2026-10-27 - Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee

00:00So, um I will call to order

00:03the uh city council transportation,

00:05energy and utilities committee at 5:32

00:09and I would entertain a motion on our

00:12agenda this evening.

00:12>> I move to approve the agenda as posted.

00:16>> Second.

00:17>> Have a motion and second. I all any

00:20discussion?

00:22Seeing none, all those in favor indicate

00:23by saying I.

00:24>> I.

00:25>> I.

00:27>> And that is unanimous. No. Uh, next on

00:30our agenda is approvement uh, adoption

00:32of our minutes from our

00:34September 27th meeting.

00:36Entertain a motion on that.

00:39>> I move the adoption of the minutes as

00:42posted.

00:43>> Second.

00:45>> We have a motion and a second. Is there

00:46any discussion?

00:48Seeing none, all those in favor of

00:50adopting our minutes indicate by saying

00:52I.

00:53>> I.

00:53>> I.

00:55>> And now we're moving on. Uh, public

00:57forum. There's nobody.

01:00Andrea, are you here to speak?

01:01>> You know how I love to talk at public.

01:03>> I didn't say you signed up. So, you're

01:04welcome.

01:05>> You're welcome to just uh maybe state

01:07your name for the record and

01:09jump on in. I'm Andrea Beats from

01:12Heinerberg Community Senior Center, and

01:15I'm here tonight because I was watching

01:17City Council last night

01:19and heard the announcement for this

01:22meeting and. Looking at

01:24microtransit and ADA, and

01:27transportation, is an enormous issue for

01:30our seniors,

01:32and we have a lot of,

01:34uh,

01:35challenges,

01:36uh, working with SSTA,

01:39and I'm just interested to hear

01:42what's going on.

01:44>> Well, great. I'm glad that um

01:45>> recording in progress.

01:49>> I'm glad someone um is listening to our

01:52um committee reports at city council and

01:54thank you for attending. Um is there

01:57anybody else here uh here? There's

01:59nobody here. Anybody online who's uh

02:02interested in speaking at public forum?

02:04Use the raise hand function in Zoom if

02:06you are and we'll recognize you.

02:14I do not see anybody who's looking to

02:17speak. Um, if you

02:20have comments during the meeting, I'll

02:21probably uh indulge that. Use the raise

02:24hand function and make us aware and uh

02:26we'll let you make comments then.

02:29Um, so

02:30with that,

02:32we'll move on to our deliberative

02:33agenda. I'll close public forum move and

02:35move on to our deliberative agenda. And

02:38the first item on our deliberative

02:39agenda is a

02:41is um information on a GMT micromobility

02:45and ADA study.

02:46Um and we don't have any

02:49um

02:50written material for this and there's no

02:52attachments to the meeting, but my

02:54understanding is there'll be a verbal

02:56update and I think Chris, you're here to

02:58do that. You're welcome to join us at

03:00the table and

03:06Okay.

03:12Uh Chris Deiani, director of planning

03:14for Green Mountain Transit. Um and like

03:17chair said here to talk about

03:18microtransit. Um

03:20so just a little bit

03:22of

03:23history. So

03:25um

03:26in Vermont there have been a number of

03:28microransit projects um pretty much all

03:31in

03:32uh the rural parts of the state. I

03:35believe five or six GMT was the first uh

03:38transit a agency to implement a

03:40microtransit uh project in in the Milia

03:43Berlin area um starting in 2021.

03:46Um that service is still continuing even

03:48with the transition from a rural service

03:50to Tri Valley Transit. And so you know

03:52coming into the study uh GMT staff have

03:55at least an understanding of what it's

03:57like to

03:58manage and operate uh the microtransit

04:00service. And so um that really helped uh

04:03inform sort of or have us have a better

04:05understanding of

04:06uh the service.

04:09>> Yep.

04:10>> You guys went through

04:13welcome to join us at the table if you'd

04:15like.

04:15>> Sure.

04:17>> Um so like I was saying

04:18>> maybe

04:19Clayton introduce himself too for the

04:21record and for

04:23>> I am Clayton Clark, general manager for

04:24Green Mountain Transit is sorry for

04:26being late and I'll let Chris continue.

