52:37street intersections. So, we address

52:40that and the responsibility of the land

52:42owner or the property owner to take care

52:44of that. Um

52:47as far as tree removal

52:51that is still um

52:55tree removal is still

52:57I don't know what the right word is

52:59covered under the uh comprehensive

53:04development.

53:06So, so if somebody wants to do a

53:09development and there's going to be tree

53:11removal, if there's so many trees over a

53:14certain diameter, it triggers a permit

53:16process. Has to go before the DRB. The

53:20conservation commission gets to weigh

53:22in. Um it does set

53:27uh reparations for tree removal in those

53:30cases and that is on a u caliper forc

53:35caliper basis or or diameter. So say

53:38you're removing 100 in of diameter of

53:42trees. It spells out that you need to

53:45replace that

53:48equal to that. So say you were taking

53:50out 100 inches, you could you could

53:52plant the equivalent in two inches trees

53:55two inch trees either onsite or offsite.

53:59So in other words, we need canopy in

54:01other parts of the city. You know, there

54:03there is a housing challenge that the

54:05mayor spoke to. So how are we finding

54:07that balance? Right? So if trees are

54:11removed in one spot, you can pay into a

54:13fund or you can pay or you can buy trees

54:16to be planted elsewhere in the city at

54:20our with our guidance. It may be in

54:23public park spaces. It may be in areas

54:26that they're going to reforest or so

54:29forth. Um trying to think out what else

54:33is new in there. It It's worth a deep

54:36dive. There's there's quite a bit in

54:38there. So

54:41>> there's also a section on the process

54:44for requesting removal of plant

54:46materials from public spaces. Um and

54:48that's become more important. Um native

54:51plants are really important, right? And

54:53so there's more and more groups that are

54:55interested in collecting seeds and using

54:57those to propagate native plants. Um and

55:00in some cases there's for-profit driven

55:02entities out there um who are looking to

55:04take seeds and plant materials and germ

55:07plasm from spaces and use those for

55:10profit. Right? So it defines the process

55:13if and under what conditions you can

55:15remove materials like that and the

55:17process for requesting that. Um and

55:20while it's important to propagate native

55:22plants, it's also important to leave

55:24seeds for their natural purposes and for

55:26wildlife um and for um yeah eco

55:31ecological purposes.

55:35The ordinance also establishes

55:37[clears throat]

55:38the conservation commission as sort of

55:41an oversight board for the work that Dan

55:44and I do on the respective parts of the

55:46city that we manage. So in other words,

55:49they will be our sounding board. We will

55:52go to them annually or bianually talk

55:55about our our work plans, our overall

55:57visions. They will also be u

56:02um a stage for public forums to discuss

56:06these sort of things. So that that's new

56:10>> and that it was the parks commission

56:12previously. Um and both of those bodies

56:14were friendly and agreed that this was a

56:16good change. Conservation Board um is

56:19the entity right now that reviews uh

56:22storm water as it relates to development

56:24um and also tree cutting as it relates

56:28to a private like contract. So they're

56:30already in the business of doing that.

56:32So it's kind of aligning the background

56:33and the skills of that commission more

56:36more thoughtfully.

56:39>> Great. Thank you.

56:42>> Thank you councelor Broadick. Any other

56:43counselors with comments or questions at

56:45this time?

56:48All right. Well, a lot of good work

56:50ahead of us. Thank you for the overview,

56:52both of you. We'll go to a vote on the

56:54motion to refer to committee. All in

56:57favor, please say I.

56:58>> I.

57:00>> Any opposed?

57:02>> That is unanimous. So, thanks again to

57:04you and the rest of your committee

57:05members.

57:05>> Thank you.

57:09>> All right, we'll turn now to item 7.6.

57:11This is a work session regarding the

57:13Vermont Overdose Prevention Center and

57:15service assessment report update. I do

57:19believe we have a number of guests here

57:21in attendance, but the CEDO director

57:23Carla Alnos Rawi will be leading us off

57:26if I'm not mistaken.

57:29>> Great.

57:31>> Yeah, please. So, take your time and

57:33Carla, whenever you're ready.

57:34>> Okay.

57:35>> Uh, we'll hand the floor to you.

57:42>> [clears throat]

57:51>> Good.

57:52>> I think that's fine. Is Bella

57:54>> She's coming back. She's just grabbing.

57:56>> Okay.

57:57>> And we're going to log in and uh share

57:59slides. Um all right. While my friends

58:04here are getting set up. Good evening.

58:07Cara Alnrai, director of CEDO. Um, the

58:11purpose of today's work session is to

58:15give an update on the status of the

58:17overdose prevention center OPC uh

58:20project. Um, in this update, we're

58:23hoping to review the results of the

58:25service assessment study, um, which was

58:29researched and prepared by our

58:32consultants, uh, the PY group. Um,

58:35[snorts] also noting that service

58:37assessment is posted on civic civic

58:40clerk along with the slides that we're

58:42going to share. [snorts] Um, another

58:44purpose of this evening is to introduce

58:47slash reintroduce um, VCJR, Vermonters

58:52for Criminal Justice Reform. Um, these

58:55are the three individuals who I will uh,

58:59give you their names shortly. Um, to

59:01talk about the work they do. VCJR was

59:04chosen as our service provider through

59:07an RFP process. Um, and they were chosen

59:10due to their deep work in the field. Um,

59:14of importance to note as you listen to

59:17the presentation is that they already do

59:21all the work required by the state state

59:24legislation that enabled enables the OPC

59:28and its establishment. everything except

59:31obviously on-site consumption. Um, so

59:35that's just a testament to their

59:37expertise in the field. Um, and we're

59:39also going to review the public

59:41engagement we've done thus far and our

59:44current public engagement which is um,

59:47essentially these slides that you're

59:49going to see that we've been doing with

59:51the MPAs thus far. Um, so before handing

59:55it over, let me introduce everyone who's

59:57with me today. I have Tom Dalton on the

1:00:00far end of the table. He is the

1:00:01executive director of VCJR. Next to him

1:00:04is Jess Kirby. She is the director of

1:00:07client services and the director of the

1:00:10OPC itself. And next to me is Bella Fern

1:00:14who will uh who is the deputy director

1:00:16of the OPC. Uh I also have with me from

1:00:19the city team Rebecca Reese.

1:00:22She is our homelessness and public

1:00:24health manager. and Tamar Buchard

1:00:28behind me um who is the city's OPC

1:00:33um grant and project manager. Um I just

1:00:37want to highlight tomorrow just for a

1:00:39moment. Tomorrow's hire represents for

1:00:42us the next phase in this project. Um,

1:00:46you have all previously been introduced

1:00:48to Terresa Visena who was hired on a on

1:00:53a short-term basis to help the city um

1:00:56sort through the legislation that um

1:00:59came down from the state. Uh she helped

1:01:01us launch the project. She helped us

1:01:04hire hire consultants and she's also the

1:01:07one who helped us get VCJR on board.

1:01:10Now, she's actually doing that work for

1:01:13other cities nationwide and has left the

1:01:17city and that's why we have Tamar who's

1:01:19helping us manage the grant. Um, after

1:01:23they give the presentations, I'd like

1:01:25the microphone back for a few more

1:01:26statements and then we'll go to

1:01:28questions.

1:01:31[clears throat]

1:01:33Should I slide this all the way over?

1:01:35Okay. All right.

1:01:38Will it come this far? Yeah, certainly.

1:01:40Okay.

1:01:43Okay. Hi everyone. Uh I'm Jess Kirby.

1:01:48Goosebumps. I get nervous with public

1:01:50speaking. Um Bella, are you going to

1:01:52help me flip the slides? Okay. So, um we

1:01:55are going to try to not um take up too

1:01:57much of your time telling you all about

1:01:59our services just because we've been

1:02:01here before um and we want to save time

1:02:03to tell you about the service assessment

1:02:04and lots about our progress and

1:02:06community engagement. So, I will and

1:02:09also somebody give me a this if I've

1:02:11been getting told at the MPA by the

1:02:13camera guy um that um I'm going too

1:02:16fast. So, I asked him at the end of the

1:02:17last one, I really tried to go slower.

1:02:19How did I do? And he said not good. So,

1:02:22I'm really working on that.

1:02:23>> You won't do that. But

1:02:25>> that's Charlie. So,

1:02:26>> yeah.

1:02:27>> So, we're okay.

1:02:29>> Yeah, he's on it.

1:02:31>> So, um do you want to slip? So, um at

1:02:34VCJR we have a walk-in program. It's a

1:02:36walk-in re-entry and recovery center um

1:02:39serving people with substance use

1:02:40disorders. We've served um over 450

1:02:43people. It's probably over 500 at this

1:02:45point. Um and we really just wanted to

1:02:49show you a couple slides that just

1:02:50really highlight the high-risisk nature

1:02:52of the people that we're working with.

1:02:54Um I won't go through all the data

1:02:55points, but you can see here that, you

1:02:57know, most of the people that we're

1:02:58working with are either unhoused um and

1:03:01sleeping outside or temporary or

1:03:03unstably housed. So that could be in a

1:03:05hotel or in a shelter, something that

1:03:06could change night by night. Um people

1:03:09who are using both a lot of stimulants

1:03:11and a lot of opioids. Um and um those

1:03:14are um all data points that we collected

1:03:16at intake. So um these ones are you know

1:03:20um you know especially scary and have to

1:03:22do with health issues. Um 80% of the

1:03:24people we were working with at intake

1:03:25reported a history of serious wounds,

1:03:27blood infections or endocarditis. Um

1:03:30endocarditis is a serious heart

1:03:31infection that people often get. um when

1:03:34they have an infection that goes

1:03:36untreated for too long and and goes to

1:03:38their bloodstream and um eventually

1:03:40affects their heart valves um it's um

1:03:43you know something that as you can see a

1:03:45lot of people have dealt with and um is

1:03:47very life-threatening. Um 29% had um

1:03:51current wounds or infections at intake.

1:03:53Um there's a few more data points here

1:03:55that just tell you about um how high

1:03:57risk the people we're working with are.

1:03:5982% at intake reported a history of

1:04:01overdose. um almost 50% had one in the

1:04:04past six months of intake. Um so pretty

1:04:08high-risisk folks we're working with. Um

1:04:10some of the services we currently

1:04:11provide that Cara was um talking about a

1:04:13little bit is um we have very robust

1:04:15services. Um I'm a person with lived

1:04:17experience with opioid use disorder

1:04:18myself. I know how important having very

1:04:22low barrier services that people can

1:04:23just rely on are open every day with

1:04:26staff that I know um that um they're

1:04:28going to help me with whatever I walk in

1:04:30the door with. That's really what people

1:04:32who um are experienc a lot of

1:04:34experiencing a lot of chaos in their

1:04:36life and struggling to have their basic

1:04:37needs met. They really need like just to

1:04:39know I come to a place with people I

1:04:41trust and they'll help me with what I

1:04:42need. So that's really what we try to

1:04:44do. Um so we have walk-in case

1:04:45management um on-site drug treatment. Uh

1:04:48we do transportation from the

1:04:50correctional facility to inpatient

1:04:52treatment to medical appointments to the

1:04:53ER to the hospital. Um we like last week

1:04:58um you know our staff brought three

1:05:00people to uh Serenity House or Valley

1:05:03Vista. There are not a lot of programs

1:05:05doing that type of work. It requires a

1:05:06lot of staff time, but it's also really

1:05:08important and transportation is a huge

1:05:09barrier to people being able to access

1:05:12these services. So it's something we

1:05:13really prioritize. So from helping

1:05:15people make the first phone call to

1:05:16treatment to having someone to call back

1:05:18if you have to leave a voicemail to

1:05:20helping you collect the documents you

1:05:22need to send to them. um you know

1:05:24sometimes people need affidavits, they

1:05:26need medical records, all sorts of

1:05:27things that end up being barriers to

1:05:28people being able to to go. So um we

1:05:31really try to um you know help people

1:05:34from the first step all the way to

1:05:36getting there. Um and then and then what

1:05:38happens after. So um [snorts] we some of

1:05:42these services it's just important to

1:05:43say um that we have a uh low barrier um

1:05:47partnership for to provide low barrier

1:05:50medical services with Johnson Health

1:05:51Center. They are an awesome Laria

1:05:53provider. We're so lucky to have them.

1:05:55We really uh started working with them

1:05:57quite naturally just because we had we

1:05:59had a lot of people coming in all of a

1:06:01sudden with serious wounds a few years

1:06:02ago and weren't connecting to

1:06:04traditional systems of care and I

1:06:06reached out to Caroline Butler at

1:06:08Johnson Health Center. We had worked

1:06:09together at the Howard Center previously

1:06:11and um just said, "Hey, do you have any

1:06:13capacity to see people? We have a lot of

1:06:14people with wounds and people are

1:06:15getting really really sick." Uh and she

1:06:18said yes um I can probably do that a

1:06:20half a day a week and it's turned into a

1:06:22lot more than that with a lot of people

1:06:23in a in a full partnership now but you

1:06:26know so they do the medical aspect side

1:06:28helping people with buponorphine mental

1:06:29health medications um wound care a lot

1:06:32of wound care um all sorts of things uh

1:06:35long acting inject injectable forms of

1:06:37buponorphine which are um really

1:06:39important and really help pro protect

1:06:41people from overdose and um uh long

1:06:44acting injectables for uh mental health,

1:06:48which is really important. People lose

1:06:49their medications all the time. We

1:06:50really have like some game-changing

1:06:52situations where people who really need

1:06:54access to mental mental health

1:06:55medications for things like psychosis

1:06:58and things that really impact their

1:06:59lives and even the community and um but

1:07:03have trouble taking medication every

1:07:04day, lose their meds, lose their

1:07:06backpack. It's hard to get them

1:07:07replaced. So having people on um you

1:07:10know a long acting through an injection

1:07:12is super uh makes sense for people that

1:07:15really struggle with those things and

1:07:16we're really happy and you know proud to

1:07:18be providing that stuff. So um we also

1:07:21have drug checking. Uh we do harm

1:07:23reduction services and supplies. Um we I

1:07:27mentioned a lot of these things already

1:07:29but you know SDI testing and treatment

1:07:31um with Johnson Health Center. Uh

1:07:35lots of stuff pretty much everything

1:07:37everyone needs. Uh you know they come in

1:07:39we'll help them with it. Uh so do you

1:07:41want to take over on this one?

1:07:42>> Yeah.

1:07:43>> Um hi everyone just to tell you my this

1:07:45my name is Bella Fern. Uh really excited

1:07:47to be here. So we'll just quickly go

1:07:49over what the overdose prevention center

1:07:51will provide which is a lot of what

1:07:52we're already doing. Um adding on

1:07:54supervised consumption and overdose

1:07:56monitoring and response. Um that's that

1:07:58extra component and we're hoping to

1:08:00expand our services as well. um had more

1:08:03staff doing more of these items because

1:08:04there is a true need to this. Um a

1:08:07couple other items I'll just mention is

1:08:08drug checking, on-site treatment, um

1:08:10including medications for opioid use

1:08:12disorder, hazardous waste disposal, lots

1:08:14of educational resources, um and help

1:08:16accessing folks to drug treatment,

1:08:18mental health care, and other wraparound

1:08:19services.

1:08:22Um we wanted to point out a um overdose

1:08:25prevention center in the United States,

1:08:26one of them. It's actually the first uh

1:08:28nation state sanctioned OPC um which

1:08:31opened in 2024 December. Um it's in

1:08:34Providence, Rhode Island. We're actually

1:08:36lucky enough to have partnered with them

1:08:38um and we're receiving technical

1:08:39assistance. So they are supporting us in

1:08:41implementation. Um additionally, just

1:08:44some statistics I wanted to bring up

1:08:45from their space. Um since they have

1:08:48opened, they've had zero fatal

1:08:50overdoses.

1:08:51um just the first nine months, 653

1:08:56unique people were served over 6,619

1:08:59visits. So, a lot of those people were

1:09:01they were able to access a lot of those

1:09:03people and take care of those needs um

1:09:05consistently, which was really

1:09:06fantastic. 4,000 referrals to treatment,

1:09:08peer support, case management. Um and

1:09:10then just to kind of jump down to the

1:09:12bottom, Rhode Island um went from 436

1:09:16overdose deaths in 2022 to 219. they

1:09:20actually surpassed their 2020 excuse me

1:09:232030 goal um and to hit a 50 to hit a

1:09:2630% reduction um this year or last year

1:09:29in 2025 rather they hit a 50% reduction

1:09:32in overdose death um in part due to a

1:09:34lot of the work that the overdose

1:09:36prevention center is doing in Providence

1:09:37Rhode Island. So just a lot of really

1:09:39fantastic results if you are interested

1:09:41to take a look inside of an overdose

1:09:43prevention center. This isn't the video

1:09:44for Rhode Island, but it is for OnPoint

1:09:46NYC in New York City, and it's a really

1:09:48great glimpse uh glimpse rather into

1:09:50what they're doing.

1:09:52Okay, so this is why we're here to talk

1:09:54to you folks today. So, we wanted to

1:09:56talk a little bit about the service

1:09:57assessment that was conducted with um

1:09:59Pacific Institute for Research

1:10:00Evaluation. We'll refer to them as Py

1:10:02throughout this presentation.

1:10:04um the Rochester criminal justice reform

1:10:06as well as the mayor's office and the

1:10:08city went in um to contract with them

1:10:11and partnered with them to gather input

1:10:14um on the people using substances in the

1:10:16community as well as community members

1:10:17and first responders to really support

1:10:19planning and implementation of the

1:10:21overdose prevention center in

1:10:22Burlington. Um just a couple of things

1:10:25they had found in the service assessment

1:10:28um was about substance use. So there was

1:10:3049 folks in the community that were

1:10:32specifically surveyed between the months

1:10:34of October and March of last year um who

1:10:37are currently using substances in our

1:10:39community. And some of the some of the

1:10:41information we gathered was 96% reported

1:10:44smoking or inhaling substances within

1:10:46the last 30 days. 53% reported

1:10:49injecting. so on. Just a few more, 80%

1:10:53were experiencing homelessness,

1:10:54indicating um that they were unsheltered

1:10:57or living outdoors in public spaces. Um

1:10:59and then health conditions, uh all but

1:11:02two respondents reported having at least

1:11:04one chronic health condition um which is

1:11:07just really heartbreaking um and really

1:11:09important for us to be able to work with

1:11:10those folks and support them in that

1:11:12way. Um and then I think this is also me

1:11:15as well. Yes. A second part of the um so

1:11:18another part of the survey was um 49% of

1:11:21these people 92% responded um and that

1:11:24they would consider using the overdose

1:11:26prevention center when it opens and 73%

1:11:30um would say they'd use it all or most

1:11:32of the time indicating that the folks

1:11:34that we are um surveying are really um

1:11:38eager to utilize this really important

1:11:40public health service. Um and then just

1:11:42a couple of um statistics brought up or

1:11:44some fa factual evidence brought up in

1:11:46the survey was that um where these

1:11:48people would mo most who are utilizing

1:11:50the space where they use currently 96%

1:11:53said they use indoors um rather than in

1:11:55a public space they would rather use

1:11:57indoors than public space and the

1:11:59statistics go on from there. Um just a

1:12:01quick note participants could select

1:12:03more than one option which is why it

1:12:04doesn't add up to 100%. Jess did you

1:12:06want to add something? I was just going

1:12:06to just clarify that that meant that

1:12:08that was one of the 96% of people said

1:12:11that that would be one of the main

1:12:12reasons they would use an OPC would be

1:12:13to use indoors rather than public.

1:12:15>> Thanks Jesse. I appreciate that.

1:12:18>> Um just a couple more statistics. This

1:12:20is information. This is full will be

1:12:21available for all city counselors as

1:12:23well as the public to view as well. So

1:12:25um and then the second part of the

1:12:26service assessment was from last year

1:12:28November to December um a communitywide

1:12:31survey which was conducted um about 1500

1:12:35people in the community were surveyed um

1:12:3874% identified as Burlington residents,

1:12:4245% working in Burlington. So a lot of

1:12:45people working and living in Burlington

1:12:46each day um and spending a lot of time

1:12:48in our community.

1:12:50Um nope, I did the right thing there.

1:12:52Great. Thank you. Um, and then so this

1:12:55is from the community survey as well.

1:12:57Will an overdose prevention center be

1:12:58helpful in our community? Um, and the

1:13:01largest majority of selected answers was

1:13:04strongly agree at 31.7%.

1:13:06Um, and then strongly disagree was at 14

1:13:09um. 62 and then there's a myriad of in

1:13:12between. But this really indicated that

1:13:14our community um or this has told us our

1:13:16community is really eager um that this

1:13:18will help support a lot of the needs

1:13:19that they're facing or seeing in their

1:13:20community as well.

1:13:24Um, and then finally from the community

1:13:26survey, um, community survey

1:13:28respondents, um, where they would

1:13:30believe an overdose prevention center is

1:13:31most effective. I will note that maps

1:13:34weren't paired, um, with this survey.

1:13:36So, a lot of these um, you know,

1:13:39downtown, Riverside, these are really

1:13:40large areas. So, when we look at this

1:13:42data, we have to remember that um, 43%

1:13:44saying downtown, that was not

1:13:46necessarily defined. Um, Riverside,

1:13:49North End, and so on. So that's the data

1:13:51from that.

1:13:53>> Okay.

1:13:55>> Uh sure. Um so some of the factors that

1:13:58will determine location. Um you know

1:14:00that's information being taken from I

1:14:02think we talked about a little on this

1:14:03next one too, didn't we? Um no maybe

1:14:06not. I think maybe we took it out. But

1:14:08um you know one of the you know key

1:14:11factors to look at is what we learned

1:14:13from the service assessment. That was

1:14:14kind of the point of doing this is like

1:14:16where you know what do community members

1:14:18have concerns about? What do community

1:14:19members want to see in the OPC? Where do

1:14:21they want to see it? What do people

1:14:22think will be most effective? Both from

1:14:24people who um have living experience and

1:14:26are likely to use a site and from

1:14:28community members. And so um you know,

1:14:31one of the um you know main main things

1:14:35that I think that is important to think

1:14:37about is that where people are currently

1:14:39using drugs now. And we learned this in

1:14:41the service assessment which I think

1:14:43says like so much about why we need an

1:14:45OPC. And you know, we know we need an

1:14:48OPC because people are dying from

1:14:49overdose death. We also want to see an

1:14:51OPC because we want to help

1:14:54[clears throat] minimize some of the,

1:14:56you know, community issues that are

1:14:58going on because people who are homeless

1:15:00and living outside, have substance use

1:15:02disorder, as we saw from a, you know,

1:15:04slide like two slides ago, are not, you

1:15:06know, wanting to be using outside. That

1:15:08is not their preference. But so, you

1:15:09know, things to be thinking about um are

1:15:12where people are currently using drugs.

1:15:1370% of people said that they are using

1:15:16outside like a park or an alley. Um 43%

1:15:20said that they were using sometimes in a

1:15:21public building. Um 67% said they were

1:15:24using in a vehicle. And um you know 57%

1:15:28public restrooms. Like I think this just

1:15:30says a lot about where people are

1:15:32currently using drugs. And you know it

1:15:35it makes me remember when I was really

1:15:37struggling you know having overdoses in

1:15:38my car alone. you know, um struggling to

1:15:41find places that I would hope would be

1:15:43safer, like what parking lot I could use

1:15:45in um you know, where I would hope

1:15:48somebody might find me, like leaving my

1:15:50car door open and not click shut, hoping

1:15:51that if I overdose, I would fall and

1:15:53somebody would see me, you know, and it

1:15:55just brings me back remembering like the

1:15:57things that people try to do to avoid

1:15:58overdose and how dangerous it really is

1:16:00and how um really limited people feel

1:16:03for options. So, that's, you know, one

1:16:05of the things that comes up here.

1:16:07[clears throat] I think you were going

1:16:08back to

1:16:08>> Absolutely. So um what we are what are

1:16:10we doing to prepare for sighting and

1:16:12implementation? Uh we've been doing a

1:16:14lot of work over these last 10 months.

1:16:16Uh working with the state and city on

1:16:18grant compliance um with the deer

1:16:20Vermont Department of Health guidelines

1:16:21and operation. Um we've been doing that

1:16:23since December developing job

1:16:25descriptions partnering with project

1:16:27Weber Renew as I said before on

1:16:28technical assistant. Um we are working

1:16:30with a real litterer to assist us with

1:16:32site acquisition and then we are

1:16:34partnering um Brown University has been

1:16:37very generous and is we are partnering

1:16:39with them to develop a participant data

1:16:40system because we believe collecting

1:16:42data at the overdose prevention center

1:16:43of participants will be very valuable

1:16:45information moving forward.

1:16:49>> I think this one's your

1:16:50>> Yeah, absolutely. Um yeah, so just some

1:16:52of the we've already been doing a lot of

1:16:53community engagement and eager to do

1:16:55more, but something we've um really put

1:16:57a lot of focus on is engaging with the

1:16:59neighborhood planning assemblies in each

1:17:00ward. We've been to every single ward at

1:17:03least um once, many twice. Um so these

1:17:06are just some of those dates that we've

1:17:08gone. And in these spaces, we're not

1:17:09just doing a presentation where we're

1:17:11talking at them. We are gathering

1:17:12information. We are answering questions.

1:17:14We are taking comments. I can definitely

1:17:16say with confidence every single time we

1:17:18leave um an MPA meeting I change the

1:17:20slide deck completely um and do a lot of

1:17:23changing uh to respond to that community

1:17:25feedback.

1:17:27So, um, one of the other main, um, you

1:17:32know, sectors that we're looking at for

1:17:33community engagement is engagement was

1:17:35engaging with service providers, wanting

1:17:36to hear from other service providers in

1:17:38Burlington and, uh, you know, other

1:17:40experts in our community about what they

1:17:42have concerns about, what they want to

1:17:43see, um, you know, getting their

1:17:45feedback, um, talking about

1:17:46collaborations. Um so this is just a

1:17:48list of um you know some and honestly

1:17:51all of this community engagement stuff

1:17:53that we're citing it says and many more

1:17:55because there are many many more on each

1:17:57of these but we're just you know picking

1:17:59out some to to talk about but so you

1:18:02know we've um engaged with turning point

1:18:04um been to the situation table Brown

1:18:06University lots of engagement with UVM

1:18:08um medical students different providers

1:18:11um uh you know women's health um you

1:18:15know addiction med providers um

1:18:17infection ious disease providers and

1:18:18students. Um and so we've done a lot of

1:18:21um a lot of outreach and engaging in um

1:18:24you know talking about the OPC with with

1:18:26UVM with um CBOE um Bridges Johnson

1:18:30Health Center um the Chitten Clinic so

1:18:33many so many more. So we've we've really

1:18:36done a lot of that.

1:18:37>> Yeah. And then we've also um been and

1:18:39will continue to do community engagement

1:18:41with stakeholders at stakeholder events.

1:18:42So city council engagement, we're here

1:18:44right now. Hi. um overdose awareness uh

1:18:47day where we do we did some tableabling

1:18:48that the last time we did that was a

1:18:50couple of weeks ago um we've testified

1:18:52at the legislature done outreach with

1:18:53key legislators um marketplace

1:18:56commission meeting community um webinars

1:18:58facilitated by OPC experts VCJR and the

1:19:01city had partnered on that um Chitten

1:19:04County youth defenders office and many

1:19:06more

1:19:07>> and we're planning another um we're

1:19:09we're planning another webinar um which

1:19:11we're really excited about and we will

1:19:14be sharing dates and um details in the

1:19:16coming weeks. Uh did this

1:19:18>> Yeah, and this is just more upcoming

1:19:19after this event tonight. So, more N MPA

1:19:22really excited to work um and go to

1:19:23Decker Towers um and more community

1:19:26groups uh the state's attorney's office.

1:19:28Um there will be a neighborhood

1:19:29assessment uh location specific

1:19:31outreach. So, a door hacking campaign

1:19:33and a lot of other outreach um for the

1:19:36areas where um an overdose prevention

1:19:37center will be, as well as um like Jess

1:19:40said, we'll be coordinating with the

1:19:41city again to do another webinar,

1:19:42citywide webinar to give that

1:19:44information out.

1:19:45>> And of course, you know, we're going to

1:19:46be engaging with law enforcement and uh

1:19:49EMS and more community stakeholders and

1:19:52residents and um you know, lots more

1:19:54community engagement to come, especially

1:19:56on specific um you know, outreach on

1:19:58specific locations. So,

1:20:02Great. And then just um factors that

1:20:04contribute to our timeline. So we have

1:20:07had our contract since December, which I

1:20:09believe has been 10 months. Um so these

1:20:11are just some of the factors that have

1:20:12contributed to the timeline in the phase

1:20:14that we're currently at. Um citing and

1:20:16identifying appropriate building within

1:20:17Burlington, building financing,

1:20:19finalizing financing, ownership,

1:20:21funding, um legislative requirements,

1:20:24city requirements, um zoning soon to

1:20:27come, um and multiple approvals from

1:20:29different coordinators. I will just say

1:20:31the city and VCJR as of recently um

1:20:33partnering with Py again to assess the

1:20:35feasibility of an additional hybrid an

1:20:38additional um hybrid mobile option. Um

1:20:40and those updates we'll share when we

1:20:42are through that evaluation process.

1:20:45I

1:20:46>> think we're getting there.

1:20:46>> I think that's it. Yeah,

1:20:48>> I'm gonna I'm just going to take the mic

1:20:50back for a sec

1:20:51>> and then we'll open for counselor

1:20:53questions if that's okay.

1:20:55Um

1:20:57uh just wanted to reiterate that last

1:20:59point that we um recently signed an

1:21:02extension on the Py contract to review

1:21:06um a a mobile option. Um and we'll get

1:21:10that feedback and share that with you

1:21:12when we have it. Um, in terms of the

1:21:15webinar and and an educational session

1:21:17that we're planning for the public, um,

1:21:19that would be virtual and here, I just

1:21:22wanted to note that we will have Weber

1:21:24Renew there, the operators of the Rhode

1:21:27Island OPC and we will also have Dr.

1:21:30Brandon Marshall from Brown University

1:21:32here who is leading who I think has been

1:21:35mentioned a couple times in public forum

1:21:37um who is leading a groundbreaking NIH

1:21:41uh funded study that is evaluating OPC's

1:21:44and their efficacy. Um, before I open to

1:21:48uh questions, I wanted council and the

1:21:52public to know that BCJR has signed an

1:21:56LOI, a letter of intent on um a

1:22:00location, a possible site location

1:22:02within the city. Um, I want to clarify

1:22:06that an LOI is nonbinding. I repeat,

1:22:10absolutely nonbinding.

1:22:13It is also confidential. All that it

1:22:16does at this point is ensure that uh

1:22:20this property will not be on the market

1:22:22for 90 days. During that period of time,

1:22:26we will be doing a feasibility study.

1:22:29There is a very real possibility that

1:22:32this location will not be a good fit for

1:22:36this use. That is the reason we are not

1:22:38discussing the actual location right

1:22:41now. As you may remember,

1:22:43there was a possible location identified

1:22:46this past winter and that was also

1:22:49deemed nonviable. We want a location

1:22:52that um first we need to see if it is in

1:22:57the proper location, fits proper uses,

1:23:00is easily accessible, is least impactful

1:23:03on the community.

1:23:05um we don't disclose the location

1:23:08publicly until we can assess whether

1:23:11it's a viable option. Uh in my opinion

1:23:14it would be um way too disruptive to

1:23:18start speaking about actual locations

1:23:21when there is as I said a real

1:23:23possibility that they won't be viable.

1:23:27Um, again, should let's say in this

1:23:3090-day period, we do determine that this

1:23:34location possibly could be a good

1:23:37location, then there are many, many

1:23:39steps before the location is actually

1:23:43secured. Those steps include a robust

1:23:47public engagement process, including, as

1:23:49Bella noted, a door knocking campaign

1:23:52within the area of the location. I will

1:23:56also note there is this use is not

1:24:00currently zoned in the city of

1:24:01Burlington. The planning commission is

1:24:03taking up this topic next month in

1:24:06October. So even if we have a location

1:24:09that we perhaps are looking at to test

1:24:11its feasibility, we don't even know what

1:24:14the planning commission how they will be

1:24:17managing the zoning. And of course,

1:24:19final approval for an OPC location rests

1:24:24with this body. It rests fully with city

1:24:26council.

1:24:28Now, I think we're ready for questions.

1:24:34>> Great. Thank you very much for the

1:24:36presentation, for the great slides, and

1:24:39thank you for being uh so vulnerable

1:24:42with your own personal story. I thought

1:24:44that that was very helpful. So, I

1:24:45appreciate you sharing that publicly

1:24:47here. Um,

1:24:50I suspect there are questions and

1:24:51comments from counselors who would like

1:24:53to get into the queue first.

1:24:56Councelor Newer. Thank you. And then

1:24:59councelor Carpenter.

1:25:00>> Um, I just want to say thank you so much

1:25:02for the work. It's really thorough and

1:25:04it's um, I think incredibly reassuring.

1:25:06I was really excited to see in

1:25:08particular the the extensiveness and

1:25:11sort of the thoroughess around public

1:25:12engagement. Um the idea around if we

1:25:15get, you know, a location that's even

1:25:17feasible, we're going to go doortodoor,

1:25:19talk to folks directly, have

1:25:20conversations directly, is really, I

1:25:22think, critical to making this

1:25:24successful. So, I was really, yeah, I

1:25:26was really excited to hear that. Um, and

1:25:29just the thing I wanted to point out,

1:25:30one for my fellow counselors, although

1:25:32maybe it's obvious here, according to

1:25:34your all's data, which is a survey of

1:25:361500 plus folks, the vast majority of

1:25:38folks who live here, but they work or

1:25:40own a business here or um live in our

1:25:44community, vast majority of folks I saw

1:25:47are supportive, meaning like a five or

1:25:49above. Um when asked if this is

1:25:51necessary or how important this is that

1:25:53we we cite this um my number although it

1:25:57was quick because I was trying to count

1:25:58between slides was around uh just under

1:26:0060%.

1:26:02Maybe maybe more than that. So I think

1:26:04it's uh fair to say that a a pretty

1:26:07large swath of the community want us to

1:26:09go in this direction.

1:26:11Um and then the other piece is just for

1:26:14folks who are as I know a lot of folks

1:26:16are including myself concerned with

1:26:17public drug use etc.

1:26:19This is to my mind one of the most

1:26:23effective sort of realistic tools we

1:26:25have to address uh the issue of public

1:26:28drug use in our city. And so if folks

1:26:30have concerns around that um folks have

1:26:32concerns about what's happening in our

1:26:34downtown, I think it's all the more

1:26:36reason that we've really got to get

1:26:37behind the work that you all are doing

1:26:39and and race toward implementation on

1:26:41this as quickly as possible. So just

1:26:43want to say that appreciate the work and

1:26:45uh onward and upward. Thank you.

1:26:48Thank you, councelor Nubieser. Go

1:26:50councelor Carpenter and then councelor

1:26:52Singh.

1:26:55>> Thanks. I have a um a number of

1:26:58questions probably not all related. Um I

1:27:02think I heard or know there's about 19

1:27:05OPC's in Canada and you haven't talked

1:27:08much about that. So I'm just curious if

1:27:11you relate to them. And one thing I'm

1:27:13curious about is the location of those

1:27:15centers in the Canadian towns they're

1:27:18in. And you don't have to answer that

1:27:20tonight, but I I think it would be

1:27:22interesting to poll that. I do know that

1:27:25the Rhode Island Center is in their

1:27:27hospital district. It's not in the

1:27:29central b business district. and

1:27:33some of what I've heard from others out

1:27:36there that um

1:27:39having it near and in the central

1:27:41business district does not have to

1:27:44happen. And that really is part of what

1:27:47I hear a lot. The problems we have in

1:27:50city hall park um are we've in some

1:27:55fashion turn part of the landscape into

1:27:57a social service area and it's a park.

1:28:00So I think understanding where the other

1:28:03OPC's are are important in understanding

1:28:07um the need to keep the park the park

1:28:10and where can we efficiently and you

1:28:14know put this in as part of that I also

1:28:17wanted to bring up that um

1:28:20the issues that we've had with the

1:28:23needle exchanges and again um it we're

1:28:28working on that but That's that is a

1:28:31concern I hear about the OPC that you

1:28:34need to manage the external your front

1:28:37yard, not just your inside and um that

1:28:42was certainly the rub on um Clark

1:28:45Street. There's been a some rub on Bank

1:28:49Street. And so I hope in your budget and

1:28:52you're planning

1:28:54your planning for external

1:28:56security or or whatever it is that you

1:28:59need to make that safe because I think

1:29:01that's people's probably biggest

1:29:03reticent around

1:29:06um location and where you can do it and

1:29:09and who the neighbors are or not. Um so

1:29:13I think you just got to address that

1:29:17head on. uh ho how are you going to do

1:29:19security and that will be really part

1:29:21and parcel with an appropriate um

1:29:25location.

1:29:27So those were sort of my couple of

1:29:29comments. Oh, I did mention the needle

1:29:31exchange and again the city's going to

1:29:34be looking at zoning for the needle

1:29:36exchange which is also not really um

1:29:41zoned. And it's my personal opinion that

1:29:45really that should be combined with the

1:29:47OPC that not nec we don't really need

1:29:50two locations. We're a small city. You

1:29:53know, you talked about 40 or 50 clients.

1:29:57I don't know. I mean, there's certainly

1:29:58more users than that, but um having and

1:30:02I know you don't run the New York

1:30:03Exchange, but I I really think the city

1:30:05has to think about that being combined

1:30:08because I I think two locations is a lot

1:30:11for a city this size.

1:30:14Okay,

1:30:15that was more comments, but anything you

1:30:18want to say about that, I'd appreciate.

1:30:20I will just for clarity sake I do

1:30:22appreciate your comment about combining

1:30:24the services and I'm sure you're aware

1:30:26but I'm saying for the public's sake

1:30:29that um the current safe syringe program

1:30:32that is being run by Vermont Cares what

1:30:34is a staterun program it's it's a grant

1:30:38from the state so um yeah so ju just

1:30:42recognizing that those are currently

1:30:44separate because their funding sources

1:30:45are separate but your point is well

1:30:48taken about combining the services

1:30:49thanks

1:30:50I don't know if you want to talk about

1:30:51Canada or No,

1:30:55>> go for it.

1:30:59>> I was just going to mention that um

1:31:03the the OPC guidelines from the Vermont

1:31:06Department of Health require the OPC to

1:31:08provide SSP services. So, we definitely

1:31:11will have those services combined at the

1:31:13OPC.

1:31:15um that wouldn't necessarily mean that

1:31:17there couldn't be other programs, but

1:31:18just you know to make the point that it

1:31:20is a required service and it is um a

1:31:24service that we have a lot of experience

1:31:27providing um our team here and uh I was

1:31:31also going to just say that I'm hearing

1:31:34what you're saying. We've heard what

1:31:35people in the community have been saying

1:31:37and when we look um for locations, we're

1:31:41really do trying to do a good job

1:31:42balancing

1:31:44um accessibility and respect for the

1:31:48feedback that we've been getting from

1:31:49the community. So, I'm hoping that we're

1:31:52going to find that right balance. Um but

1:31:55just wanted you to know that we have

1:31:56heard that and we are taking that into

1:31:58account. And um in terms of establishing

1:32:03trust, I think one of the things that we

1:32:06feel is going to be really helpful with

1:32:08that is that you may remember that when

1:32:11we were here last time, we mentioned a

1:32:13phased approach and that once we begin

1:32:16implementing services at the new

1:32:18location, we plan to do that for at

1:32:21least 3 to six months before

1:32:24implementing supervised consumption

1:32:25services, which will give us time to

1:32:28acclimate our client clients, uh, to

1:32:31build trust with neighbors, to develop

1:32:34relationships with nearby businesses and

1:32:37others in the community, and to train

1:32:39the new staff and to, you know, get

1:32:41ourselves ready. And there are certain

1:32:44timelines within the guidelines that

1:32:46require us to have a waiting period

1:32:48anyway. So we plan to use that by

1:32:52implementing nonsupervised consumption

1:32:55services with this population in that

1:32:58location to help build trust with the

1:33:00community so that by the time we ask to

1:33:04be able to provide supervised

1:33:07consumption services, there's a level of

1:33:09trust there because we've demonstrated

1:33:12responsible implementation of services

1:33:15in that location with this population.

1:33:20Thank you. Thank you, councelor

1:33:21Carpenter. We'll go to councelor Sing

1:33:23then Bergman. [clears throat]

1:33:24>> Uh thanks very much for the

1:33:26presentation. Really appreciate

1:33:28everybody being here and and just like

1:33:30councelor Travers I or Council President

1:33:33um I do appreciate um when folks are

1:33:36vulnerable and do share their

1:33:38experiences um with substance abuse and

1:33:41how it's affected their lives. Uh I

1:33:43think it's an important context um to

1:33:45that. And you know, I noticed in the

1:33:47executive summary, and this is just a

1:33:49general question, that people with lived

1:33:50experience emphasize that super uh

1:33:53services beyond supervised consumption

1:33:56should be optional. And I know in many

1:33:58other spaces in this country, we we've

1:34:01moved to a place where harm reduction,

1:34:04we require counseling. Uh when people

1:34:07come in and use those type of services,

1:34:10you know, I I understand that's the

1:34:12people with lived experiences. I was

1:34:14wondering um your position on that on

1:34:16whether counseling should be provided

1:34:18when somebody comes in.

1:34:20>> I'm actually super glad you brought this

1:34:21up because it's a point that I think is

1:34:23really important to us that we want

1:34:25people to hear. Uh you know, there

1:34:28always ends up being this thing that

1:34:30people think harm reductions over here

1:34:32and recovery services are over here and

1:34:34we really see ourselves, you know, as in

1:34:37the middle on that. Like we really are.