04:29>> Sorry to interrupt you. Yeah. No. Um,

04:32so what I was saying, so for,

04:34uh, for this study, it really, you know,

04:36timed well with, uh, GMT's return to our

04:39urban focus and really looking at what

04:41microtransit might look like here in

04:43Chittening County. Um, the only,

04:46uh, previous study that has happened to

04:48date for microtransit in Chitten County

04:49was the town of Wilston a couple years

04:51ago. Um, looked at what microtransit

04:53might look like. Um, GMT was part of

04:56that study. And one of the things that

04:58came out of that a couple years ago was

05:00just saying, you know, we really need to

05:02look at this holistically, not just sort

05:04of town by town, look at it in sort of

05:06the context of GMT's entire,

05:09um,

05:09service area. And so,

05:11uh, we we applied for UPWP funding, uh,

05:14last year to help fund, uh, this

05:16particular study. And um so over the

05:18past few months we've been working with

05:19Steman Hill Consulting who is a longtime

05:21consultant for GMT as well as uh VIA who

05:24is a technology provider

05:26um in the microtransit and transit

05:27planning space. Um I'll stop there if

05:30there's any sort of other intro stuff

05:32planning that you wanted to touch on

05:33before

05:34>> No, just other than um I want to let

05:37folks know that you're getting a preview

05:39that uh our own board has not yet

05:41received. So, we're going to be pretty

05:43light on details just because our own

05:45organization has has not had a chance to

05:47to review. Uh, but certainly happy to um

05:51to share with you, you know, some of our

05:52thoughts. Um, I will say that

05:56um

05:57I probably don't see a pathway forward

06:00for

06:01uh this service until GMT experiences

06:03some financial stability that we've, you

06:06know, been trying for. And uh

06:09um so I just want to make sure that

06:10we're realistic

06:12um with knowing that

06:14um you know our financial situation is

06:17going to

06:18uh play into how we move forward with

06:20this. So

06:22uh other than that Chris please uh

06:24continue.

06:25>> Yeah. So just to sort of level set what

06:28microtransit is. It is essentially a

06:31shared ride

06:32uh similar to a taxi or Uber and lift

06:34but run and managed by a public transit

06:36agency. In some instances it's operated

06:38directly by the transit agency. In other

06:40instances it's operated by

06:43um a third party vendor that the transit

06:44a agency manages. Um

06:47and really for

06:49the study there were sort of two

06:50overarching goals. One is knowing that

06:52we wanted to try and be as efficient

06:54with the service. Um, and in

06:56implementing a microransit service would

06:58also

06:59be taking in our ADA, Americans with

07:01Disabilities Act, uh, passengers as well

07:03as our O and D, older adults and persons

07:05with disabilities program and taking

07:07those riders and also co-mingling them

07:08with general public passengers who might

07:10not qualify for one of those programs.