1:34:39We provide people with treatment and

1:34:41recovery services every day. We are the

1:34:44people that people come to when they are

1:34:46actively using and they aren't able to

1:34:47go access traditional recovery services,

1:34:50you know, because they have use every

1:34:52day. So, we're the people that they

1:34:53built trust with that we've been talking

1:34:55to them slowly about like, you know,

1:34:57when they come in and they're saying, "I

1:34:59can't do this anymore. I'm beat down. I

1:35:01don't know what to do. I've been in

1:35:02treatment before. I don't want to go

1:35:04back. I didn't like this. I didn't like

1:35:06that." We're taking those opportunities

1:35:07to say, "Hey, did you know this

1:35:09changed?" You know, a lot of people have

1:35:11fear about going to the methodone clinic

1:35:13because you used to have to go 365 days

1:35:14a year. So, we're looking for those

1:35:16opportunities to say, "Hey, did you know

1:35:17now that you can get every other day

1:35:19takehomes and you only have to go three

1:35:21days a week? You don't have to go on

1:35:22Christmas anymore. You know, you don't

1:35:23have to go on Thanksgiving anymore. You

1:35:24have to go on Sundays anymore." Um, you

1:35:27know, because we basically during COVID

1:35:29had a like, you know, research study on

1:35:32what happens if you give people access

1:35:34to this medication and we saw that it

1:35:35actually was really beneficial and that

1:35:37harm wasn't caused and this guy didn't

1:35:39fall. But so we're able to um we have

1:35:42those ins with people and at the OPC

1:35:44just like we do now we will be helping

1:35:47people every day with treatment and

1:35:49recovery services driving people to

1:35:50treatment helping people do the

1:35:51screenings offering counseling uh you

1:35:53know we are we do not believe that this

1:35:57that that uh OPC's or uh certain service

1:36:01programs are not a place to talk to

1:36:03people about treatment. we think the

1:36:04exact opposite that it is absolutely a

1:36:06place to talk to people about treatment

1:36:08and um that people want to talk to us

1:36:10about treatment. So um I don't know if

1:36:12that answered your question or not but I

1:36:14really wanted to make a point that that

1:36:15is very important to us and we will be

1:36:16doing a lot of treatment and recovery

1:36:18services. And then I also wanted to flag

1:36:21um you know we talked about the Browns

1:36:23the Brown study isn't finished yet. So

1:36:26we don't know 100% I believe

1:36:28Massachusetts saw a 60% decrease in

1:36:31overdose deaths in the same period

1:36:33without an OPC. And there's been other

1:36:36factors that have been here in Vermont

1:36:39public safety committee just saw that

1:36:41we're going to have the lowest substance

1:36:43use event since 2021 this year. um you

1:36:46know so I think drawing conclusions

1:36:49broadly about an OPC and its benefits at

1:36:52this moment I think is premature. I I

1:36:55also want to flag in um you know the

1:36:59survey the community survey uh when

1:37:02people were asked how satisfied you are

1:37:04with the city's approach to combating

1:37:05overdose crisis was about 70% were not

1:37:09very dissatisfied or or very

1:37:12dissatisfied or dissatisfied.

1:37:14And when asked what could the city do

1:37:16better to address the overdose crisis in

1:37:18our community, 40% of the most frequent

1:37:22response focused on need to enforce laws

1:37:25and hold people accountable for illegal

1:37:27behavior, including mention of increased

1:37:30policing with additional funding,

1:37:32arresting and prosecuting dealers or

1:37:35people who use drug and enforcing

1:37:37existing laws. So

1:37:40though um folks are are are stating

1:37:43there's broad support um for an OPC, I I

1:37:48read some of this survey as there is

1:37:50broad dissatisfaction

1:37:52uh with the opioid crisis and how we

1:37:56plan to address it. Um

1:37:59I that's just a comment if you want to

1:38:01comment on that. I I just seeing it in

1:38:04the survey, it seemed very surprising to

1:38:06me and and that we're going fullbore

1:38:08ahead with this um when I see that type

1:38:12of response from the community.

1:38:14>> Anything?

1:38:16>> I mean, I guess the only thing I would

1:38:18say is that I'm dissatisfied with the

1:38:20opioid response, too. I think that

1:38:22that's hard to know what it is about the

1:38:25response that people are dissatisfied

1:38:27with. Um, I think what it probably means

1:38:31is that they're dissatisfied with the

1:38:32status quo. And I think that this is one

1:38:35step to try something different that is

1:38:39evidence-based and I think makes sense

1:38:43in a common sense kind of way. I think

1:38:45it's common sense that if you are

1:38:48already working with a population and

1:38:50you're providing them with a range of

1:38:53services like we are case management a

1:38:56on-site access to drug treatment and

1:38:59things like that that also allowing them

1:39:03an opportunity to use in a place that

1:39:06they're not alone where there are

1:39:07professionals available to intervene if

1:39:10they experience a life-threatening

1:39:12situation. I think it's just to me it's

1:39:15a common sense thing that it will have

1:39:17value because

1:39:19often as we saw in the slide they

1:39:21otherwise would be by themselves and you

1:39:25know having worked in this field for 25

1:39:28plus years I know that um

1:39:34the the type of approach that we're

1:39:35taking of welcoming people in no matter

1:39:39where they are in the recovery process

1:39:41whether they're currently using which is

1:39:44the first phase of recovery. I mean

1:39:46people first start thinking about

1:39:48recovery while they're using and and so

1:39:52I feel very strongly that if you're as a

1:39:55program if you're not engaging people

1:39:57that are currently using you're not

1:39:59taking full advantage of the opportunity

1:40:01to help them transition to recovery

1:40:03because there are a lot of barriers

1:40:05through that process. And I think that

1:40:08um having the opportunity to to bring

1:40:11people in and give them safety while

1:40:14you're also trying to help them with

1:40:17long-term safety, which mostly has to do

1:40:19with treatment and recovery. I think

1:40:21that that's part of a continuum that

1:40:23makes sense to me. And so I I am very

1:40:26interested in the research that Brown is

1:40:28doing and that have has been done in

1:40:30other places. But I also feel very

1:40:33grounded in personal experience and

1:40:35common sense and experiences of people

1:40:38who have been through the recovery

1:40:40process. Um, so

1:40:44we feel very

1:40:48confident, I guess I would say, in the

1:40:50value of of the work that we're doing

1:40:52now and the value of this expansion in

1:40:55services. And so I I know that you would

1:40:58expect us to be believers, but we really

1:41:01[laughter] are.

1:41:04>> Thank you.

1:41:05>> Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Sing.

1:41:06We'll go to councelor Bergman and then

1:41:08Shaker and then Sanchez Parkinson.

1:41:11>> Um, [clears throat] thank you. This is

1:41:13hard work. It it it is really hard work

1:41:17uh on the soul. So, I I I just want to

1:41:20appreciate all of you, including city

1:41:23staff, who are not necessarily direct,

1:41:25but are part of this process for putting

1:41:28yourselves out there, and I appreciate

1:41:30that. I'm struck by

1:41:34four things um in in the presentation by

1:41:39the desire of people that you're seeing

1:41:41who are using not to use in public. uh

1:41:45their desire to connect with services

1:41:48and your connection uh of them with

1:41:52services. That's probably a terrible

1:41:54sentence, but I think is uh you get the

1:41:56point. um and

1:41:59the experience that you've got with uh

1:42:03people who have been incarcerated, who

1:42:05have been through the system. We have

1:42:07had a carceral system for well, I mean,

1:42:10since I was a teenager under the

1:42:13Rockefeller drug laws and the, you know,

1:42:17the Nixon war on drugs, uh tremendous

1:42:20failure in my in my understanding of

1:42:24things. So your connection with folks

1:42:28who have been incarcerated is that lived

1:42:31experience in terms of how to do this in

1:42:33a in the the right way in a different

1:42:35way. I'm I'm impressed by that. And I

1:42:37guess overarching is the um uh the fact

1:42:42that you're operating already. So I I

1:42:46got a few little follow-ups on that. Let

1:42:49me let me just start with the you know

1:42:51the the question in terms of you're

1:42:53operating already which means like you

1:42:57you're managing the exterior

1:43:00already

1:43:01right

1:43:03>> and so there there's it's not going to

1:43:06be like oh my god I'm going to have to

1:43:08figure out a way to manage it when

1:43:09you're already doing that. I just need

1:43:11public confirmation of this. Much of

1:43:13this may be rhetorical, but somebody has

1:43:16to say, you know, this is actually not a

1:43:19hypothetical. You're actually doing it.

1:43:21So, if you could just be so kind to be

1:43:23so clear.

1:43:24>> Yes. Um, sure. We care so much about

1:43:30when we start safe consumption and now

1:43:33that we care so much about being good

1:43:37neighbors and on public perception and

1:43:39on uh making sure that we manage um any

1:43:42issue that might come up. You know, Tom,

1:43:44you know, likes to laugh and tell people

1:43:46like how I am, you know, like on it, you

1:43:49know, like but I have really good

1:43:51relationships with people over a very

1:43:52very long period of time. So, I'm able

1:43:55to go out and say like, "Hey guys, you

1:43:56coming in? Are you getting going?" You

1:43:58know, like this kind of thing. And it

1:43:59works really well. And, you know, I'm

1:44:02I'm telling you that um you know, the

1:44:04the trust and the buyin that we have

1:44:07with people and um the the longtime

1:44:10relationships with people um and the

1:44:12experience we have in being able to talk

1:44:14to people about challenging issues and

1:44:16all these all all these types of things

1:44:18that can come up. Um we are committed to

1:44:20addressing things right away, anything

1:44:22that does come up. Um, seriously, we

1:44:25absolutely believe that things that go

1:44:26on nearby are things that we want to pay

1:44:28attention to and just even as community

1:44:30members and service providers in this

1:44:32area are our responsibility too. Um, and

1:44:34so yes, we are already managing that. We

1:44:37have a lot of clients as you see and

1:44:39yeah, that's part of our normal

1:44:40practice.

1:44:41>> I'm going to run out of time in almost

1:44:43two two minutes. So, I'm going to just

1:44:46ask at least one more question. I mean,

1:44:48we have got what has been, I think,

1:44:51termed a hard population to get off of

1:44:55the street, you know, like people are

1:44:57complaining about, you know, this group

1:44:59of folks that are like out in the park

1:45:01up the street there. So, I I I'm curious

1:45:05as to what your hopes and expectations

1:45:08are for getting, you know, folks who

1:45:14people are are complaining about off the

1:45:17street, you know, and into the program.

1:45:20>> Yeah. You want to take this one?

1:45:23>> Sure. I mean, [clears throat] I think

1:45:25one of the one of the key goals of the

1:45:28OPC is to give people a place to use

1:45:30that's not public

1:45:32and to help them transition to treatment

1:45:37and recovery, you know, as quickly as

1:45:40possible. Um,

1:45:44and I think that, you know, one of the

1:45:47messages that we want people to hear is

1:45:50that, you know, we we operate a recovery

1:45:52center now. We see ourselves as a

1:45:55recovery model. Um, when I I I started

1:46:00the safe recovery program at the Howard

1:46:01Center, the reason that I chose the name

1:46:04safe recovery is because I wanted to

1:46:06combine the ideas of safety, which is

1:46:09what harm reductions about, and recovery

1:46:11because a lot of harm reduction programs

1:46:14traditionally have not really made that

1:46:17connection. And so that's something that

1:46:19we see, you know, maybe differently than

1:46:22some harm reduction programs.

1:46:25And to me, what it's about is that

1:46:28treatment and recovery are forms of harm

1:46:30reduction. You know, if you can help

1:46:32people reduce and eliminate their use,

1:46:36then you've reduced a lot of harm that

1:46:38way on a long-term basis. So that type

1:46:42of a model that that t that engages

1:46:45people that are currently using and

1:46:48helping them transition to sustained

1:46:49recovery and sticking with them through

1:46:51thick and thin. So if they become

1:46:53incarcerated, if they, you know, have a

1:46:56relapse, if they run into health issues,

1:47:01um if they run into um something in

1:47:03their personal lives that might put

1:47:05their recovery at risk. You know, we

1:47:07have people that come back, you know,

1:47:09after 10, 15, 20 years because we've

1:47:13established these relationships and if

1:47:16they're struggling with something and

1:47:18they're thinking about who could I talk

1:47:19to that I will have confidentiality,

1:47:22I think that they are that they care

1:47:25about me, I think that they have, you

1:47:27know, resources and are respected in the

1:47:29community and, you know, they can reach

1:47:32out and try to make connections that I

1:47:35might not be able to make myself, a

1:47:37federal public defender, was just

1:47:39marveling at some of the work that Jess

1:47:42did this week. You know, and we hear

1:47:44that on a regular basis that people hear

1:47:47it from our clients that they work with

1:47:49in the community that they hear it

1:47:50through providers that they've heard

1:47:52about it for years and and that's what

1:47:54we're trying to bring to the OPC. That

1:47:57that's the the kind of um

1:48:00approach and you know value structure

1:48:03that we're trying to bring to the OPC.

1:48:06Thank you. I appreciate it. My time is

1:48:07up.

1:48:08>> Thank you, Councelor Bergman. We'll go

1:48:10councelor Shakar, then Sanchez

1:48:12Parkinson, and then Barlo.

1:48:14>> Thank you, President Travers. And thank

1:48:16you all, this uh great crew in front of

1:48:19us for being here. Um and and I I want

1:48:22to echo the thanks for sharing your

1:48:24personal connection to this work as

1:48:26well. Um, I I see it and I feel it and I

1:48:28appreciate it and I uh admire it deeply

1:48:31that you're able to uh give back in this

1:48:35way um and and be a part of this work.

1:48:37Um, so I'm just going to I don't want to

1:48:39run out of time, so I'm going to rattle

1:48:40off a couple things and then maybe save

1:48:43time for response um at the end. Um, the

1:48:47first is um I just want to thank you for

1:48:50the openness around pathways to recovery

1:48:52being part of the service model. I think

1:48:54one of the things that several of us up

1:48:56here when we were as a member of the

1:48:58community community community

1:48:59development and neighborhood

1:49:00revitalization committee, one of the

1:49:02things that frankly just really

1:49:04surprised me and alarmed me a bit when

1:49:06we were working on some syringe litter

1:49:07reports last year was that um with one

1:49:10of the SSPs there was like referral to

1:49:13treatment was like 2 to 3% of visits and

1:49:16so it was very very low and there was

1:49:18really no details given or understanding

1:49:20and it felt like a real missed

1:49:22opportunity to set people up for

1:49:24long-term health and success and to

1:49:26reach their fullest potential. And I

1:49:27understand the importance of meeting

1:49:29people where they're at, but I also

1:49:32don't think that helping to connect them

1:49:33to resources to lead safer and fuller

1:49:36and richer lives should be an

1:49:37afterthought. And so, um, to me, that's

1:49:40like just a real criteria for feeling,

1:49:43um, good moving forward with this is

1:49:46that this is safety is absolutely

1:49:48paramount. Um, but it's not it can't be

1:49:51the end unto itself. um ultimately

1:49:53everyone deserves their a chance to

1:49:56thrive. Um and I want to make sure that

1:49:58that's built into this and I appreciate

1:50:00um you naming that. Um I also want to

1:50:03give a quick plus one as someone who's

1:50:05spent my entire career in nonprofits and

1:50:07in the funding space of nonprofits that

1:50:09I think collaboration is key minimizing

1:50:12duplication of services and leveraging

1:50:15um funding to go further whenever

1:50:18possible. And so I appreciated the slide

1:50:20about the folks you've already been

1:50:21talking to. I think about so many of the

1:50:24providers in this community doing

1:50:26remarkable work. Uh one example that

1:50:28comes to mind for me is that Turning

1:50:29Point has peer recovery coaches in the

1:50:31emergency room. Is there a model where

1:50:33like leaning on some of that expertise

1:50:35or service design could be part of of

1:50:37what's available at at the OPC when it's

1:50:40stood up? And I'm not saying that has to

1:50:42be what happens at all, but just an

1:50:43example of leveraging opportunities for

1:50:46partnership among the really rich

1:50:48service community that we have here. Um

1:50:50I'm happy to see that that collaborative

1:50:52conversations are underway and I uh I

1:50:55think they're really smart. Um it would

1:50:57be helpful as the zoning conversations

1:51:00get underway with um the planning

1:51:03commission and then come back to council

1:51:05to know how other cities have zoned

1:51:08these programs and what um what kind of

1:51:12proximity requirements or other

1:51:14requirements are part of that. I think

1:51:17uh I'm I can't speak for everyone up

1:51:19here, but I'm not an expert in this. Um

1:51:21and would really love to see how it's

1:51:24done um in other places. Um I don't know

1:51:27how comparable Canada is, but knowing

1:51:29how much longer they've been providing

1:51:31this kind of service and how many more

1:51:33OPCs they have than us in the US, um it

1:51:36would be helpful to also look beyond

1:51:38just the the handful here in the US to

1:51:40just really understand how this is how

1:51:42this is done in other places. And then

1:51:45um I also just want to say that one

1:51:47thing that would be very helpful for me

1:51:49as we move forward uh and in the the

1:51:52conversations yet to come is a real

1:51:54honest conversation about conditions for

1:51:56success. I get a little confused with

1:51:58the discourse that comes before me um

1:52:01that some centers have started closing

1:52:04um and that may not be as effective and

1:52:06others sound vibrant and and effective

1:52:09and like that they're working well. And

1:52:11so it would be very helpful to

1:52:14understand what some of those conditions

1:52:16for success are. If the Rhode Island

1:52:18model is so great and it's in near a

1:52:20medical clinic, is that something we

1:52:21really need to seriously consider even

1:52:24though that wasn't even really offered

1:52:26as an option on the survey? Because

1:52:28we're seeing that those are the centers

1:52:29that have the most success. I'm making

1:52:31this up, but like I think that's really

1:52:32important for us to understand since I

1:52:35can't quite yet make sense of why I keep

1:52:37hearing that some are successful and

1:52:39some are closing. And why is that when

1:52:42we're making um this leap as a city? Um

1:52:45I think we have a lot to be proud of

1:52:47when we're on the cutting edge of of

1:52:48truly life-saving services. Um but I

1:52:51think just making sure that we're doing

1:52:52it as thoughtfully as we can that some

1:52:54programs haven't been successful um

1:52:56would be helpful to understand what some

1:52:58of those conditions may have been.

1:52:59Thanks.

1:53:01>> Uh, thank you for all of that. Um, I

1:53:04just a couple quick things. I don't want

1:53:06to get too much into um, you know, the

1:53:09thing with Canada. I'm not an expert on

1:53:10that. Um, but what I do know through

1:53:13talking to other experts that, you know,

1:53:15do drug policy work, etc. Um, is that,

1:53:18you know, it's not there. I have not

1:53:20heard that it's because they're not

1:53:22successful. It seems like it's more

1:53:23political climate. We know that things

1:53:25are really changing in terms of

1:53:26political climate across the country and

1:53:28clearly in Canada as well. Um and so I

1:53:31don't know that it's because they're not

1:53:32successful. Um but um you know it's

1:53:35something that we want to look into more

1:53:37um and learn and learn about um on um

1:53:41Project Weber Renew being close to a

1:53:43hospital. So we work with them a lot.

1:53:44They're technical assistance partners.

1:53:45We've gotten to know them really well.

1:53:47We absolutely adore them because they

1:53:49have been so from day one just open and

1:53:52honest with us and giving us the real

1:53:54deal. I got to go there and visit and

1:53:55and be there during the day and really

1:53:58it was so inspiring and motivating for

1:54:00wanting to get this open and standing up

1:54:02um because of just you know just seeing

1:54:04how comfortable people were there and

1:54:06how many things they were accessing and

1:54:08you know the way that they um you know

1:54:10were engaging with the OPC director just

1:54:13reminded me so much of relationships

1:54:14that I have. She's also a person with

1:54:16lived experience in in a community that

1:54:17she grew up in just like I am. And um

1:54:19and just um seeing how comfortable

1:54:21people were, how safe people were, and

1:54:23how many other things they were doing,

1:54:25you know, talking about treatment, um

1:54:27doing laundry, you know, getting

1:54:28something to eat, checking in with a

1:54:30medical provider, all these things just

1:54:31in like, you know, 45 minutes of

1:54:32stopping by. Um but I do know in terms

1:54:35of the hospital next door, that really

1:54:37was um you know, not like it wasn't

1:54:40necessarily intentional because they

1:54:41were planning for it to be by a

1:54:42hospital. really they had two other

1:54:44sites that kind of fell through um

1:54:46beforehand. It really was viable

1:54:47property that would work for the

1:54:49project. You know, that's how it ended

1:54:50up being there. And um I think um

1:54:53there's some comfort in being near a

1:54:54hospital for the community um and things

1:54:56like that. I won't speak for them too

1:54:57much, but um you know, they've really

1:55:00only called for medical help like a

1:55:03couple times, one time I think, you

1:55:05know. So it's like I think that's more

1:55:08um you know community comfort this type

1:55:10of thing viable property rather than

1:55:12like it really needed to be near a

1:55:14hospital because they're really not

1:55:15using you know first responders or you

1:55:17know that in any sort of a you know

1:55:20meaningful or big way at all. So um but

1:55:24because they are skilled and trained in

1:55:26in being able to respond appropriately

1:55:27and safely and and saving a lot of

1:55:29lives. But um so those were just two

1:55:31things that I was thinking of on on your

1:55:33points. Yeah. Thank you.

1:55:35Thank you. Thank you, councelor Shaker.

1:55:37We'll go to councelor Sanchez Parkinson

1:55:38and then councelor Barlo.

1:55:40>> Thank you. Um thank you so much for

1:55:43joining us today and thank you both Jess

1:55:45and Bella for also joining a number of

1:55:47community health conversations that we

1:55:49had in the RA committee. Um it has just

1:55:51been amazing to see how you all have

1:55:54just picked up this project and are just

1:55:56running with it. I think it's also uh a

1:55:58testament to the work that you all have

1:56:00already been doing. So a foundational

1:56:02work to be able to stand this project

1:56:04up. Um I think just actually building on

1:56:08a few of the comments that have been

1:56:09made already. Um it was important for me

1:56:12to think of how to situate the OPC in

1:56:15terms of within your own scope of work

1:56:17but also within what's already happening

1:56:19across the city and you've done a really

1:56:21good job of mapping that out. I'm a

1:56:23really visual person. So I told Belle, I

1:56:25think one time like I'm imagining this

1:56:27like city map with all the service

1:56:29everywhere and then seeing how this fits

1:56:31into our sort of broader ecosystem. So I

1:56:34really appreciate all the work that's

1:56:35going on um around that. Uh I you've

1:56:39talked about connecting with other

1:56:40service providers. Um I would be curious

1:56:43to know what their feedback is even if

1:56:46it's I don't even know how do we would

1:56:48receive that but um that's just one

1:56:51question in my mind as I think about

1:56:53like how does this work fit into others

1:56:55um getting feedback from other service

1:56:57providers would be helpful

1:57:00um I think similar to councelor Shakar

1:57:02I'm very much thinking of the life of

1:57:05this grant and this project and so the I

1:57:09anticipate sort of this increase of

1:57:11capac capacity, staff, and ultimately

1:57:14impact that we're going to have in the

1:57:16community. And I'm also thinking about

1:57:18what is the end or sort of like the

1:57:22downward

1:57:23look like for this project as well. And

1:57:25so as part of like the story that we're

1:57:28talking about, I know we're sort of

1:57:29thinking of the ramp up uh in my mind,

1:57:31I'm also thinking of what does that look

1:57:33like after the funding is running low?

1:57:37like what is sort of like longer term

1:57:38plans to think of the sustainability. Um

1:57:42I just some ideas came to mind as I

1:57:44think of sustainability. You again you

1:57:45have the foundation within VCJR and

1:57:48within the current ser sort of service

1:57:50providers um ecosystem and I wonder if

1:57:52there's part of this story that also

1:57:54talks about how some of this work that

1:57:57is ramped up um could really accelerate

1:58:01uh current efforts that we have so that

1:58:03they can be sustained in some capacity

1:58:04beyond this project. Um, the other point

1:58:08I wanted to, this really stood out to me

1:58:11as we talked about public spaces,

1:58:13consumption in public spaces, and seeing

1:58:15that 78% of people um, actually use

1:58:19where they're living. And the reason

1:58:21that stood out to me is because as a

1:58:24parent, as someone who's um you know

1:58:27often in conversations with with

1:58:28families and children, I know that

1:58:30particularly in central district where

1:58:32we have a highly concentrated uh

1:58:35population including families that there

1:58:37are people who are using where they're

1:58:39living like the survey says with

1:58:41children and with family members in in

1:58:43their homes. And so I wondered if this

1:58:47al if the OPC in addition to supporting

1:58:50those who are in consuming in public

1:58:53spaces can also be a space for those who

1:58:56may not have the adequate space within

1:58:58their homes and where they're um using.

1:59:01Um and then lastly, I know I'm almost

1:59:03running out of time. I wanted to

1:59:05acknowledge I think that there's a lot

1:59:07of interest not just in the community

1:59:08but also within the council because we

1:59:10are also engaging with the community.

1:59:12Um, and I want to acknowledge all of

1:59:14that extra work, part of the work, but I

1:59:16don't know if you anticipated this

1:59:17amount of work, uh, in terms of

1:59:20educating and engaging the community and

1:59:22engaging the council. Um, and so I'll

1:59:25kind of share this out for the council

1:59:27as well, but for you all an invitation

1:59:28that um, if this this conversation

1:59:32around the OPC feels like we need a home

1:59:35for it, um, I would be happy to create

1:59:38some space in the RAB committee to

1:59:40further explore some of these uh, deeper

1:59:42questions that have been asked. Um, so

1:59:45I'll put that out there as an offer or a

1:59:48partner partnership, potential

1:59:49partnership. Um, and then finally, as we

1:59:51think about community engagement, uh,

1:59:54also related to our work with the RAIB,

1:59:57uh, I would be interested to think about

1:59:58how to intentionally engage with

2:00:00immigrant and communities of color in

2:00:02our in our city. Thank you.

2:00:04>> Definitely. Thank you so much.

2:00:06Appreciate all of that. Does anybody

2:00:08have a comment? Do you want to say

2:00:09something? Do you?

2:00:10>> Thank you.

2:00:11>> I feel like I've been talking a lot.

2:00:12Yeah.

2:00:13>> Thank you.

2:00:14>> Yeah. On all of that.

2:00:16>> Really good points.

2:00:18>> Thank you, councelor. Uh, councelor

2:00:19Parlo.

2:00:20>> Uh, thank you. And I'll also extend my

2:00:22appreciation for all the public

2:00:24engagement that you are doing on this

2:00:26important topic and I attended the W 47

2:00:30um NPA last week and that was I thought

2:00:32a really good discussion and we had

2:00:34voted to extend the discussion and bump

2:00:37another topic on our uh agenda just to

2:00:40give it more space. But

2:00:42>> um I have two questions. and some of my

2:00:44questions have been already have asked.

2:00:45So I have two remaining questions um

2:00:48that haven't been and I'll sort of give

2:00:49them to you quickly. The first is um you

2:00:53talked about openness to a mobile option

2:00:55and then I heard mobile hybrid and so

2:00:58are you considering both of those or

2:01:01just a mobile hybrid? Um, so that's

2:01:04question I guess one and question two is

2:01:07um the the the OPC funding is basically

2:01:11pilot funding. Um, and that funding runs

2:01:13through fiscal 28 I think. And so I'm

2:01:17wondering because I I had assumed that

2:01:19if you were getting physical space you

2:01:21would be leasing that space, but in your

2:01:23slide deck tonight it said lease or buy.

2:01:26And how would that limited funding play

2:01:28into a lease versus buy decision?

2:01:32And those are my questions.

2:01:40>> I

2:01:42um so in terms of the the pilot funding

2:01:46as an executive director and I think

2:01:47some of the people on the council have

2:01:49had experience as well. You know, it's

2:01:51always piecing together funding as time

2:01:54goes on. You know, uh, VCGR has been in

2:01:56operation since 2013, and I worked for

2:01:5917 years at the Howard Center. And even

2:02:01at the Howard Center, it was piecing

2:02:04grants together to keep the program

2:02:07going within within the agency. And so

2:02:11kind of my philosophy is you take a leap

2:02:14of faith and you do really really good

2:02:18work that is good enough that the value

2:02:22can't be denied and is recognizable by

2:02:24the community so that the community

2:02:26wants to continue to support the

2:02:28program. And we feel like with, you

2:02:31know, if we're able to continue funding

2:02:32through FY28, which is the legislator's

2:02:35intent, stated intention, that we will

2:02:38have enough data and enough community

2:02:41experience that they will probably want

2:02:44to continue that funding. Um, I think

2:02:47the opioid settlement funds, you know,

2:02:51continue for for quite a few more years.

2:02:54And so that, you know, is the source of

2:02:56the current funding and could be a

2:02:58potential source for funding beyond

2:02:59FY28.

2:03:01And then, you know, um

2:03:04that gives us a longer runway to to work

2:03:08on a, you know, long-term sustainability

2:03:11program. So that's kind of what our

2:03:14thinking is around that. But a lot of it

2:03:16is taking it a step at a time and just

2:03:19having the faith that when you're doing

2:03:22good work that is having a positive

2:03:23impact on the community and you're

2:03:25documenting it well that people will see

2:03:29that it's smart to put resources towards

2:03:31it.

2:03:33>> All nonprofits are kind of doing that.

2:03:36You know, they're all kind of piecing it

2:03:37together, needing grants. They come year

2:03:39by year. So, we'll be in that camp, too.

2:03:42We already are.

2:03:48>> And did you Okay.

2:03:50>> Thank you.

2:03:52>> Oh, sorry.

2:03:53>> No, that's fine.

2:03:54>> Um, wow, that was loud. Sorry. Um, I

2:03:59think we we are using different terms

2:04:01because we're not 100% sure to be

2:04:03honest. This is why we um so Montreal

2:04:08has some mobile units as well and they

2:04:11have seen some success with it. Um it is

2:04:14of interest to us. That is specifically

2:04:16why we took some of the funding that we

2:04:20have in the budget and extended the

2:04:22contract with Py to give us more

2:04:24information on on how it would work

2:04:29best. 100% mobile. Um BCJR still needs a

2:04:34home to be doing their other services as

2:04:37well. And I noted that a lot of

2:04:40counselors had mentioned um the recovery

2:04:43services and the wraparound services and

2:04:45making sure it's not simply um

2:04:48consumption. And so we want to make sure

2:04:50there's space for that as well. So, I

2:04:52would ask that um we put a pin in that

2:04:56until we can get the py assessment back

2:04:59and take a deeper dive into that data.

2:05:04>> Okay. Thank you.

2:05:06>> Thank you, councelor Barlo. Are there

2:05:08any other counselors that wish to be

2:05:10recognized on this item? We'll go

2:05:12councelor Grant and we'll try to finish

2:05:14the first round first. Councelor

2:05:15Carpenter then. Okay. So, councelor

2:05:17Grant, go ahead.

2:05:19>> Hi, I appreciate you all.

2:05:22Um, and I appreciate you sharing lived

2:05:24experience because it's it's very

2:05:26important especially regarding um we

2:05:29still have such a a tremendous stigma

2:05:32around using medications. We use

2:05:34medications for blood pressure. We use

2:05:36medication for diabetes and other

2:05:39chronic health problems.

2:05:42Why can't we get this medication to be

2:05:44available in localarmacies? Right? that

2:05:46is still a huge hurdle that has to be

2:05:50addressed. Um I just have uh a variety

2:05:56of comments. First and foremost, there

2:05:59is a difference between the central

2:06:01district and the central business

2:06:04district.

2:06:05And I think we have to really especially

2:06:09as counselors be very specific. People

2:06:13keep feeling like this is going to be

2:06:15put in the middle of Church Street.

2:06:18That's not the intention. The central

2:06:21district is wards two and three, which

2:06:24the data is incredibly clear, have the

2:06:29most incidents uh related to uh

2:06:33substance use disorder. So I think as

2:06:36counselors, we need to be very specific.

2:06:38We need to say wards two and three.

2:06:40central district is named central

2:06:42district and then people keep um

2:06:44conflating it and I think that's uh

2:06:47problematic. We're dealing with a

2:06:50population that has no place to go.

2:06:52Period. Full stop. They have no place to

2:06:55go.

2:06:57And that has been said a lot, but we

2:07:00still have many members of our community

2:07:02that do not understand that. um our

2:07:06businesses shut their bathrooms to uh

2:07:09the public because people um regrettably

2:07:13were overdosing in the bathrooms. When

2:07:15Ben & Jerry's closed their um bathrooms

2:07:19to the public, they wrote out a

2:07:21statement saying we need um an overdose

2:07:25prevention center. I personally don't

2:07:28support mobile. I support a building

2:07:31primarily because it would give us

2:07:34additional bathrooms for people to use.

2:07:37Um I have a little dream that maybe

2:07:39it'll have showers as well. Uh there are

2:07:42many things that um people who have been

2:07:45forced to live on the street don't have

2:07:47access to and and if some of these

2:07:50things can be added as part of the

2:07:52wraparound services that would be uh

2:07:55fantastic. a place where local barbers

2:07:57who volunteer can come in, give people

2:07:59haircuts, things like that. Um,

2:08:03I want to say that

2:08:09we keep hearing about the status quo.

2:08:11The status quo. This is not an OPC is

2:08:15not the status quo. It's not.

2:08:18So if we are going to say that we're

2:08:21going to fight the status quo,

2:08:24this is what this means. It means trying

2:08:27something that hasn't been tried in our

2:08:30area. The war on drugs has failed.

2:08:34It's well documented. It's complete

2:08:36failure. Has racial and class uh

2:08:39inequities.

2:08:40Um we could go in another

2:08:44meeting just talking about that. I would

2:08:47again uh direct people to Governor

2:08:49Shumland's 2014 state of the state

2:08:51address where he talked about the fact

2:08:53that we needed to as a state come

2:08:56together in order to address the then

2:08:58opioid crisis that we had. We now have a

2:09:01fentanyl crisis. It is different. It is

2:09:04more addictive. It is harder for people

2:09:06to get into recovery. It has more uh

2:09:10likelihood of people um relapsing. So

2:09:14that's very important to know. when we

2:09:16do not have such leadership

2:09:19from our current governor. So when we

2:09:22talk about the three levels of substance

2:09:24use disorder which is the actual drug

2:09:26trafficking and then the dealers and

2:09:28down to the people who suffer from

2:09:30substance use disorder, we need a

2:09:32strategy um with the governor

2:09:36coordinating federal assistance

2:09:39to coordinate law enforcement to get

2:09:42these arrests on the traffickers. Then

2:09:44we need to deal with the dealers and

2:09:46then with the people that have substance

2:09:48use disorder. Then we got to get them

2:09:50into recovery. It's different. We can't

2:09:52have law enforcement at every level

2:09:54because it's proven not to be effective.

2:09:58Um conditions of success. Uh it is very

2:10:02true political will changed in in

2:10:04Canada. Um and also the funding changed

2:10:08in some areas and this is all documented

2:10:11data is there. Immediately public use

2:10:14went back up immediately. Syringe litter

2:10:16went back up immediately. Open overdoses

2:10:19went back up. Uh demand on services for

2:10:22EMS, police department, encampments all

2:10:25went back up and increased except for

2:10:28some areas which actually

2:10:31made sure to shift money over to

2:10:35recovery and housing.

2:10:39and housing is a big part that we still

2:10:41don't have. Uh so where they were able

2:10:44to do that, they saw uh they didn't see

2:10:48those those stats go back up because

2:10:50they did indeed put these other services

2:10:54um in place with housing

2:10:58and housing housing housing housing.

2:11:00This is something we need until we get

2:11:01housing and we because people don't have

2:11:03someplace to go. Thank you.

2:11:06>> Thank you, councelor Grant. I see

2:11:07councelor Litwin and then is there

2:11:08anyone else that wants to get in the

2:11:10queue on this item.

2:11:13Okay, councelor Litwin, we'll go to you.

2:11:16Thanks so much and thanks for the

2:11:18presentation. Um, I have to say I'm uh

2:11:22Councelor Carpenter and I are singing

2:11:23from the same song book tonight. Um, I

2:11:26have to really second everything she um

2:11:30spoke of and I really appreciate also

2:11:32Councelor Shakar's comments as well. Um,

2:11:36I guess because folks really got a lot

2:11:38of my questions answered tonight. And I

2:11:40also want to thank Director Al-Nisari

2:11:42for um, you know, just the uh, candid

2:11:47and helpful information that was shared

2:11:48tonight. I think that will help clear up

2:11:51any questions counselors or the public

2:11:53may have. Some of the things that came

2:11:55up for me when I was reviewing the data

2:11:59um is just that I want us to be kind of

2:12:02aware or cognizant of how we're

2:12:05presenting data both to this body um and

2:12:08to the council and specifically the data

2:12:11that concerns me is the data um around

2:12:15the conversation of like do the public

2:12:17want this and where do they want this?

2:12:19And so one of the questions that came up

2:12:22for me was that um essentially

2:12:28you had an end group of 49 people for

2:12:32the survey um of folks who would be

2:12:35willing to use the OPC. But when I go

2:12:38back to the the data that I have

2:12:41available to me, which is the most

2:12:44recent data from Howard Center Safe

2:12:46Recovery on Clark Street in terms of how

2:12:48many unique users were using the SSP,

2:12:52um just as as sort of a a population

2:12:55that we might like to survey that was

2:12:57hovering around, 1100 people and so I

2:13:00realize this is a difficult population

2:13:02to survey. However, I have real concerns

2:13:07about the statistical significance and

2:13:09the margin of error um if we only have

2:13:13an end group of 49 um when we have a

2:13:17population uh potential uh patient

2:13:20population that high. Um, the second

2:13:23question or issue that came up for me

2:13:26that I really want to point out is that,

2:13:29you know, there was a there there was a

2:13:31a big, you know, um, bar chart that

2:13:36said, look how high, you know,

2:13:38downtown's 49% or something to that

2:13:40effect. People think it should be

2:13:42downtown, which, by the way, we're

2:13:43interchangeably using the terms downtown

2:13:46and central district and all sorts of

2:13:48other things and we have to define that.

2:13:50But the drop in whether or not someone

2:13:53would be willing to travel to an OPC if

2:13:56it were in the Old North End or on

2:13:58Riverside is statistically insignificant

2:14:00because the end group is 49. So it

2:14:03really goes from 96% to 85% to 81%

2:14:08which really means that only six fewer

2:14:11respondents of that 49 said Old North

2:14:14End over downtown and only one fewer

2:14:17said Riverside. So really they are

2:14:18willing to travel um up to 15 minutes

2:14:22and use a free shuttle or bus if offered

2:14:24which was also part of that survey. And

2:14:26so I do think we need to be really

2:14:28thinking about where uh where this

2:14:31location is um outside of our downtown.

2:14:34Um, in addition, um,

2:14:39I saw that in the first nine months of

2:14:42the Weber project, there were about 650

2:14:45clients. And of the over 4,000 referrals

2:14:49to treatment, I'm sort of wondering,

2:14:52well, what was the reduction in the

2:14:53clientele as a number or percentage, you

2:14:55know, like of those 4,000 referrals to

2:14:58treatment

2:15:00um, for the 650 clients, like what were

2:15:02the outcomes? And I think that gets back

2:15:04to what was what counselor uh Shaper was

2:15:07also sort of talking about. Um I also

2:15:11noticed that you said that half of your

2:15:13clients have experienced overdose in the

2:15:15past six months and 90% of them are not

2:15:18accessing recovery services. So, I'm

2:15:21also wondering what kind of qualitative

2:15:24information from your clients

2:15:27um that you're uh talking about as to

2:15:32what what are those barriers and what

2:15:34actions you're taking, which I know you

2:15:36are and you did address some of them um

2:15:39to helping um as a clinic to reverse

2:15:42that trend. I know a big one is just not

2:15:44being able to get folks into places like

2:15:47Serenity House, but for the folks that

2:15:49that aren't ready, um I'm curious about

2:15:52that as well. And then I did just want

2:15:55to point out one last thing, which is,

2:15:57you know, this is why data is so

2:15:59interesting

2:16:00earlier. um a counselor had mentioned

2:16:03you know uh the vast support but when I

2:16:06read this I I see 33% of people felt

2:16:10that's one in three of those 1500 people

2:16:13felt that it would be negative for

2:16:14Burlington

2:16:16and 60% felt that it would be positive

2:16:18with the remaining 7% being neutral. So

2:16:21I think that really demonstrates a

2:16:23stronger divide than we have been being

2:16:25kind of presented and talking about. And

2:16:28we as counselors um we have to take in I

2:16:33have to take into account that that one

2:16:35person and those two people when I'm

2:16:37thinking about community based

2:16:38solutions. Last

2:16:40>> your time. Councelor Linwin if you could

2:16:42just grab

2:16:43>> No, that's fine. I'll stop. Thank you.

2:16:45>> All right. Thank you, Councelor Litwin.