07:12Um, so making sure that there was sort

07:14of no harm to existing riders in this

07:16demand response space was one of the

07:17goals. And then the other major goal is

07:20uh Clayton and I have talked a lot about

07:21with this committee about sort of the

07:23challenges GMT has faced and we don't

07:25want this system to negatively affect uh

07:28the fixed route service. We really

07:30wanted to enhance uh the fixed route

07:32service and get more more people

07:34um in our buses. Um so those were sort

07:36of the two sort of goals at

07:39uh the onset. Um,

07:42and really, you know, I think about all

07:44of microtransit and and the study really

07:46touches on this is it's kind of like

07:48layers of a cake. There's really

07:49different pieces that we're we're

07:50looking at. And so

07:52um

07:53you know the the study looked at for the

07:56for the ADA and O andD passengers uh

07:59putting it into the system it's

08:01um

08:02it's kind of keeping the same but with

08:04but with maybe a different technology

08:05that can uh

08:07better co-mingle rides and stuff like

08:09that than maybe what is currently

08:10happening. So you really using

08:11technology to make the experience better

08:13for that uh that group of folks and then

08:16um

08:16adding in the general public passenger

08:19folks. And so,

08:20um, the study also, you know, there's

08:22probably a thousand different scenarios

08:24that we could look at, but we really

08:25wanted to keep it contained knowing

08:27that, um, keep it contained to the what

08:30is our existing, uh, ADA pair transit

08:32zone. And so, what we really looked at

08:33for this study was just looking at, uh,

08:363/4 of a mile

08:38outside of our existing fixed route

08:39service for both weekdays, Saturdays,

08:42and Sundays. And so, you know,

08:44there's certainly areas where we could

08:46look, you know, even further than that,

08:48but that seemed to really match well

08:49with what we think is the most feasible

08:52um service area to be to provide the

08:54most efficient service. Um,

08:57one of the other pieces with

08:59technologies, there's a a

09:01sort of litany of levers that

09:04uh

09:05we can that we worked with via in the

09:07study for and uh when operating the

09:09server. So you can you can customize

09:11things like how far is the service um

09:14going to ask somebody to walk to a

09:16microtransit vehicle? Um how long are we

09:19going to ask people to wait for the

09:20microtransit vehicle? Um things like

09:22that really affect the quality of

09:24service for

09:25uh for what microtransit looks like here

09:27in Chenning County. Um or how many times

09:30you know can is a system going to ask

09:32somebody to to transfer to the fixed

09:34route. Um, and then the other lever,

09:36too, is,

09:37um, knowing that for us the goal is to

09:39really get people on the fixed route

09:41service is what is the maximum distance

09:42we're going to allow the system to,

09:45uh, do, say, a microtransit trip only

09:47and not have somebody transfer from a

09:51domain response vehicle to a fixed route

09:53vehicle? Um

09:55so you know Clay touched a little bit on

09:58the sort of the the feasibility of the

10:00service. Just to put into context, um

10:03we've talked a lot, we've talked here

10:04with this committee about uh Vrans puts

10:07together a report about the cost per

10:08passenger and

10:10um our our fixed route service here in

10:12Chenning County moves is about six to

10:14seven bucks per passenger in terms of

10:16the cost whereas microtransit service

10:18across the state and also

10:21um for this type of service would be in

10:22the area of

10:2430 $35 per passenger. So just in terms

10:26of scale, you know, really want to set

10:28that out there that recognizing it's a

10:30different service model. Um

10:32it also is a lot more expensive to

10:34operate um even when you're adding in

10:36general public passengers um to the

10:39service model. So for sure that's the

10:42cost per passenger. Yep. Exactly. Yeah.

10:43So taking the operating cost basically

10:45divided by you know the number of people

10:47that

10:48are using the service

10:51um

10:52>> and that is

10:54for

10:54um the entire if you were to have it in

10:57the entire service area you were talking

10:59about like 3/4 of a mile for the entire

11:02>> correct area

11:03>> correct

11:04>> Um, okay,

11:08um, and so one of the things, you know,

11:10is what is that expected wrership? And

11:13so, for the the number that I just

11:15tossed out there, we're talking about

11:16roughly 230

11:19uh000

11:20passengers a year, which, you know, we

11:22do 1.7

11:23million rides to 2 million rides in our

11:25fix art service.

11:27That would be an additional sort of

11:28230,000

11:29rides in the system. Um, again, there

11:32are

11:33uh a number of levers like I mentioned

11:35that can sort of

11:36uh affect that. Um, one of the things

11:40uh with the connection to the fixed ride

11:42service is that

11:43um this would allow or we estimate that

11:46about

11:4750 to 60%of

11:49the microransit rides would also be a

11:51ride on the fixed route service.

11:54>> Um, and so you know that's that's sort

11:57of where the the modeling sort of came

11:58out of that

11:59>> because it would be a transfer or

12:01>> because it'be a transfer. Exactly. Um,

12:03and a lot of it is is dependent on the

12:06the type of service that's out there. So

12:07here in Burlington, we have really, you

12:09know, the most robust, most frequent

12:11service compared to the other

12:12municipalities of Chen Canyon. And so

12:14there's a lot more opportunities for the

12:16rides to be sort of

12:17um

12:18intersected between that microtransit

12:20ride and the fixed route ride, you know,

12:22in other parts of our service area where

12:24the service is a lot less frequent. Um

12:27you're going to see a lot more of those

12:29kind of microransit only rides just

12:31because or the ride might just not even

12:34uh come up as an eligible ride.

12:36um because of the sort of micro

12:38frequency that we have in other parts of

12:40the system.

12:43Um

12:45anything else quite I have some other

12:46things but if there's other I think

12:47you're hitting it great. Um so the study

12:51>> um

12:52has got all the the

12:53>> it has it has a lot more granular

12:55details

12:55>> and yeah that we could

12:58we can sort of pull out

13:00once we you know once you uh fed it with

13:02your with your board.

13:04>> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Um, one of the, you

13:05know, one of the things that, uh, going

13:08into the study that we knew sort of when

13:11we wanted to look at this, as well as

13:12coming out of sort of all the service

13:13reduction that we've had over the past

13:15couple years are, rare areas where,

13:17um, there are now gaps in our service,

13:20uh, because of some of the service

13:22changes that we've made over time. I

13:23think one of the most notable ones that

13:25we've heard a lot about is

13:27uh, airport access. Um, and so, you

13:29know, that was a particular place where,

13:32um, we asked the consultants to sort of

13:34look at

13:37what would that take to sort of have

13:39microtransit,

13:41say, in that 4:30 to 6:00 a.m. time

13:43frame when, when most of the flights

13:45leave, or in that 10 to 11:30 p.m. time

13:48frame when all the flights are, are, you

13:49know, coming back in into the airport.

13:51And um so that was one of the areas in

13:53particular that um

13:55that we asked them to look at. Uh again,

13:57you know, it's it's a large service

13:59area. Those are times where our fixed

14:01route service isn't the most

14:03um the most frequent. So, it's really

14:04trying to find that balance of what kind

14:06of level of fix route service as well as

14:08um

14:09resources for microtransit we have to

14:12offer out there.

14:15Um one of the other pieces that's

14:16actually tying in with the completion of

14:18the study and some of the work that the

14:20office of city planning is doing is um

14:22they're working on a a mobility hub

14:25guide book. I don't know if they've come

14:26yet to the toque on that, but

14:28um that is another opportunity where

14:30we're really at least making sure to set

14:32up some of the

14:33uh framework for what

14:35uh microtransit might look like with

14:37these mobility hubs. Um because one of

14:39the pieces for

14:41the service design is,

14:43you know, a taxi might get picked up and

14:45dropped off at any

14:47number of places across the area. to

14:49make the the microtransit service

14:51efficient. Uh the consultants recommend

14:53that you put sort of designated transfer

14:56points where that connection from

14:57between the microtransit vehicle and the

14:59fixed route vehicle may be.

15:01Obvious places are places like the

15:02transit center, but also uh like the

15:04Ethan Allen shopping center and the new

15:06north end or other places throughout the

15:07service area. And so that's really where

15:09that connection to some of the work that

15:11uh city planning is doing on creating

15:13these sort of mobility hubs um for a

15:15spot for microtransit and transit to

15:17sort of

15:18co-inact.

15:20>> Did the didn't this study just look at

15:22like a a Burlington only pilot or any

15:26pilots just in Burlington?

15:28>> Nothing specifically to to one

15:29municipality. And so that's that's one

15:31of the pieces I think as we sort of look

15:33at what next steps are.

15:35Um, we have to kind of figure out

15:37whether there's a sort of really

15:38targeted approach, that there could be

15:40some sort of funding partner to really

15:41help offset some of those, um, higher

15:43cost per passenger rides, um, in maybe a

15:46smaller more targeted market whether

15:47that's the airport or some other, other,

15:50um, you know, specific targeted area.

15:53>> So that would be a follow-up study.

15:55>> It' be a follow-up study. It would also

15:58um

16:01microtransit is one of those those

16:03things where

16:04and the consultants talked about this.

16:06It's kind of you you really kind of want

16:08to start small and then work your way

16:10because there's so many levers. You

16:11could add another vehicle on the road.

16:13That obviously comes with cost, but add

16:14another vehicle to

16:16increase the the quality service or

16:18there's a lot more ways to really

16:20kind of test and pilot in the moment as

16:23opposed to sort of a sort of a picture

16:25server. putting in large amounts of

16:26investment to put in a new route or

16:28something like that. Um so

16:31while it might be more expensive on a

16:32cost per passenger basis, there is sort

16:34of the ability to test and tweak

16:36particular things. And I think, just as

16:38we are going to need to sort of innovate

16:40on the

16:42operational transit side, this is an

16:44opportunity for us to innovate on the

16:46financial side. Because,

16:48um,

16:49I think you've heard me talk before

16:51about our statute being,

16:53um, a bit broadened for us to have

16:55service agreements, um, with

16:57non-municipal actors.