2:16:48>> Okay. Um I thank you. Um that's a lot. I

2:16:52can't remember everything, but I'll try

2:16:53to respond to some of your points. Um

2:16:55one thing I wanted to point out is the

2:16:57um data about um location. This was

2:17:01actually not from the 49 people with

2:17:03lived experience. This was from the

2:17:05community survey respondents. So the

2:17:071500 um so th that those are accurate

2:17:10percentages on those from the community

2:17:12surveys respondents, not from the um

2:17:14people with living experience. Um so

2:17:16that was one thing. Um, another point I

2:17:18just wanted to clear up was the 90% of

2:17:21people that were not um, accessing um,

2:17:23recovery services. That's actually what

2:17:25we asked people at intake was if they

2:17:28were accessing services at traditional

2:17:30recovery center. So we were trying to,

2:17:33you know, get to our people um accessing

2:17:37services at before they were coming to

2:17:39us at places that are offering more

2:17:42traditional recovery services aka not

2:17:44usually able to access or not able to

2:17:46access if they're currently using. Um so

2:17:48that's what that is. Not that they

2:17:50weren't accessing any type of recovery

2:17:52services ever. Um and another thing um I

2:17:56wanted to point out was just 49 people

2:17:58with lived exper living experience were

2:18:00surveyed. Um that was just PY's budget.

2:18:02They were incentivized um surveys. Um

2:18:05and uh we did you know at Safe Recovery

2:18:09probably five or six years ago survey

2:18:11hundreds of people um about OPC and it

2:18:14was like 94% or something said that they

2:18:17would access uh that they really felt

2:18:18like they would use an OPC and needed

2:18:20access to one. Also, we what what we saw

2:18:25from these 49 people with living

2:18:26experience is is very on par with what

2:18:30we, you know, hear every day from, you

2:18:32know, the people that we work with. And

2:18:34we work with hundreds of people in

2:18:35Burlington. And um we didn't find

2:18:38anything in this surprising in terms of,

2:18:40you know, people uh what they wanted to

2:18:43see and get out of an OPC. We we've been

2:18:45talking to people about this for years.

2:18:47Um Tom and I were both on a commission

2:18:49with Sarah George like 10 years ago

2:18:51about OPC and so we've been talking to

2:18:54um you know participants of of harm

2:18:56reduction and and treatment services for

2:18:58a very long time um about this and um

2:19:00there was nothing that was very

2:19:02surprising. You know this is very on par

2:19:04with what what we um kind of had

2:19:06expected to see in terms of what

2:19:08people's needs are, what people's risks

2:19:10are, um you know people's willingness to

2:19:13to use the site um what they were using.

2:19:16We it was you know what we we we really

2:19:19survey people every day you know is my

2:19:21point not just these 49. Um but um Tom

2:19:24do you have anything you want to add on

2:19:25this?

2:19:26>> No Bella because there was a lot there.

2:19:28I'm sorry I know I didn't respond to

2:19:29everything but hopefully I hit a few of

2:19:31your points

2:19:33and and help clear some stuff up. Um the

2:19:36other thing I wanted to say um about uh

2:19:38quickly recovery not you know um the

2:19:42statistic that was being shared about

2:19:44safe recoveries um access to um or

2:19:47referring people to services and that

2:19:49being really low. Um I'll just say um I

2:19:52I know from working there that it was

2:19:54hard to c it was hard for them to

2:19:56capture for various reasons. Um and I

2:19:59will just say that we recently were

2:20:01working on getting a really robust

2:20:03database. Brown is helping us with that.

2:20:05But we do know that in the past um you

2:20:07know like I said last week we brought

2:20:09three people to treatment. Um just in

2:20:11the past um 90 days we referred 60

2:20:14people to um impatient treatment alone.

2:20:17So that's not including you know

2:20:18treatment for buponorphine and methadone

2:20:20and helping people get in the clinic and

2:20:22all these things. So we were very heavy

2:20:24on the referrals and helping people

2:20:26access those things. So

2:20:27>> yeah.

2:20:29>> Thank you. Thank you councelor Lwin.

2:20:30Yeah. Is there any counselor that has

2:20:32not been heard on this item that wishes

2:20:34to speak to it?

2:20:38Okay. Any other folks with questions or

2:20:41comments?

2:20:43Sure. Council Carpenter, you you still

2:20:45have three minutes left, so we we can go

2:20:47back to you briefly.

2:20:48>> Just quickly, and this is

2:20:50>> Oops. Quickly and a refresher. Early on,

2:20:53there was a lot of conversation about

2:20:57the probable

2:20:59illegality of opening it. And I'm just

2:21:02sort of uh curious where we're at with

2:21:05that. I mean, I think we discussed it

2:21:07and we're kind of over that, but can you

2:21:09refresh my memory?

2:21:16>> Yes.

2:21:17Um,

2:21:19so this an overdose prevention center is

2:21:22still considered illegal. So on-site

2:21:25consumption uh is considered illegal

2:21:27federally. However, based on the because

2:21:30of the legislation that was passed in

2:21:32Montpelier, it is not illegal statewide.

2:21:36This is similar to cannabis for example.

2:21:39Um, so we're in that federal gray zone.

2:21:44Is that your question?

2:21:46Yeah. Um and then the the next phase

2:21:49would be at the municipal level to allow

2:21:52for the zoning for it.

2:21:55>> Um and then that would take us there.

2:21:56>> Okay. And I assume unfortunately we're

2:22:00not going to get any federal money.

2:22:02>> Uh no, I would not expect any.

2:22:04>> Thank you.

2:22:05>> Yeah.

2:22:08>> Uh sorry.

2:22:11>> Yeah. No, please go ahead.

2:22:12>> Okay. Uh, I was just going to say that I

2:22:15think it's important to emphasize what

2:22:16Cara said about the federal gray area.

2:22:20I don't do illegal things and I don't I

2:22:25I don't want

2:22:27I I don't acknowledge that it's illegal

2:22:30federally. I don't think it is. I think

2:22:32it's an open question that has not been

2:22:35decided by the court, certainly not by

2:22:37the Supreme Court or even an appellet

2:22:39court. And um I think that if more

2:22:44centers open that may get litigated over

2:22:49time but I think if you read the the

2:22:52crack statute which is the you know the

2:22:54law that people cite it's pretty clear

2:22:57that people who are trying to operate a

2:22:59health related public health program

2:23:02under the opaces you know under

2:23:05legislation passed by a twothirds

2:23:07majority of the Vermont legislature

2:23:10and under the opices of the Burlington

2:23:13City Council and the mayor's office, you

2:23:15know that we have lifetimes of work in

2:23:18this field trying to help people access

2:23:22treatment and recovery. We're not there

2:23:25for the reasons that the crack statute

2:23:27was put in place to prevent. And so I I

2:23:31don't want

2:23:33anyone to say that it's illegal

2:23:35federally. We don't know. But New York

2:23:39and Rhode Island have been operating for

2:23:41a couple years and the the federal

2:23:44government has not taken legal action

2:23:46against them. And u you know I think

2:23:50that

2:23:53it's just important to say that it is a

2:23:56gray area but um we don't think that we

2:24:00are moving towards doing something

2:24:02illegal.

2:24:05just want to say that. [laughter]

2:24:08>> Can I speed one mile per hour over? So

2:24:11that's what he means when he says he

2:24:13doesn't do anything illegal. He's very

2:24:14law and safety oriented. I just wanted

2:24:17to mention that um attorney Ramak

2:24:19Krishna before he left wrote a memo on

2:24:21this very topic and um to Tom's point

2:24:25why the statutes that were enacted to

2:24:29address what we refer to as crackouses

2:24:32aren't applicable in this circumstance.

2:24:34So I can find that again and share that

2:24:36with the council if folks need to see

2:24:38that again or for the first time.

2:24:43>> Thank you city Brown. Um just as a work

2:24:47session, I'll just just chime in on just

2:24:49a couple brief items here. First of all,

2:24:51it's a question for you, Director Alnos

2:24:52Rawi, which is uh I appreciated your

2:24:55statements with respect to the letter of

2:24:56intent and there being this 90-day

2:24:58window within which the property would

2:24:59be off the market, but presumptively

2:25:01that means that this due diligence

2:25:02period will hopefully occur within that

2:25:0590-day window. And so in terms of timing

2:25:09here, is is it your thought or or other

2:25:11folks thoughts here that potentially if

2:25:14due diligence works out for this

2:25:16proposed site that you could be back

2:25:18before the council by say the end of the

2:25:20year asking that we approve this

2:25:23location and that the planning

2:25:25commission and the council expedite uh

2:25:28zoning to permit uh the use in in

2:25:30wherever the proposed location is.

2:25:33Yes, those are a lot of ifs and buts.

2:25:36So, so I just want to be clear about

2:25:38that. Um, and again, the letter of

2:25:41intent was uh signed just a few days

2:25:44ago. So, we are right at the beginning

2:25:46of the 90-day period at this point. Um,

2:25:50and uh, as I also said during that,

2:25:53there is probably a 50/50 chance this

2:25:56site will not be viable as well. So um

2:26:00but should it be viable um we will try

2:26:03and expedite a process and or if we are

2:26:06unable to um I would assume that we

2:26:10would perhaps discuss extending um the

2:26:13letter of intent to give us time so as

2:26:17not to shove anything down anybody's

2:26:20throat so to speak. I want to be clear

2:26:22about that because I want to go back to

2:26:24the door knocking and the public

2:26:26engagement and making sure that we're

2:26:28staying true to that. Um, so I what we

2:26:33need right now is just uh a little

2:26:35breathing room because this document was

2:26:37just signed so that we can even see if

2:26:39bus routes, traffic patterns,

2:26:42um other other uses in that neighborhood

2:26:46uh whether it would be compatible or

2:26:48not. Um and then um I could envision at

2:26:53that point perhaps having an executive

2:26:56session with this body to decide next

2:26:58steps so that we can all be on the same

2:27:00page together and so that we can also

2:27:03get your feedback around public

2:27:05engagement and I know that the mayor

2:27:07also wants to ensure that proper public

2:27:09engagement is happening. Um so there

2:27:13will be no purchase of any um building

2:27:17in a in a rushed manner. Um so just

2:27:21we're this is still a work in progress

2:27:24for us. I will also say

2:27:27um there are you know when a legislature

2:27:31passes a bill um that has intent um then

2:27:36it's left to the staff of the state to

2:27:39try and work out all the details and

2:27:42there we have gone around the malberry

2:27:44bush on location quite some bit. Um

2:27:48there are the original intent was that

2:27:51uh a property would be rented until it

2:27:53was clear that that was not a viable

2:27:55option because landlords would not be

2:27:57interested in renting for this use and

2:28:00that's why we had to go back to get

2:28:02further clarification in the last

2:28:04legislative session and now we are

2:28:06looking at actually purchasing a

2:28:08property. So, um, all I can say is I can

2:28:11guarantee transparency and I can also

2:28:14guarantee that we will have enough

2:28:16public process and if we're feeling if

2:28:18all of you are feeling like there hasn't

2:28:20been enough public process around a

2:28:22specific location and if the public

2:28:24feels that way as well, um, I myself am

2:28:29happy to hit the pause button. Okay.

2:28:32>> Uh, thank you for that update and thank

2:28:34you for all the work that has gone into

2:28:35this and for your being here this

2:28:37evening. uh excited to learn more about

2:28:39the due diligence period here to come

2:28:41and to have you all back. Um I will just

2:28:43say just two things on my note. If if

2:28:46this is something that's going to come

2:28:47up in the coming months. Um I appreciate

2:28:50the questions that are still outstanding

2:28:52with respect to the legality and thank

2:28:54you city attorney Brown for your

2:28:56willingness to send uh that memo along.

2:28:59I also just I want to be cautious about

2:29:01not painting too rosy a picture about

2:29:04those legality concerns. Um,

2:29:09unfortunately, we are living in a space

2:29:11right now with a federal administration

2:29:12for the next couple years that was the

2:29:15same administration that appointed the

2:29:17Vermont US attorney that had the last

2:29:19say here in Vermont with respect to what

2:29:21they were referring to at the time as

2:29:22safe injection facilities. And the last

2:29:24memo on this from 2017 said that a

2:29:27location like that, which we're

2:29:28considering, could be subject to federal

2:29:30forfeite. Um, and so I just I I want us

2:29:33to have a full picture of what could

2:29:35potentially be out there in terms of the

2:29:37legal risks in standing up a site along

2:29:39these lines. Um, the other question that

2:29:41I will have and and and certainly I do

2:29:43not mean to in any way imply that VCJR,

2:29:46which does excellent work, would be

2:29:47breaking the law by continuing to pursue

2:29:49this, but it's nonetheless uh a reality

2:29:52that's out there at the moment. Um, and

2:29:54then just one other note, I appreciate

2:29:57the comments, Tom, that you were making

2:29:59with respect to the leap of faith and

2:30:01and sort of proof of concept and uh

2:30:04hopefully that securing additional

2:30:05funding. Um, but my understanding is

2:30:08that the operating budget of this could

2:30:10be annually, you know, upwards of a

2:30:12million dollars, which is why the state

2:30:13had previously allocated that. And I

2:30:16think we would all agree that's that's a

2:30:17pretty big leap of faith, right? And so

2:30:19as we come back and think about this, I

2:30:21think it would be helpful for the

2:30:22council to um have more information with

2:30:24respect to the the confidence that we

2:30:26have in the future sustainability of

2:30:28funding sources for this work. Um

2:30:31because uh you know hopefully if we

2:30:34continue to proceed in this direction,

2:30:35it's something that will be there uh for

2:30:37many years to come and not just with the

2:30:39$2 million that we have at the moment.

2:30:42Those were my last comments. Um,

2:30:45councelor Grant, did you have another

2:30:47comment?

2:30:48>> Thank you. Um,

2:30:49>> you we were at time. I gave myself three

2:30:52minutes there and you did use your five

2:30:54minutes, but I'm happy to give you a

2:30:55minute or so.

2:30:56>> Okay. Well,

2:30:57>> okay,

2:30:58>> Council Carpenter got to speak.

2:31:01>> Yeah, she had three minutes left, but I

2:31:02just if I'm happy to turn to you, but if

2:31:04you could just keep it to a minute or

2:31:06so, that would be great.

2:31:08>> Okay. Um, I just wanted to remind people

2:31:12we can't have it both ways.

2:31:14We can't say as many people in the

2:31:18committee have said don't want to see

2:31:20these people. They have no place to go.

2:31:24So we can't have it both ways and that

2:31:26is something that we have to think

2:31:27about. Uh with regards to the legality,

2:31:31um yeah, we're testing the boundaries

2:31:33with something new, right? Because we're

2:31:34trying to break the status quo. Um, I

2:31:37will say on point, I've seen several

2:31:40presentations uh by them and their their

2:31:42former director who I think uh was hired

2:31:45out in LA to open um facilities out

2:31:49there. Uh, one of the things that she

2:31:51talked about frequently was the

2:31:54excellent relationship they had with the

2:31:56local uh, police department and the fire

2:31:59department, the EMS services and such

2:32:02that police officers would actually

2:32:04carry around cards, business cards for

2:32:06the OPC and direct people um, to go

2:32:10there. So, I think that is really

2:32:11important to note because those

2:32:14organizations, those city departments

2:32:16recognize

2:32:18a huge amount. I mean, granted, New York

2:32:20City is a very large city, so we're

2:32:23talking about millions of dollars. Were

2:32:25being saved by the fact [clears throat]

2:32:27that the um the number of calls that

2:32:32were going to EMS and police

2:32:35dramatically dropped. Uh and so that was

2:32:38one of the reasons why the city

2:32:40continues uh to support those OPC's.

2:32:43Thank you.

2:32:45>> Thank you, Councelor Grant. Uh Director

2:32:48Alas Rawi or any of our guests here any

2:32:51final comments or I know this was a long

2:32:53presentation, but it was very helpful.

2:32:55>> Thank you. Um you all have my email, so

2:32:58let me know if you have further

2:32:59questions. Um I think it would be

2:33:01easiest if you don't reach out to our

2:33:03partner directly. I'm happy to funnel

2:33:05those questions just to let them do

2:33:07their work. That way, if you have extra

2:33:09questions, I'm happy to gather them and

2:33:12um and staff can reach out to BCGR to

2:33:15get the any extra answers you have.

2:33:18>> Great. Thank you so much.

2:33:19>> Thank you very much.

2:33:34All right. Uh we have two additional

2:33:36deliberative items less left left. The

2:33:38next item is item 7.7. This is another

2:33:41work session regarding an update from

2:33:42the ad hoc tax fairness committee. Um,

2:33:48if there is no objection, my my

2:33:50intention here is although presiding uh

2:33:53I I also serve as the chair of the ad

2:33:55hoc uh tax fairness committee and so my

2:33:57intention is just to tee up the work

2:33:59session and then we'll be looking to

2:34:02Nancy Stson as well as other members of

2:34:04the committee uh to introduce this

2:34:07presentation. Um just very briefly here

2:34:12uh as the mayor mentioned this work on

2:34:14the tax fairness group began with an

2:34:16advisory committee established by uh the

2:34:19mayor's office and we received the

2:34:21report and thank you to the mayor's team

2:34:22for posting that to our agenda. Uh this

2:34:26council, as folks know, [clears throat]

2:34:27then stood up the ad hoc tax fairness

2:34:29committee that has continued to review

2:34:31the recommendations of that committee,

2:34:33including some recommended items that uh

2:34:35the advisory group recommended further

2:34:37exploration of. There was a proposed

2:34:39charter change that the council

2:34:41considered back in June of 2026. The

2:34:44council at that time sent that charter

2:34:46change back to the ad hoc committee for

2:34:48it to continue to uh look at that more

2:34:51carefully to receive staff input to seek

2:34:54expert input and to discuss it uh as a

2:34:56committee. Um since that point in time

2:34:59and and counting the meetings

2:35:00beforehand, the ad hoc tax fairness

2:35:02committee has met uh 10 different times

2:35:04between March and September 22nd. And I

2:35:08want to take a moment to extend our

2:35:09appreciation. I I mentioned Nancy

2:35:11before, but to senior policy and data

2:35:14analyst Nancy Stson uh who does way more

2:35:17for the city than uh her chop title

2:35:19covers there. Um also want to extend our

2:35:22appreciation to CIO Shod uh acting

2:35:26assessor Tracy Isham uh and director of

2:35:29permitting and inspections Bill Ward. Uh

2:35:31we also we also received testimony from

2:35:33Stephu uh president and executive

2:35:35director of the public assets institute

2:35:37who was also a member of the mayor's

2:35:38advisory group on tax fairness. So uh

2:35:41while we received input from a number of

2:35:43other folks both at our meetings as well

2:35:45as in communications outside the

2:35:46meetings I wanted to extend specific

2:35:48thanks to those folks.

2:35:51uh as we'll now hear in the presentation

2:35:54to come, there's still generally three

2:35:56concepts uh that the ad hoc committee

2:35:59has been considering. One is a concept

2:36:02around authorizing enhanced appraisals

2:36:05for certain subclassifications of

2:36:07property. Uh specifically, the ad hoc

2:36:10committee has been focusing on second

2:36:12homes as well as vacant properties, but

2:36:14we'll speak in a moment about those in

2:36:15greater length. The second is as was was

2:36:19the first recommendation that came out

2:36:21of the mayor's tax fairness advisory

2:36:22group around authorizing a municipal

2:36:24homestead property tax exemption. And

2:36:26there's a couple different models that

2:36:28the ad hoc committee has been looking at

2:36:30which members will speak to in a moment.

2:36:32And then the third item that the

2:36:33committee has been discussing is the

2:36:35establishment of a property transfer tax

2:36:37of 5% on homes valued over $1 million.

2:36:42Uh again the committee has spent its

2:36:44time uh focusing on and understanding

2:36:46how each of these concepts might

2:36:48function in practice, the policy goals

2:36:50each proposal is intended to advance and

2:36:53the administrative work that would be

2:36:54required for successful implementation.

2:36:57Uh I want to emphasize before we jump

2:36:59into the discussion that the committee

2:37:02has not unanimously endorsed any

2:37:04specific proposal in its current form.

2:37:07Uh committee members continue to hold

2:37:09differing views regarding the most

2:37:10impactful and effective approaches to

2:37:12tax fairness and addressing inequities

2:37:14in our current tax structure. A majority

2:37:17of the committee though concluded that

2:37:19each of the concepts that we'll discuss

2:37:21this evening deserve additional public

2:37:23discussions before any final

2:37:25recommendations to the city council are

2:37:27prepared. And to that end, and we'll

2:37:29talk about it a couple times this

2:37:30evening, following this work session,

2:37:33there will be public sessions to talk

2:37:35about the committee's work here in

2:37:37Contoy's auditorium. Uh between council

2:37:39meetings really. So there will be one on

2:37:41Monday, October 19th, and then Monday,

2:37:43November 2nd, and then Monday, November

2:37:4516th, we'll be advertising those

2:37:47opportunities to solicit public input.