16:59And uh

17:01so when

17:02uh when I hear uh Chris talk about well

17:04the airport needs people that are

17:06um you know riding early and late and

17:09then I think well gee who are some of

17:11the people that are using that service?

17:13Well, maybe like the hotels or, the are

17:15the folks that we would want to

17:16approach,

17:17um, to

17:18uh, to say, "Hey, you know, we, we, in

17:20as an alternative to operating your own

17:22shuttle, if you could make, if you made

17:24a contribution, um, you know, we would

17:26be able to do a service like this

17:28because I,

17:29uh, I want to make sure that we are sort

17:31of aligning, uh, the financials with the

17:34beneficiaries."

17:37Uh

17:40this is that's sort of like the next

17:42round

17:43of of thinking, right?

17:46>> So if I could just add when you're

17:48adding the uh the thinking to that um

17:51don't ignore the transportation demand

17:54management um ordinance that we have in

17:56place right now.

17:58But also

18:00uh there is continued work

18:03uh by the planning office on

18:06um

18:07revisions to the TDM

18:09ordinance and

18:10um trying to make it

18:13um

18:14more effective than than what it is and

18:18you know we've got we we've got our

18:19we've got the the camel's nose in the

18:22tent

18:23>> and uh I'm looking to get the the hind

18:26quarter in.

18:27So

18:28um

18:29you're you're I think that if you can uh

18:33um build that into the into the concept

18:36that there's

18:38there's a lot of potential there

18:44>> any other committee members. Do you have

18:46more presentation?

18:47>> No this really discussion you know I

18:49just want I think having question

18:50discussion really would help would

18:51>> Okay. Good.

18:53>> Um are there other questions from

18:54committee members right now? Go ahead,

18:57Mary.

19:00>> Yeah. No, I think uh

19:03yeah, I think I I'm just kind of

19:05probably reiterating what you just said,

19:06but I think for Burlington at least, you

19:09want you want microransit to

19:13enhance the this the service that we

19:15already have with the the buses and and

19:17support them. So whether it's the two

19:20examples I I think of our like what you

19:22said with getting people from where they

19:25where they live or or work or wherever

19:28to

19:29a bus stop

19:30uh

19:31that can take them somewhere else. I

19:33think of an example that we hear

19:36all every other week in public forum.

19:38somebody who used who lives on the 11

19:40who on the former site of the 11 who

19:43cannot get to the hospital anymore. If

19:45microtransit can get them to a number

19:47two bus stop and they can get to the

19:49hospital. Um and then also about the

19:52hospital the other side of it is

19:54extending the capacity of our current

19:56lines to get to other places maybe

19:59piloting future routes like going to

20:02tilly drive from the hospital.

20:05>> Um

20:06so I think those are

20:08important uses and I so I

20:10I'm I'm glad that this is something that

20:12we're taking on. So, thank you.

20:15>> One one thing I'll just add on that I

20:17think one of the things we talk about a

20:19lot when we're talking with partners in

20:21the area is particularly on maybe sort

20:24of the peripheries of our service areas.

20:26What are the different modes of transit

20:27and needing to needing to have sort of

20:30the the backup data to show it's worth

20:32it to send a 40ft bus

20:34down a particular place. And so, you

20:36know, we're always talking about what,

20:38say, maybe the smallest mode might look

20:39like, which is a vanour or now in this

20:42case microtransit, that would then give

20:44us the data. And there's, there's plenty

20:45of

20:46uh studies out there that show,

20:48you know, somebody did microtransit in a

20:50particular area for x amount of time

20:52that gave really good data to the

20:53transit agency to advocate and find

20:55funding to then bring a, a bus, you

20:57know, a bigger bus and be more efficient

20:59with that service. And so it's really

21:01getting that information at those

21:02different stages for those different set

21:04of modes to then sort of hopefully build

21:06up to that

21:07um demand for a big bus.

21:09>> Yeah. If you if you build it, people

21:12will people will ride it and

21:14we'll never know what where else we need

21:16service until we

21:17until we start doing the doing like you

21:21said small pilots. And if a bunch of

21:23people want to use the small pilots then

21:26you just scale up from there. I think it

21:27makes perfect sense.

21:30Becca, do you have questions or

21:32comments? Go ahead.