2:37:49The tax fairness ad hoc committee will

2:37:51then reconvene after those public

2:37:53sessions are done to prepare for you all

2:37:55a final recommendation on any charter

2:37:57changes that we would be looking for for

2:37:59uh our March ballot with December being

2:38:01the time frame within which we would

2:38:03have to take action to get an item onto

2:38:05the town meeting day ballot. So with

2:38:07that, in terms of uh the agenda to come

2:38:10here, I know that Nancy is going to give

2:38:12a little bit more of a deeper intro and

2:38:15background here with some slides that

2:38:17our committee members helped to prepare

2:38:18along with Nancy. We'll then hear from

2:38:20councelor Newbieser on the concept of

2:38:22the property transfer tax of 5% on homes

2:38:25of a million dollars or more. Uh Nancy

2:38:28will speak in more detail to uh the uh

2:38:32proposal on on subclassifications,

2:38:34particularly those related to second

2:38:36homes. Deputy Chief of Staff General

2:38:39Monro Accaris will speak to the general

2:38:41concept of a homestead property tax

2:38:43exemption. Councelor Singh will speak to

2:38:46a related proposal uh that the public

2:38:48will be considering and that the

2:38:50committee has been considering around um

2:38:52the exemption being funded through a uh

2:38:55rebate program. and then councelor

2:38:57Sanchez Parkinson will speak to the

2:38:58committee's next steps particularly with

2:39:00respect to uh public engagement and and

2:39:03how we will best engage the community

2:39:04over the three sessions that I spoke to

2:39:06there. Uh so with that uh we'll proceed

2:39:09with the presentation and then open the

2:39:11floor broadly to any comments or

2:39:12questions that we have from counselors.

2:39:14So Nancy, thank you and when you're

2:39:16ready, we'll turn it over to you.

2:39:24>> Hi everybody. Thank you for having me.

2:39:27Um, like councelor Traver said, I'm just

2:39:29going to give a brief um, background and

2:39:32overview of our tax system just to set

2:39:34the stage here. Um, as councelor Travers

2:39:38was saying, this work has been evolving

2:39:40over some time. Um, mayor uh, the mayor

2:39:45started the um, advisory kicked this off

2:39:48with an advisory group uh, last winter.

2:39:51Um, this included both city staff and

2:39:53city councilors, but also a number of

2:39:55members of the public to discuss

2:39:57problems with the current tax system and

2:40:00put together and put together a report

2:40:02on uh some recommendations. And so this

2:40:07group um advanced five recommendations

2:40:10with different levels of support across

2:40:12those recommendations. They included a

2:40:15homestead exemption and um setting the

2:40:17tax rates by classifications as well as

2:40:19this property transfer tax that we'll

2:40:21talk about in a moment. Um over the

2:40:24course of the fall, the administration

2:40:26put forth an advisory question to go on

2:40:29the uh town meeting day ballot, which

2:40:31the city council did not advance. Um

2:40:34since March, uh this city council

2:40:37committee has been meeting um to talk

2:40:40about variations on these ideas.

2:40:44So, a little background on property

2:40:46taxes, which I think will mostly be

2:40:48review, but just um for background, uh

2:40:52Burlington raised about $140 million

2:40:54from property taxes last year or or will

2:40:57this year. Uh which is about two and a

2:40:59half% of the grand list. Um it's

2:41:01important to note that about twothirds

2:41:04of that is dedicated to state taxes and

2:41:07the reforms we're talking about today

2:41:09will only affect the municipal side of

2:41:11people's bills.

2:41:12Uh, municipal property taxes provide

2:41:15about half of our general fund revenue

2:41:18and they're split between these 18

2:41:20splinter rates that are that have

2:41:21dedicated purposes. Most of them

2:41:25relevant to our discussion later around

2:41:27classifications. The state currently has

2:41:30two classifications for the purposes of

2:41:32property taxes. Homestead, which are

2:41:34primary residences, and non-homestead

2:41:36properties. They are they have advanced

2:41:39a bill that would create a third um

2:41:42classification of property a

2:41:44nonhomestead residential. They would

2:41:46split the non-homestead properties into

2:41:48non-homestead residential non-homestead

2:41:50non-residential. Uh that has not been

2:41:53put into effect yet and likely won't for

2:41:55at least another couple years, but it is

2:41:57on the horizon.

2:42:00Uh the state does provide property tax

2:42:04credits to certain households that uh

2:42:07own homestead properties up to uh

2:42:10certain levels of income. The education

2:42:13tax property credit has a much higher uh

2:42:16income cap at $115,000 of uh household

2:42:20income. Whereas municipal, there is a

2:42:24municipal uh property tax credit, but

2:42:26it's capped at $47,000

2:42:28of household income. So 44% of

2:42:31Burlington house uh homesteads do

2:42:34receive an edit towards their education

2:42:37taxes. Uh but only 11% of homesteads

2:42:40receive a municipal tax credit. And with

2:42:43that, I'm going to switch out our slides

2:42:47unless you would like uh Council Nubia,

2:42:49would you like to share them or should I

2:42:50switch them?

2:42:52>> Okay.

2:42:54>> And if it's okay, I'll just say hit the

2:42:56next slide every once in a while.

2:42:57>> Got it.

2:42:58>> Sweet.

2:43:04>> Okay.

2:43:06I will say before turning the floor to

2:43:07councelor Newbieser um these were slides

2:43:11created by councelor Newbieser not by

2:43:13the committee. So some of the slides are

2:43:16not like the others in the presentation.

2:43:18So [laughter]

2:43:18>> what gave it away? Yeah.

2:43:20>> What gave it away?

2:43:20>> Yeah. Uh but councelor Newbieser happy

2:43:23to happy to turn the floor to you for

2:43:25the slides that you've created.

2:43:27>> Thank you, Council President. Yeah,

2:43:28these are these are certainly certainly

2:43:30my slides. Um, and I guess I'll just say

2:43:31my interest as a counselor in this

2:43:34committee, um, was to figure out ways to

2:43:37do exactly this, tax the rich and invest

2:43:39in affordable housing. When I was going

2:43:41doortodoor talking with folks in Ward

2:43:43One, um, and really ever since becoming

2:43:46a counselor,

2:43:48folks pretty consistently have said we

2:43:50should find ways at the municipal level

2:43:52to greatly increase the amount of public

2:43:55money going in to build uh,

2:43:57nonfor-profit, permanently affordable

2:43:59housing.

2:44:00um and that folks with money with the

2:44:02means to be able to pay that uh at the

2:44:04very top should uh front those costs. So

2:44:07I want to talk a little bit about the

2:44:08property transfer tax um of 5% that is

2:44:12one of these proposals. Uh this would

2:44:14apply to single family homes valued uh

2:44:18or sold I should say at $1 million or

2:44:20more um and talk a little bit about what

2:44:22that might mean for our community. So

2:44:25slide.

2:44:28So again, breaking down the proposal, uh

2:44:30very basically, um this would be a

2:44:32municipal tax of 5% at the point of sale

2:44:35when someone sells their single family

2:44:37home. Uh if they sell that for $1

2:44:39million or above, all of the revenue

2:44:42generated uh would go directly under

2:44:44this proposal into the city's housing

2:44:46trust fund. And that's a tool that we

2:44:48use uh going back years now uh to create

2:44:52uh to support the creation I should say

2:44:54of not for-profit permanently affordable

2:44:56renter uh and owner occupied homes in

2:45:00the city.

2:45:02Based on the last few years of sales

2:45:04data that we have as a city, we're

2:45:06talking about approximately two dozen uh

2:45:10sales, meaning about two dozen

2:45:12households per year would be impacted.

2:45:15So the vast vast vast majority of people

2:45:18uh would not be impacted by this

2:45:21proposal um just those at the very very

2:45:24uh top of our city in terms of value of

2:45:28assets. And then finally again it

2:45:30depends on the year and obviously

2:45:31depends on what happens in the future

2:45:33but roughly speaking this will raise

2:45:35more than a million dollars annually for

2:45:38affordable housing in our city.

2:45:41So we can go to the next slide.

2:45:44Um during the committee process, city

2:45:46staff did uh uh confirm that this

2:45:49proposal would be relatively easy to

2:45:51implement. There would be a little

2:45:53administrative um leg work upfront

2:45:55mainly. Um but we would not be required

2:45:58to hire additional staff, etc. to

2:46:02actually implement the proposal if

2:46:04voters approve it and we get it through

2:46:05the state level. This is a charter

2:46:07change. So, the next step to finalizing

2:46:10a proposal like this is to place it on

2:46:12the ballot uh and to allow voters to

2:46:14weigh in. Some open questions that uh

2:46:18were brought up in committee and I think

2:46:20we we do need to iron out prior to

2:46:22officially putting it on the ballot for

2:46:24voter uh approval. Is one is that 5%

2:46:29paid for by the buyer or seller or is it

2:46:32some kind of split? Uh we had discussion

2:46:34briefly about how do we make sure that

2:46:36this is actually enforceable if we were

2:46:39able to implement it. Um and then there

2:46:41was some discussion around in the

2:46:43committee around uh considering a

2:46:45carveout for households in that two

2:46:48dozen households, you know, two dozen uh

2:46:50sales per year if they've added an ADU

2:46:53on their property and is there a

2:46:54carveout that's necessary for that.

2:46:58So I think we can go to the next. So is

2:47:01this a radical idea? That is a good

2:47:04question. The answer is

2:47:06no. It is not a radical idea. Um I want

2:47:09to talk a little bit about why this is

2:47:11not a radical idea and we can go to the

2:47:12next slide for that.

2:47:15So I I want to put this in the context

2:47:18of what's happening around us and I

2:47:19think it's really important and I don't

2:47:21think is sort of too pie in the sky or

2:47:23high level here. Um, the reality is is

2:47:26that the wealthiest folks in our city

2:47:29and state and country are quite

2:47:31literally empirically doing better than

2:47:33they ever have in the history of this

2:47:35country. Uh, going back even surpassing

2:47:38the guilded age. Um, housing as an

2:47:41asset, as a means for building wealth,

2:47:44uh, has appreciated at a record pace.

2:47:46And really when you think about wealth

2:47:48inequality in this country, we really

2:47:51need to start thinking about it as those

2:47:53with assets and those without assets.

2:47:56And obviously uh for most folks prop,

2:47:59you know, uh property ownership is one

2:48:01of a pretty big asset in terms of how

2:48:04they build generational wealth and what

2:48:06they pass on to their kids. Um, but the

2:48:08vast majority of people both in our

2:48:11city, in the state of Vermont, in our

2:48:12country do not have uh the kind of

2:48:15assets that maybe the top five or 10% of

2:48:18us uh may have. Um, and then again just

2:48:22a context piece here on how folks are

2:48:24doing economically who would be impacted

2:48:26by this tax, property transfer tax if

2:48:29implemented. they are very recently have

2:48:32just received the largest uh tax cut in

2:48:35the modern history of the country uh

2:48:38from uh the president and the federal

2:48:40level. And so so far we have not seen

2:48:42any really uh we we haven't seen any

2:48:45effort um or I shouldn't say effort. We

2:48:47haven't seen any successful efforts to

2:48:49recapture that tax cut. We haven't seen

2:48:51any uh increases or moves uh to tax the

2:48:55wealthy. I don't think we could even get

2:48:57a vote in the House on it last

2:48:58legislative session. Um and so that's

2:49:01that's sort of the context we're

2:49:02operating here under. Additionally, here

2:49:06at the local level, um we've got

2:49:08somewhere in the neighborhood, according

2:49:09to the census, of a little over 17,000

2:49:12uh households in the city of Burlington.

2:49:1460% of those folks rent. So right off

2:49:16the bat, you're taking 10,000 of that

2:49:1817,000 households off the table in terms

2:49:21of not being impacted. Uh and again, uh

2:49:25the vast majority of the households who

2:49:27uh do own their home, we're only talking

2:49:30about the 24

2:49:33um most wellto-d do when we're talking

2:49:36about home evaluation on a single family

2:49:39being impacted by this. And so the

2:49:41question is, are we willing to tax those

2:49:4424 households

2:49:46uh in order to make available more

2:49:51permanently affordable not for-profit

2:49:52housing stock for the other uh thousands

2:49:57of us here in the city. So we can go to

2:50:00the next slide here. Again, why isn't

2:50:02this a radical idea? the average sale

2:50:04price going back to uh how few people in

2:50:08our city will actually be impacted by

2:50:09this if we implemented it. The average

2:50:11sale price to give some context here uh

2:50:14of a single family home in the last

2:50:15number of years is in the ballpark of

2:50:17half a million dollars uh which is high

2:50:19but that's speaks to why we uh or why

2:50:23I'm proposing that we set the amount at

2:50:251 million. and the average assessed

2:50:28value of an over owner occupied home is

2:50:30approximately 341,000.

2:50:33Um

2:50:36we also can't ignore the fact that

2:50:38obviously is as you know we've we've

2:50:41constantly discussed on this council

2:50:42community safety um and public health

2:50:45and a big part of that is the fact that

2:50:48we have record levels of folks sleeping

2:50:50outside uh not having access to safe

2:50:53consistent shelter. Um, I would also

2:50:56point out the state of Vermont has had a

2:50:57property transfer tax in place for

2:50:59decades now. Uh, I put in there, maybe I

2:51:01was uh feeling excited when I was making

2:51:04these slides, the sky has not fallen, it

2:51:06is still up there, beautiful and intact.

2:51:09Um, and the reality is that we need more

2:51:11affordable housing. I don't think if you

2:51:13asked any single resident in this city,

2:51:16maybe minus those 24 households I'm

2:51:18proposing, we we place uh a tax on, do

2:51:21we need to put more money into

2:51:23affordable housing? Is there enough

2:51:24affordable housing, both rental

2:51:26opportunities, but also home ownership

2:51:28opportunities? I have not spoken to a

2:51:30person, regardless of political stripe,

2:51:31political party, whatever it might be,

2:51:34background, who has said that um housing

2:51:38in the city is acceptable and we don't

2:51:40need more, you know, affordability isn't

2:51:42a concern in that respect.

2:51:44So, we can go to the next slide here.

2:51:49Yeah. So, uh obviously this is a

2:51:51proposal. Uh, I'm really excited for

2:51:53these public engagement sessions. I

2:51:54think it's going to be important to get

2:51:56folks uh talking about this idea.

2:51:58Excited to hear the public feedback and

2:52:00obviously any questions that we can uh I

2:52:03can speak to tonight or any of us on the

2:52:04committee can speak to tonight. Um, look

2:52:07forward to doing so. Thank you.

2:52:09>> Thank you, Councelor Newbies.

2:52:12Nancy, I think we can turn it back to

2:52:14you if you're able to flip the slide

2:52:16presentation back.

2:52:17>> Okay.

2:52:19I'm just gonna skip ahead a little bit.

2:52:26Okay. Uh

2:52:29oh, never mind.

2:52:35>> Okay. Um so another proposal that the

2:52:38committee discussed um is creating some

2:52:42a way of uh enhance assessments for

2:52:46certain property classes. Um, so as I

2:52:49mentioned before, currently the there

2:52:52are um

2:52:55there are classifications for taxes on

2:52:57the education side. There's homestead

2:52:58and non-homestead properties. They pay

2:53:01two different rates, though lately those

2:53:02rates are basically in line. Um and then

2:53:05on the municipal side, we tax commercial

2:53:08properties at 120% of their appraised

2:53:11value or their assessed um at 120%

2:53:15increasing their taxes above what it

2:53:17would be at normally. Um so the

2:53:19committee discussed a charter change

2:53:21that would allow the city to create

2:53:23other property classifications and

2:53:26increase that assessment ratio um for

2:53:29those properties. So, in particular, we

2:53:31talked about non-homestead second homes

2:53:34and vacant properties. Um, the caveat

2:53:37here is that for both of these

2:53:39classifications, the uh it would rely on

2:53:44being able to identify these target

2:53:46properties successfully.

2:53:49Uh, so there and how we would do that is

2:53:53is is still a slightly open question.

2:53:56There's no current city designation for

2:53:58second homes. um but they could

2:54:01potentially be identified uh using

2:54:03homestead declarations and the rental

2:54:05registry. There's approximately 14,000

2:54:09um residential properties 1400 thanks

2:54:121400 residential properties that are not

2:54:15rentals and are not homesteads. Um if we

2:54:18treated those properties like we treat

2:54:20commercial properties, we could raise an

2:54:23additional $1 million.

2:54:26On the vacant property side, it's it's a

2:54:28slightly different story. Uh DPI has a

2:54:31process for uh finding and um charging

2:54:35vacant building fees to vacant

2:54:37properties and there are 25 vacant

2:54:40properties currently on that list. Um so

2:54:42there would not be a large revenue

2:54:44impact of uh increasing the assessment

2:54:47ratio for those properties, but it could

2:54:50provide incentives for them to convert

2:54:52them uh and and make them not vacant.

2:54:56If I can add just one quick little thing

2:54:58also. Um just one just pointing out

2:55:00again that property um different

2:55:04classifications for different kinds of

2:55:05properties is actually quite common in

2:55:07other parts of the country and some

2:55:08places have many different

2:55:10classifications. So this isn't a it's

2:55:12not a new concept. It's fairly standard

2:55:14honestly throughout the country. Um and

2:55:16then on the second homes front, I just

2:55:18found this very interesting. Um, in the

2:55:21recent uh polls about the election

2:55:23coming up in November, the University of

2:55:26um New Hampshire poll and the Vermont

2:55:28public poll, they had a question about

2:55:29second home taxation and both in both

2:55:32polls, there's widespread support for

2:55:34this among the state across the state of

2:55:36Vermont. Um, of course, you know, with

2:55:39some political party differences, but um

2:55:41but still it's a concept that a lot of

2:55:42people are talking about and there does

2:55:44seem to be quite a lot of interest in um

2:55:46at least throughout the state.

2:55:51Thank you. Next

2:55:52>> and I will talk about homestead

2:55:54exemption. Um I mean I won't spend a lot

2:55:57of time on this only because we've you

2:55:58know we've discussed this in city

2:56:00council before throughout the year. Um

2:56:02but just as a quick reminder um

2:56:05essentially a homestead exemption is

2:56:07when you reduce a homestead property's

2:56:09assessed value by some amount in order

2:56:11to reduce its municipal tax bill. Um, a

2:56:15really a key thing about a homestead

2:56:17exemption is that it could address um

2:56:19documented inequities and assessments.

2:56:21This is where lower valued properties

2:56:24are over assessed compared to higher

2:56:25value properties. We've had some

2:56:27research done. I mean, this is a common

2:56:29problem um throughout the country. We've

2:56:31had some research done here showing that

2:56:34it's here as well. And so this would

2:56:35help to um address that that issue. Um

2:56:39and so what we've been looking at is um

2:56:41you there's there are universal

2:56:43exemptions in which just all homesteads

2:56:45receive you know um a certain value

2:56:47taken off. Um we've also been looking at

2:56:49targeting this more based on you know

2:56:52property value up to a certain amount um

2:56:55or household income or both.

2:57:01And so just as an example um of how this

2:57:04could look uh essentially we um with the

2:57:07homestead exemption you'd want we'd want

2:57:09to keep the um we'd want to keep revenue

2:57:11stable. So in order to make up for the

2:57:14loss in the grandless value the tax rate

2:57:17would need to increase. So, if you're

2:57:19looking at a $50,000 exemption for

2:57:21homesteads, and let's say that we did it

2:57:24up to 350K or less, that would require

2:57:28about a 2% municipal tax rate increase

2:57:31to remain revenue neutral. And this

2:57:33would provide about $400 in tax relief

2:57:37annually to eligible properties.

2:57:45>> Now, we're on to Buddy.

2:57:47>> Thanks, Jen. And thanks Nancy. Uh I just

2:57:50wanted to express um I went back and

2:57:53forth a lot of times with Nancy and

2:57:55she's been amazing as far as u going

2:57:57through the numbers. So I just wanted to

2:57:59acknowledge that and appreciate the

2:58:01other staff that have come um to speak

2:58:03to the committee. [clears throat] So,

2:58:06um, mine's kind of, you know, the idea

2:58:09that I I'm trying to propose here is

2:58:11kind of a and to to the homestead

2:58:14classifications and similar to what

2:58:16Jen's talking about it, but kind of

2:58:18hybriding them all. But in in the

2:58:20instance, my goal was to hold the tax

2:58:22rate constant and lessen the impact on

2:58:25residential, rental, and commercial

2:58:26properties and try to offset the decline

2:58:29in revenue by other means and administer

2:58:32this via refund rather than a blanket

2:58:36exemption across the board. Um and the

2:58:40method and just using you know the

2:58:42simple you know math explanation to keep

2:58:46revenue to raise revenue to give a

2:58:48refund you would either have to raise

2:58:50the tax rate or the assessed value. So

2:58:52my idea was to raise the assessed value

2:58:55and hold the tax rate constant. And I

2:58:57would achieve this by dovetailing this

2:59:00along with the non-h homestead single

2:59:02family condo properties at a factor

2:59:05above the appraised value similar to

2:59:07what we do with commercial property

2:59:08assessments.

2:59:11Why I proposed it as a refund rather

2:59:13than a universal exemp exemption. The

2:59:16universal exemption requires a charter

2:59:18authority and assessing impacts over

2:59:20time would require additional charter

2:59:22charter changes. So if we do a universal

2:59:24exemption, we have 350, we have X as you

2:59:29know our exemption amount. If that

2:59:32doesn't provide enough relief or it

2:59:34doesn't provide targeted relief or we're

2:59:36seeing a lot of people who don't

2:59:37necessarily need relief uh taking

2:59:39advantage of that, it requires a charter

2:59:41change again to to change that. With

2:59:44this, we would be able to pilot

2:59:47different exemption levels at different

2:59:49assessed values and use ordinance and

2:59:52the budget process to refine the

2:59:54impacts. So my thought was is if we have

2:59:58the ability to assess a greater factor

3:00:01on say non-h homestead second homes, we

3:00:05take in [clears throat] additional

3:00:06revenue and then we offer a refund that

3:00:08would be inconsensitive

3:00:10to a certain level based on assessed

3:00:13value and exemption and then we would

3:00:16see the effects of that and whether it

3:00:19is targeted enough. Do we have money

3:00:21left over? Are we short on funds? and

3:00:24then further refine that over time and

3:00:28as things change to offer that refund

3:00:31going forward. Um there [clears throat]

3:00:33was some uh items brought up in

3:00:36committee that I think are worth

3:00:37mentioning. The timing of a refund would

3:00:40most likely have to be in the second

3:00:42half of the fiscal year because revenue

3:00:44needs to be collected before we

3:00:46potentially offer a refund. Uh, a lot of

3:00:49this would be backwardlooking

3:00:51as to whether you declared as a non-h

3:00:53homestead second home. Basically, that's

3:00:57declared on April 1st. The fiscal year

3:00:59starts July 1st. So, this would be end

3:01:02up in the next calendar year. Um the

3:01:05refund would require additional DF, you

3:01:07know, Department of Financial

3:01:08Administration staffing, which could

3:01:11potentially be uh incorporated into the

3:01:14revenue model once we decided um what

3:01:17that rate would be, adding that

3:01:19assessment value um to non-stead home

3:01:22SEC or non-homestead second homes. And

3:01:25the reason I like this and I I do

3:01:28believe an ability to repay is really

3:01:31important on something like this because

3:01:34giving the blanket exemption we would

3:01:36include potentially people that don't

3:01:38necessarily need a refund. I think a

3:01:40good starting place for me would be that

3:01:43people that receive a state rebate on

3:01:45their educational property taxes um this

3:01:48is something that would be a caveat for

3:01:50them to be be able to apply for the

3:01:52refund.

3:01:55All right. Thank you, Councelor Singh.

3:01:58Um, again, I think the the committee has

3:02:01had some very good discussions on all of

3:02:04these items. Hopefully, as evidenced by

3:02:06the presentation this evening, we look

3:02:08forward to other counselors uh feedback

3:02:11and questions on it. But before doing

3:02:12that, we'll turn to councelor Sanchez

3:02:14Parkinson to talk a little bit about uh

3:02:16what's to come in terms of public

3:02:17engagement before we hear from you all.

3:02:20>> Thank you. So, um I just want to also

3:02:22share my appreciation for the city staff

3:02:24and the committee. I think that we

3:02:25really I think we added up 10 meetings

3:02:28since we last started uh meeting as a

3:02:30committee. So, I'm feel really excited

3:02:33to be in this point and to be able to

3:02:35engage the community which was feedback

3:02:37that we received from the council last

3:02:39time. Um with that we are uh me we as

3:02:42mentioned we'll have three community

3:02:44meetings but I also see this working

3:02:46session as really important because

3:02:47other feedback that we received last

3:02:50time that would there there wasn't

3:02:51enough council engagement so I hope

3:02:53you're queuing up your questions um so

3:02:55that we can engage and also I would

3:02:58highly encourage um all counselors to at

3:03:01least attend one of these community

3:03:02forums and to help us um spread the word

3:03:06to make sure that your constituents are

3:03:08included and invited to these different

3:03:11um community forums. I also am working

3:03:14with city staff to see if we can offer

3:03:17dinner and potential child care for

3:03:19these sessions which I think would be

3:03:20really exciting to make sure that um the

3:03:23broadest audience and and community can

3:03:26attend as well. Um I think that is all

3:03:30of the details and more to come on

3:03:33location and details for the for the

3:03:36forums.

3:03:37>> Great. Thank you, councelor Ces

3:03:39Parkinson. Uh, so with that, I think we

3:03:42will open the floor to other counselors.

3:03:45You've heard from those of us who are

3:03:46members of the committee. Certainly,

3:03:48we'll be able to weigh in and answer

3:03:50questions. This is a work session as we

3:03:51proceed. Uh, but any counselors have any

3:03:54questions or comments at this point in

3:03:56time. Otherwise, again, of course, as

3:03:58councelor Sanchez Parkinson mentioned,

3:04:00we have the public forums coming up and

3:04:02then ultimately the goal is to have an

3:04:04item for us to actually debate at our

3:04:06meetings in December.

3:04:11Yes, Councelor Shakar,

3:04:13>> thank you so much. Um, I want to echo

3:04:15gratitude for city staff. I can only

3:04:18imagine how many spreadsheets and

3:04:20numbers, Nancy, in particular, this

3:04:22required. Um, and thank you to the

3:04:24committee who um I believe I was the

3:04:27lead sponsor on standing up this

3:04:29committee and then did not have to

3:04:30participate in those 10 meetings. So,

3:04:33um, I'm really grateful to all of you

3:04:35who have been a part of this. And I want

3:04:37to be really clear for the public

3:04:38because I think the narrative got

3:04:40unnecessarily messy last winter when

3:04:42this was initially up for whether or not

3:04:44to put a question on the ballot. And I

3:04:47want to be clear for me and I think for

3:04:48many, the question was never about

3:04:51whether or not tax fairness matters or

3:04:53is important or should be pursued. um

3:04:56the decision to put a non-binding

3:04:58advisory question, not to put a

3:05:00non-binding advisory question on the

3:05:02ballot was never to say this work is not

3:05:04important. And I'm so grateful that the

3:05:06conversation has continued that we've

3:05:08been able to dive in even deeper to

3:05:10different scenarios and different paths

3:05:12forward. Um, and I also just want to

3:05:14echo before I have a few questions here,

3:05:16but I also just want to say that I

3:05:18appreciate both that we're looking at

3:05:20ways to provide immediate tax relief to

3:05:22folks who need it and looking at

3:05:24pathways to growing revenue for the

3:05:26housing trust fund. Um, I, you know, I

3:05:30also was allowed voice with fixing an

3:05:32administrative error recently that had

3:05:34us putting only 7% of our short-term

3:05:36rental tax instead of the full 9% into

3:05:38that fund. It's a critically important

3:05:40fund. I'm very grateful for all the

3:05:41projects it has sponsored and continues

3:05:44to sponsor in the community. So, I

3:05:45appreciate that this committee explored

3:05:48that as well. So, a few questions and

3:05:51maybe I'll just like rattle them off for

3:05:53the committee members and for you all

3:05:54and then you can answer them at once.

3:05:57Um, one is I'm curious for the um

3:06:00property transfer tax if the 5% if there

3:06:03are models like where did that number

3:06:05come from? I think the state's property

3:06:07transfer tax number is closer to 1%. I'm

3:06:10not aware of of other municipalities or

3:06:13cities or states that have that number,

3:06:16but I just don't I'm not as familiar.

3:06:17So, I'm curious where the 5% comes from.

3:06:20Um, I'm also curious I just wanted to

3:06:22clarify with the homestead exemption,

3:06:25Jen, that you presented. Um, and you

3:06:28said that there would be a 2% universal

3:06:30tax rate increase. Was that just on

3:06:34nonhomestead residential properties and

3:06:37commercial properties or was that also

3:06:39on other homestead? I wasn't totally

3:06:41clear on what that universal 2% increase

3:06:43was for. I continue to have a lot of

3:06:46concern about the possibility of

3:06:48increasing municipal taxes on rental

3:06:51properties on non-homestead residential

3:06:53properties. So I appreciate councelor

3:06:55seeing this kind of more complicated

3:06:59version to understand. I think I was

3:07:00following it, but that there's

3:07:02potentially a path to not adding more

3:07:05tax burden on our rental units, um,

3:07:08which would increase rents. So, um, I

3:07:11appreciated that. So, I'm happy to just

3:07:13kind of leave that there for the minute.

3:07:15And then, um, I'm curious for the three

3:07:19info sessions if like town meeting TV or

3:07:21if there will be ways to tune in or

3:07:23watch afterwards for those of us and

3:07:25also the public who may not be able to

3:07:26be there. I love the uh thinking about

3:07:29dinner in childcare too. It's fantastic.

3:07:31Um I will stop there. Thank you.

3:07:34>> Um I can answer the last question and

3:07:37then I think we'll go to deputy chief of

3:07:40staff Sakars and then councelor Newer to

3:07:42answer your other questions if they're

3:07:43willing to answer them. Councelor

3:07:44Shakar, uh we will hopefully be

3:07:47partnering with and working with Town

3:07:48Meeting TV with respect to uh these

3:07:51these forums. And so, uh, we we hope

3:07:54that there will be a way for the public

3:07:56to engage that way as well. Um,

3:08:01Jen, should we turn to you first with

3:08:02respect to the homestead exemption

3:08:04question, then go to councelor Newer on

3:08:05the

3:08:06>> Yeah,

3:08:06>> one quick thing. Um,

3:08:10>> if it's okay, maybe Nancy can explain

3:08:12how the 2% piece works. Um, I do

3:08:17understand. I don't think I can

3:08:18articulate it as well as Nancy can. Um I

3:08:21just want to clarify just really quickly

3:08:22that in both the um the exemption that I

3:08:27presented and in buddies rentals can

3:08:30technically be included in both

3:08:32including in Buddy's model. Um you can

3:08:33model it both ways in the sense that

3:08:35there can be rentals in the second home

3:08:37category. Correct.

3:08:39We we haven't we haven't finalized a

3:08:41definition for um the sort of second

3:08:45home grouping. Um whether or not it

3:08:48includes

3:08:50um rentals would change some of the

3:08:51modeling. Um

3:08:53>> well no no I guess the main point I was

3:08:54just trying to point out is that um

3:08:58removing including or removing rentals

3:09:00is a choice and you can model it both

3:09:02ways and it just affects the it affects

3:09:04the rates. So Buddy's model or this

3:09:07model one doesn't inherently not include

3:09:09rentals. It just depends on how you

3:09:10model it. So I just wanted to clarify

3:09:12that piece.

3:09:14>> And then um to your question about the

3:09:16the 2% increase, what what effectively

3:09:19happens with the homestead exemption is

3:09:20that we are taking value out of the

3:09:23grand list. And so if you take value out

3:09:25of the grand list, in order to raise the

3:09:27same amount of revenue as before, you

3:09:29need to increase the tax rate. And so

3:09:32the tax rate goes up and it and it

3:09:34applies to all properties including the

3:09:36properties that receive the exemption,

3:09:38but the exemption um ends up being a

3:09:41greater decrease.

3:09:43>> But when you were saying a 2% universal

3:09:46increase, was that only for

3:09:48nonhomestead, residential, and

3:09:50commercial, or was that for everything?

3:09:52>> No, it would be for everything. Like our

3:09:54our regular tax rate 0.9 would have to

3:09:57increase across the board.

3:09:59>> Okay. Thank you.

3:10:01And then councelor Newbies, did you want

3:10:03to answer councelor Shakar's question on

3:10:05the models for the 5% value?

3:10:08>> Um, yes, the the 5% came from the need

3:10:12to tax the rich in order to fund

3:10:14affordable housing. And what I mean by

3:10:16that is we have a community need to

3:10:19raise substantial amounts of revenue for

3:10:21the housing trust fund. uh and we have

3:10:25uh a few dozen households in the city

3:10:27that can uh contribute to that um in a

3:10:31way that they are not currently and so

3:10:33that is where the the 5% came from. So

3:10:36there's

3:10:37>> Sorry, councelor Shaker, you're at time.

3:10:39So

3:10:40>> thank you.

3:10:40>> Well, and to be clear, the

3:10:44again we the the intent of the proposal,

3:10:47the intent of this 5% number uh is that

3:10:50we identify that we need more affordable

3:10:52housing and that we uh as a matter of

3:10:56principle but also pragmatic tax policy

3:10:58are going to tax those uh who have the

3:11:01money to make that happen.

3:11:05Thank you. Uh any other counselors that

3:11:08Yeah, councelor Well, we had councelor

3:11:10Carpenter

3:11:12and then councelor Bergman, did you want

3:11:14to get in the queue? Okay, then we'll go

3:11:15council Bergman and then let one

3:11:18>> go ahead.

3:11:19>> Okay, we can take it and then

3:11:24>> sorry.

3:11:25>> Um these are not in any order. They're

3:11:28just comments and and questions. Um

3:11:32looking at the rebate model that

3:11:34councelor Singh proposed is similar to

3:11:37what we did several years ago with um

3:11:40when we had a lag in the assessment

3:11:42value and we had we were offered the

3:11:45rebate program.

3:11:47>> Are you not able to or can you um

3:11:50guesstimate

3:11:52how many people might get a rebate? I

3:11:55mean, we we know how many people get the

3:11:58homestead exemption now, and that's a

3:12:01sign of their

3:12:05low or not so low income. I mean, the

3:12:07size of the rebate

3:12:09is a reflection of the higher the rebate

3:12:12they get, the lower the income they're

3:12:15likely to have. They have a high high

3:12:18tax value, low income, they get more of

3:12:20a rebate. And so not tonight. Can we can

3:12:25we guesstimate that? Because that would

3:12:27give us some idea of, you know, um what

3:12:31we might be looking at at a revenue

3:12:34loss,

3:12:36right?

3:12:40Yes. We we do not know on the property

3:12:43level what uh property credits people

3:12:46are getting, but we do know 44% of

3:12:48homesteads get a property tax credit.

3:12:51And we have in the past gotten data from

3:12:53the state on sort of how incomes relate

3:12:57>> okay

3:12:57>> to um homestead values and I've asked

3:13:01for an update um to that data

3:13:04>> so we can we can dig into that

3:13:07>> um just

3:13:08>> I would just say specifically with the

3:13:11rebate model the idea was to have the

3:13:13revenue already realized that would

3:13:16provide the rebate. So essentially I'm

3:13:20trying to make it not tax but uh deficit

3:13:25neutral so it would cover its own cost.

3:13:28>> Um I mean that would be another decision

3:13:31we'd have to make. I'm curious that this

3:13:33can be done by ordinance and you've got

3:13:35that clarified.

3:13:38>> I I uh don't have that clarified would

3:13:40be whether ordinance or the budget

3:13:42process is the way we put in that. The

3:13:44proposal we did during COVID was we just

3:13:48did it. So I'm assuming I don't know the

3:13:52legal background but we just we just did

3:13:54it. Um so and it was the budget process

3:13:57I believe.

3:13:58>> Reson by the state.

3:13:59>> Um on councelor um

3:14:02>> sorry councelor litwin you're you are

3:14:04unmuted if you could please mute. Um,

3:14:08thank you on on the transfer tax. Have

3:14:10you spoken to the Vermont Housing

3:14:11Conservation Board who relies entirely

3:14:14on the state transfer tax or not

3:14:16entirely, but um I just think it would

3:14:19be important to get their political

3:14:20opinion and um understand

3:14:25that it will not go through the

3:14:27legislature unless they support it. I'm

3:14:30I just can guarantee that. So, I would

3:14:35have a conversation with them. And I

3:14:37think asking someone, whether they're

3:14:40rich or not, to contribute $50,000 of

3:14:43their home sale is a big bite. And I

3:14:46understand you think those 24 are very

3:14:48wealthy, but um 5% as opposed to 1% is a

3:14:54is a big leap. Um

3:14:58what were my other questions? I guess I

3:15:00asked the percent. Oh, on vacant

3:15:04buildings, I don't why why can't we tax

3:15:07them differently? Can't we just simply

3:15:09change that? I know we have fees for

3:15:11them and you know penalties, but we put

3:15:15that in ordinance and it would seem to

3:15:17me you could undo the ordinance if you

3:15:20wanted to get more revenue from the

3:15:21vacant houses.

3:15:23I mean, that's sort of a um

3:15:26redundant question. And I'm just saying

3:15:29DPI has said we already get fees from

3:15:32them. And what I'm saying if if those

3:15:35vacant buildings can produce revenue in

3:15:37another way,

3:15:39can we not look at another way?

3:15:42>> My understanding is that the fees have

3:15:44to be based on the actual cost to DPI of

3:15:48dealing with these vacant properties.

3:15:50And in order to tax them at a higher

3:15:54rate than other properties, we would

3:15:56need a charter change like we did with

3:15:58commercial properties.

3:16:00>> I I'd be curious to see I'm I'm

3:16:02surprised that the fees are based in

3:16:04charter.

3:16:06>> No, the the fees aren't based in

3:16:07charter, but the fees need to be uh

3:16:11equivalent to the costs to DPI of the

3:16:14vacant properties is is my

3:16:16understanding.

3:16:17>> Yeah. Basically, there are parameters

3:16:19which Bill Ward would be able to speak

3:16:21much more closely to, but there are

3:16:23parameters within which we can move on

3:16:26that, but we can't just move

3:16:27indefinitely in any direction. And my

3:16:30understanding is that we are kind of at

3:16:31the limit of what we can currently do

3:16:33within the law. And so, we would require

3:16:35some kind of legislative or other

3:16:38action. And and that was my suggest. I

3:16:40think we should just look at the law and

3:16:42see if if uh putting them in a different

3:16:46category is against the law, so to

3:16:51speak. Um you might have to drop the

3:16:54fees, but if charging 20% more on the

3:16:57assessment produces more revenue, then

3:17:01maybe that would be worth it.

3:17:04I I guess I'm just suggesting we dig a

3:17:06little more in those vacant properties.

3:17:08Um

3:17:11the other thing you mentioned

3:17:12>> if you can just mention one other thing

3:17:14councelor Carpenter because we've gone

3:17:15through five minutes here.

3:17:16>> Okay. Is just um the in the difference

3:17:19on the valuation problems or

3:17:23inconsistencies and again that seems to

3:17:25me something we should fix not

3:17:27necessarily adjust the tax rate around

3:17:29it. I mean if there's if there are

3:17:32inconsistencies we should fix it.

3:17:35>> Thank you councelor Carpenter. We'll go

3:17:37to councelor Bergman and then councelor

3:17:39Litwin.

3:17:41>> Thanks. Our taxing authority is based on

3:17:44the charter or state law. And so NY's

3:17:47absolutely right. That's why we have

3:17:50been working so hard to work within the

3:17:53um the charter authority that we have on

3:17:56the different areas. So that's why we

3:17:59structured the uh vacant building

3:18:01ordinance the way we did. what is not a

3:18:03tax and since I'm the one who wrote it

3:18:06and you know was able to defend it on a

3:18:08whole lot of reasons that's why and I am

3:18:12very skeptical that you've got the

3:18:14ability legally to be able to do the

3:18:17type of variations on classifications

3:18:20without a charter change so with a

3:18:23>> so I so anyway but not to not to to

3:18:26debate for me um I look at the

3:18:31fundamental principle of what we're

3:18:33doing is to get our revenues paid for by

3:18:37those who are most able to pay for it.

3:18:39And we have got a city which under the

3:18:432023 um gross uh income information that

3:18:47we got uh the adjusted gross income

3:18:50about 90% of the people in our city are

3:18:53makingund under $120,000.

3:18:57So a a year and you know we're only

3:18:59making in terms of the amount of the

3:19:02total income about uh 46%. Like less

3:19:07than half 90% making less than half.

3:19:09There is a great income disparity in

3:19:12this city that I am supportive of us

3:19:15doing things like a property transfer

3:19:17tax. I totally appreciate the suggestion

3:19:21to go and try to get the political

3:19:23support because charter changes require

3:19:26the legislature to do that. But I got to

3:19:28tell you that silence and acquiescence

3:19:31on the status quo is not going to get

3:19:33you anywhere. You don't get anywhere

3:19:35unless you push. And sometimes you got

3:19:37to push and you got to push and you got

3:19:40to push. And you're seeing a moment in

3:19:42this country which is showing that

3:19:45pushing is going to make a difference.

3:19:47Right? And it's so that's where I land.

3:19:52That's where I land in terms of the

3:19:54principles of fair taxation. Um in terms

3:19:58of revenue and maintaining it, I have

3:20:02said consistently

3:20:04for many years that we do not have uh a

3:20:08um an expenditure problem. We've got a

3:20:11revenue problem. So the idea that you're

3:20:14going to create a tax fairness thing

3:20:15that is going to cut revenue makes no

3:20:18sense to me at all. We talk about all

3:20:20the needs that we've got. Heard Charlie

3:20:23talk about, you know, like the crossing

3:20:25lights. I'm sorry, but those cost money,

3:20:28right? They're important. We've got to

3:20:30do that. We've got to do traffic coming.

3:20:33We've got to do police. We've got to do

3:20:35all sorts of thing. Mass transit. You

3:20:37don't get there by cutting our revenue.

3:20:40makes no sense at all to me. Um, and the

3:20:43last point that I just want to make on

3:20:45this is one of one of the basic

3:20:48principles of a of

3:20:52tax fairness

3:20:54being you know being right with this is

3:20:57also having a system which is relatively

3:20:59simple.

3:21:01So we have, you know, that's something

3:21:04as we're building this that we've got to

3:21:06to make that um

3:21:09we we've got to build it in a way that

3:21:11is simple not just to administer but

3:21:14also to understand because the people

3:21:15that are going to use it need to be able

3:21:18to understand it. You make it really

3:21:19complicated, you make it really hard to

3:21:22get to the program, um you will you will

3:21:25save it. That's why Trump is like at the

3:21:28way that they got to the gazillion

3:21:30dollar cuts in Medicaid, right? By

3:21:33making all these hoops that are just

3:21:35going to devastate the system. So you

3:21:38can have on paper all sorts of stuff,

3:21:40but if people can't navigate the system,

3:21:42if they got to jump through too many

3:21:44hoops, they are not going to do it. It's

3:21:46going to just be on paper. So um that's

3:21:51another principle in terms of going

3:21:53through this. So, um I hope we can get

3:21:56to uh to a place that I um will

3:22:00wholeheartedly support on on these.

3:22:02Thanks.

3:22:05>> Thank you, Councelor Bergman. Uh we'll

3:22:07go to Councelor Litwin and then

3:22:09Councelor Broadick.

3:22:11>> Thanks so much. Um and I appreciate

3:22:13everybody. This is a lot to to take in

3:22:16all at once this evening. Um a lot of

3:22:18complex ideas that folks have clearly

3:22:21spent many many hours working through.

3:22:23So, I want to thank everybody who's been

3:22:25doing that. Um,

3:22:29one of the things that I want to just

3:22:32point out is that, you know, we're not a

3:22:34huge city. A lot of these folks who are

3:22:37moving out of these homes or moving into

3:22:39these homes may or may not be rich. I

3:22:42didn't see any data that um that

3:22:46suggested that we had income data on the

3:22:49folks who are buying these homes or who

3:22:52would be buying these homes. Are we

3:22:54talking about um some someone a

3:22:57religious group who buys a home um or a

3:23:00large family uh a multi-

3:23:04you know a particularly large family? Um

3:23:07I do support progressive taxation in

3:23:09other ways. Um, and I look forward to

3:23:13learning more and seeing more about what

3:23:15actually comes out. But

3:23:19I was particularly takenback by this

3:23:22idea that we would create really high um

3:23:26stakes tax policy

3:23:29on a p based on a percentage that was

3:23:31pulled out of thin air that there is no

3:23:34data anywhere as far as we know in the

3:23:38United States that would support such a

3:23:41massive um 5% transfer tax. And we are

3:23:48supposed to be a very datadriven body,

3:23:50right? We have a lot of conversations

3:23:51about the data. Um, and in this case,

3:23:55that's not happening. So, I wouldn't be

3:23:57able to support something as high as 5%

3:24:01um without some sort of example of where

3:24:05that's worked um which we don't have.

3:24:08So, um I I do think these public

3:24:12conversations are important. These work

3:24:14sessions are important. We need to work

3:24:16through these important uh questions.

3:24:18There are definitely constituents of

3:24:20mine who will benefit from some of these

3:24:23um proposals and there are some that

3:24:27would not. And so we need to make sure

3:24:29that we're having very

3:24:31intentional conversations with folks and

3:24:34they feel that they don't aren't finding

3:24:36out at the last minute. So outreach will

3:24:38be critical. And I I heard councelor

3:24:40Sanchez Parkinson loud and clear that um

3:24:43it would be helpful for folks um you

3:24:47know for all of us to help make sure

3:24:48that our constituents are aware of these

3:24:51meetings coming up. So thank you. So um

3:24:55I I guess I'll just leave that there.

3:24:56But I just find the idea that

3:25:00um at this very micro level, this taxing

3:25:03the rich idea, it feels more like a

3:25:08campaign buzzword than um a substantive

3:25:11policy that we would want to pursue. Uh

3:25:14and I'll leave that there. Thank you.

3:25:17>> Right. Thank you, Councelor Litwin. I

3:25:18think we'll go around to uh any

3:25:21councilors that are not on the committee

3:25:22who haven't spoken yet and then would be

3:25:24happy to uh give any committee members

3:25:26an opportunity to uh respond to any last

3:25:29items. I had councelor Brderick next and

3:25:31then councelor Barlo and councelor

3:25:33Grant. Okay, council. Thank you. And

3:25:37thank you to the committee and city

3:25:39staff. And I'm excited to hear from the

3:25:43the rest of Burlington when we have

3:25:46these public meetings um

3:25:52on the the property transfer tax, which

3:25:55I fully support. Um

3:25:59I guess just the the notion that um

3:26:04this would be the first time

3:26:07um or at least the the the only time in

3:26:09the present day that someone is doing

3:26:12something

3:26:14um personally does not waver my belief

3:26:19and that it should be done if we as a

3:26:22city believe that it should be done

3:26:24which is a totally different question

3:26:25obviously that we're debating right now

3:26:27that we will be debating um I just did a

3:26:30very quick Google search to see what

3:26:32what major cities have for their

3:26:34municipal

3:26:36um

3:26:37property transfer tax rate. The first

3:26:39one that came up was Philadelphia that

3:26:41has a 3.278%

3:26:43property transfer tax rate. Um

3:26:47somebody had to propose that and I'm

3:26:50sure they also heard that nobody else

3:26:53has it that high. Um but they did it. Um

3:27:00so I don't I like this is more of I

3:27:04guess a question for the philosophers

3:27:05but um eventually somebody has to do

3:27:08something for the first time and

3:27:10Burlington is well known for being the

3:27:11tip of the spear on many things and I

3:27:15think that is a good reputation to have

3:27:18if we are if we believe as a city um

3:27:21whether it's us on the council or the

3:27:23people of Burlington when hopefully

3:27:24these go to the ballot that this is the

3:27:26right thing and this is what we should

3:27:28be doing. Um, and lastly, I I would just

3:27:32like um to voice caution um in

3:27:36opposition to um the

3:27:40um possibility of um creating an

3:27:43exception of the property transfer tax

3:27:45for those who have um built ADUs. Uh, I

3:27:49think ADUs are a fine program um to

3:27:54increase our housing stock, but there's

3:27:56no guarantee that those ADUs would be

3:28:00affordable housing. Um,

3:28:03so,

3:28:06uh, I think it would kind of defeat the

3:28:07purpose of the property transfer tax

3:28:09whose money would go into affordable

3:28:11housing. So, I I wouldn't believe I

3:28:13don't believe in creating that

3:28:15exception. But again, I'm excited to

3:28:18hear what the public has to say on all

3:28:20of these items. So, thank you all.

3:28:22>> Thank you, Council Broad, Councelor

3:28:24Barlo, and then Grant.

3:28:26>> Um, thank you and and thank you to the

3:28:28committee for continuing this work. Um,

3:28:31because I think it is another important

3:28:33conversation that we're having. Um,

3:28:37I had a just a couple of like comments

3:28:40and questions I guess. Um, first is the

3:28:43comment on the vacant building

3:28:45classification. And I think our vacant

3:28:47building fees are meant to sort of

3:28:50incentivize those property owners to um

3:28:54either redevelop or reinhabit somehow

3:28:56their properties. And in and I'm not

3:28:59sure that it would be a good property

3:29:01classification, at least as I think

3:29:02about it, to uh to try to try to raise

3:29:06revenue on. Um, and I guess along the

3:29:09lines of property classifications, I'm

3:29:11wondering if um the

3:29:15new property classifications we're

3:29:17contemplating align with state

3:29:18definitions or would they be our own

3:29:20definitions? And I'm wondering if there

3:29:22is some value in trying to align our

3:29:25second home definition with whatever the

3:29:27state might have on that just so to make

3:29:30things clear uh for taxpayers. Um, the

3:29:34other thing is I I I hear what people

3:29:36are saying about being the tip of the

3:29:37spear and and um, you know, being the

3:29:41first to try things, but I think we also

3:29:43have to keep in mind that we we have to

3:29:46keep in mind what's possible um, and

3:29:48what's likely and we already have uh,

3:29:52charter changes that have been

3:29:53languishing in um, in the legislature.

3:29:57And you know, we you know, we shouldn't

3:29:59invest a lot of time, energy, resource

3:30:01into things that are going to languish

3:30:04in the um legislature unless we know we

3:30:07have support for these things. So,

3:30:08echoing what councelor Carpenter said

3:30:11earlier, I I wonder if the state would

3:30:13let us hone in on their their their

3:30:16ability to tax property transfers. Um

3:30:19and and so we should get a good read on

3:30:21that before we spend a lot of time

3:30:24trying to um trying to move that

3:30:26forward. And you know, I just did a

3:30:28cursory search of what those tax the

3:30:30property transfer tax rates are from the

3:30:33state and they're they're significantly

3:30:35less than the 5% that's in this

3:30:37proposal.

3:30:39Um, and the other thing is we've

3:30:40[clears throat] had this conversation

3:30:41tonight and I heard um, councelor

3:30:44Bergman talk about raising revenue and

3:30:46having a revenue problem and I always

3:30:47thought of this conversation about tax

3:30:50fairness about being more about revenue

3:30:52being revenue neutrality and trying to u

3:30:55more fairly aortion the the taxes that

3:30:58are collected. So, um I'm not sure if

3:31:02this conversation is about raising more

3:31:05revenue or being fairer to our

3:31:08taxpayers. And those are just my high

3:31:10level uh first impressions on all of

3:31:13this. And um I look forward to the

3:31:16continued discussions in the community

3:31:17forum.

3:31:19>> Thank you, Councelor Barlo. We'll go to

3:31:21councelor Grant.

3:31:24>> Hi, thank you for all the work. I've

3:31:26I've tried to follow some of the

3:31:28meetings, but they're during my work

3:31:30hours, but um I appreciate the details

3:31:34uh to the conversation. Uh, I will say

3:31:38the homestead exemption option, which is

3:31:41something that I actually support, it's

3:31:45it's interesting the way it was

3:31:47previously battered around even though

3:31:50it was the most popular option that came

3:31:52out of the uh mayor's group that she had

3:31:56uh put together to talk about tax

3:31:59fairness. And I still regret very much

3:32:02that um we as a council could not see

3:32:06fit to allow uh the residents of

3:32:09Burlington to vote on that option

3:32:12because I think to have allowed that

3:32:15vote would have given us um really

3:32:18important information in this

3:32:20conversation. Right? We denied the

3:32:22people that vote. We denied ourselves

3:32:25um additional information that we could

3:32:28have. Um, so and I I could see some of

3:32:32the back and forth like why bring it

3:32:34forward again when there was in fact

3:32:36this push back and not allowing it to be

3:32:38put on the ballot. I think that's valid

3:32:41questions. Um, I am deeply troubled by

3:32:45the the rebate option. I don't see this

3:32:51um

3:32:53I I just don't see it working as

3:32:56intended. I think first of all it's it's

3:32:59going to make people jump through hoops

3:33:01because this is going to require people

3:33:04to

3:33:06fill out paperwork that has to be

3:33:09processed in order to determine what

3:33:11rebate they would be um eligible for. So

3:33:16that's going to set a very high bar for

3:33:18people to access that benefit. And when

3:33:23we talk about

3:33:25how much people have to work these days,

3:33:29um the lower the income, the more you're

3:33:32working, you're creating one more thing

3:33:34that people have to do. And I just when

3:33:37we talk about having to add staff, I

3:33:40actually have a a question for CA uh CEO

3:33:44uh Chad with regards to what that would

3:33:48look like. What would the the burden on

3:33:53um the DFA team be?

3:33:56Like is one person enough? Would it have

3:33:59to be more than one person? would the

3:34:01revenue

3:34:03be that we would have to spend on

3:34:06staffing and then in the time I I don't

3:34:08know if that was something that was

3:34:11discussed but I would I would love to

3:34:12hear your input on that.

3:34:18>> I appreciate that question. It was

3:34:20something that was asked um and it is

3:34:23something that we're working through

3:34:24with staff. Nancy is helping us to

3:34:27collect a little bit more data so that

3:34:29we can figure out what exactly that

3:34:32workload to the best that we can figure

3:34:34out would look like and would one person

3:34:36be able to cover that. So stay tuned. Um

3:34:38and we'll get back to you with more

3:34:40info.

3:34:42>> Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate

3:34:43it. Uh that's all I have.

3:34:47>> Thank you, Councelor Grant. I think uh

3:34:50I'll turn to you just a moment,

3:34:51Councelor Sanchez Parkinson. I think

3:34:52every counselor who is not a member of

3:34:54the committee has had an opportunity to

3:34:56speak now and so I would be happy to

3:34:58turn back to committee members as well

3:35:00as uh Nancy our sort of exeicio

3:35:03committee member here uh for any further

3:35:05thoughts that you have and councelor

3:35:07Sanchez Parkinson I see your hand raised

3:35:09turn to you.

3:35:10>> Thank you. Um, I want to just appreciate

3:35:13all of the counselors who have not been

3:35:14part of the committee because um, as I

3:35:19started going down this path, um, this

3:35:21conversation, one thing was very clear

3:35:24that we're talking about people's

3:35:26wealth. We're talking about people's

3:35:28properties. Um, and it creates big

3:35:30feelings. Um, and we're we see that when

3:35:33we have discussions here on council, and

3:35:36we're going to see that when we go out

3:35:37to the public. And so I guess one

3:35:40initial request that I have for um our

3:35:45our council and and our committee is

3:35:47that we go into these discussions

3:35:49understanding that we're going into the

3:35:51community forums with people already

3:35:53being um highly sensitive around this

3:35:57topic and we are going to have power

3:36:00dynamics coming into play in those

3:36:02conversations. We're going to have

3:36:03people who come in because they may be

3:36:06impacted because their homes are valued

3:36:08at a million or up. Or we might have

3:36:10people who don't even own a home and may

3:36:12never own a home. Um and so being aware

3:36:16of those power dynamics when we go into

3:36:18community forums, I think is going to be

3:36:20very important. Um because we know that

3:36:23as um councelor Barlo was just saying

3:36:26like really the goal here is to create

3:36:28some relief for folks and that is going

3:36:30to um require that some folks in our

3:36:33community end up having to to to pay

3:36:36some of that. And so um I think that has

3:36:40been top of mind in today's discussion

3:36:42um and as we go into our our forum. Um,

3:36:46I did want to point out that the state

3:36:49transfer tax has been brought up a

3:36:50number of times and I just want to note

3:36:52that yes, it is a very the the

3:36:55percentage is is very distinct. We're

3:36:57looking at a 2% or less um for the state

3:37:00transfer tax and and the proposed one

3:37:02was 5% and up. Uh I do want to

3:37:05differentiate that the state transfer

3:37:07tax is looking at a much lower um

3:37:11property value than what is being

3:37:13proposed. And so, um, that I think makes

3:37:16a very clear difference for for me and

3:37:20how I think about this proposal. And so,

3:37:23um, I believe that we're looking at the

3:37:25state begins, um, that tax transfer is

3:37:29around 2% for 200 homes valued at

3:37:33200,000 and up, whereas we're looking at

3:37:36a million and up. And so I would be

3:37:38curious to play around with some of

3:37:40those numbers because I I do I I do know

3:37:43that the 5% is is pretty high, but I

3:37:45just wanted to make that distinction

3:37:46that it is a very different proposal. Um

3:37:50that's all for now. Thank you all.

3:37:53>> Thank you, councelor. Uh any other

3:37:55members of the committee, Nancy

3:37:57included, have any further thoughts

3:37:59here? Yep. Councelor Singh. Yeah, I just

3:38:00want to make a clarification, you know,

3:38:03on the proposal that I have come up with

3:38:05is the charter authority we would need

3:38:09would be to assess uh non-homestead

3:38:12second homes at a different rate than

3:38:14they are currently assessed similar to

3:38:16commercial. It would not be a situation

3:38:19where we're offering a rebate and

3:38:21reducing revenue. The idea would be to

3:38:24increase revenue by assessing a

3:38:26different factor to non homestead single

3:38:29family and condos. Using that additional

3:38:33revenue, then you would stand up a

3:38:35refund program that could be tailored

3:38:39and changed based on uh homestead value

3:38:43and homestead exemption and measuring

3:38:45the effects of that. Currently, people

3:38:48already file for their educational

3:38:51property tax rebates. We do we would

3:38:54know the distinct set of people that

3:38:57would have a 340k

3:39:01assessed value because we have that and

3:39:03we could direct mail directly to those

3:39:06people and say you're eligible for a

3:39:08rebate. Um, so when when I hear those

3:39:13type of obstacles, just similar to

3:39:16everything else is we can find a reason

3:39:19to not do these things, but or we could

3:39:21find a reason to do them, similar to

3:39:23what other counselors have said here

3:39:25this evening. Um, so the rebate program

3:39:28will be part of the budget process. What

3:39:30we'd need to ask charter authority for

3:39:32would be the different classifications

3:39:34and to stand up a different assessment

3:39:36factor. exactly what we do for

3:39:39commercial properties.

3:39:42Thank you, council sing. Any other

3:39:45thoughts or comments from folks?

3:39:50All right, this was a real work session,

3:39:52so I appreciate folks participation and

3:39:54we'll look forward to the public

3:39:56meetings to come. And again, Nancy, uh

3:39:58tons of gratitude to to you and uh CIO

3:40:02Shod, uh yourself and members of your

3:40:04team as well for your participation in

3:40:05this process.

3:40:08Okay, we have one last deliberative item

3:40:11which is that uh the board of finance is

3:40:15that committee which its members are uh

3:40:18appointed by the

3:40:21uh full city council. Um, I'll provide

3:40:25councelor Newbieser an opportunity to

3:40:27speak to it if he would like, but

3:40:28councelor Newbieser as I understand it

3:40:30is uh may may I say okay is is welcoming

3:40:35a third baby uh into their household

3:40:38here which is amazing and we

3:40:39congratulate you and welcome you to the

3:40:43three kid club. Um and uh uh as a result

3:40:49um a decision has been made that uh the

3:40:52recommended action here is that the

3:40:53council would act to um replace

3:40:57councelor Newer on the board of finance

3:40:59uh with with councelor Bergman. Um but

3:41:02councelor Newer, before we turn to a

3:41:04motion to that regard, anything that you

3:41:06wanted to add on this particular piece?

3:41:09Um, no, just that I I appreciate uh my

3:41:13colleague stepping in and will allow me

3:41:15a little more time to spend with my

3:41:17family over the next couple months and

3:41:19like you said, we welcome um our third

3:41:21kid to to our family. So, I appreciate

3:41:23it.

3:41:24>> Great. Congratulations.

3:41:26Um,

3:41:28is there a motion to appoint Councelor

3:41:31Bergman to the board of finance?

3:41:36>> So, moved by councelor Bergman. Uh, I

3:41:39don't know if it needs a second, but for

3:41:41good measure, is there a second?

3:41:43>> Second.

3:41:44>> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Barlo. Um,

3:41:48Council Bergman, anything you want to

3:41:50say on the matter?

3:41:52>> I've done a lot in the city. I have

3:41:54never served on the board of finance.

3:41:57[laughter]

3:41:58We'll check another box for you. Um,

3:42:01great. Any comments or questions on this

3:42:04item?

3:42:07All right. Seeing none, we'll go to a

3:42:09vote. All in favor of the motion made by

3:42:11Councelor Bergman to appoint Councelor

3:42:13Bergman to the board of finance

3:42:15[laughter] say I.

3:42:17>> I. I.

3:42:18>> Any opposed?

3:42:20>> All right, that carries unanimously.

3:42:22Congratulations, Councelor Bergman and

3:42:24Councelor Newer. Thank you very much for

3:42:25your service on the board. Um, that is

3:42:29the end of our deliberative agenda. It

3:42:31is not quite 10:30. Uh, we do have city

3:42:34council, general city affairs and city

3:42:36council president council updates. I do

3:42:38not have any updates, but do any

3:42:39councilors have items for general city

3:42:41affairs?

3:42:45>> Yes, councelor Sanchez Parkinson.

3:42:47>> Um, I just wanted to note, and I felt

3:42:48bad for not acknowledging this earlier,

3:42:51we did have a number of UVM students

3:42:53that came out here on a field trip today

3:42:55um to visit our city council. um they

3:42:58did end up leaving a little early, but I

3:43:00just wanted to acknowledge that um UVM

3:43:02is making a couple of trips down here

3:43:04with their students.

3:43:06>> Great. Thank you for calling that out.

3:43:10Any other comments for general city

3:43:11affairs?

3:43:14>> Okay. Again, I don't have a council

3:43:16update. So, absent objection and seeing

3:43:19no other business before the council, we

3:43:21will adjourn the meeting at 10:20 p.m.

3:43:24Thank you.

3:43:45Yeah.

3:43:51[music]

3:43:53Down.

3:44:00>> [music]