21:33>> Yeah, thank you. Um,

21:35I think this is great and um

21:39I really like the discussion around

21:40aligning the microtransits um with the

21:44different uses like at the hospital or

21:46at the airport. I know just to as a

21:49potential jumping off point um

21:52there are several

21:55private I think private public

21:57partnership type companies that are

21:59pretty active in the healthcare

22:01transportation world. So

22:03um like one of them it's actually

22:05started by a friend of mine from

22:06business school. It's called Round Trip

22:08and they um so anyway I just encourage

22:11you to look at how they've made it

22:12happen. I think they're they figured out

22:14how to get medical Medicare funding to

22:16get people rides and

22:18um

22:19obviously what we're talking about would

22:21be different than that, but maybe

22:22there's some inspiration there on

22:25um kind of how they got started or some

22:27of the tech they used. I don't know. Um

22:29I just have always followed that and

22:32thought it was really interesting and

22:33this conversation reminded me of it. But

22:35yeah, I also really like

22:37I mean I, just I feel like we're kind of

22:40I don't know, you all might think

22:43differently, but it it feels like we're

22:44just a little stuck in

22:46our

22:47I mean, because of the funding cuts

22:49primarily, but also because,

22:52um,

22:53I don't

22:55I could very well be wrong about this,

22:57but in my observation, I'm not hearing a

22:59lot of, like,

23:02uh, encouragement and

23:04increase in usage of public transport.

23:07And so I think microtransit is great in

23:10that it breaks down

23:12to that specific level. And then, you

23:14know, maybe we could learn about what

23:16those um you know, where where are the

23:19opportunities that we could reasonably

23:21increase

23:23um usage of of public transit, transit

23:26overall. So

23:28um because it's just hard to do that

23:30when you're looking at the big giant

23:32system. So thank you for this. It's very

23:34interesting. I'm learning a lot as

23:35always.

23:38>> Thank you, Becca.

23:39>> Um I had questions around um just

23:42the I I understand it but I I wonder I

23:45don't know how it fits in the current

23:46ecosystem like how is it different than

23:48SSTA

23:49for instance

23:50um and then I had some additional

23:52questions. So, one of the things that,

23:55um, you know, SSTA is a provider that

23:57does,

23:58um, multiple programs, and so,

24:02uh,

24:02when you see their vehicles out and

24:04about through the community, um, the

24:07people on those vehicles you could have

24:09one rider who's there for our ADA

24:11service, another rider who's part of

24:12Medicaid transportation, another rider

24:15who's part of

24:16transportation. And so

24:18um this is something that Vermont is

24:20sort of you know famous for is what is

24:22called braided transit where instead of

24:25where larger areas you would have a

24:26contractor that would just focus on

24:29say you know Medicaid transportation and

24:31nothing else and because of our size we

24:33we braid the service. The thing about

24:36adding

24:37um the general public to that type of

24:40ondemand transit is that it will start

24:43to generate the

24:45um the volume that will get other

24:47contractors interested. And so typically

24:50when we because we have to put out um to

24:53bid for the paratransit service.

24:55Typically there's one bidder that's SSTA

24:58because they're the you know the local

25:00uh um

25:01operator and and we'll be the only one

25:03that bids on it which certainly puts us

25:05at a disadvantage when it comes to you

25:07know cost and choice.

25:10And so

25:11um you know by

25:13adding a general public uh component

25:16then we may see you know companies like

25:18VIA or others who do microransit you

25:21know worldwide um seeing this as a

25:23market that they would want to enter

25:24into. And then what you would get is

25:27that their sort of expertise that you

25:29know that this is the same way

25:31McDonald's fries are great

25:33um you know they they know how to do you

25:35know microtransit.

25:36So for the ADA component, um you would

25:39be a competitor with ES

25:41or you wouldn't bid to SSDA because

25:43you'd have

25:43>> well they would SSDA would be welcome to

25:45bid on it and if then if they were able

25:47to provide the service then they would

25:49uh at the competitive price then they

25:51would be able to uh continue with the

25:52cont

25:53>> but it would be for general writership

25:54as well.

25:55>> Yeah. Yeah.

25:56>> Got it. Um second question on the 3/4

25:59mile

26:00outside existing service. So

26:03like there's places in the near north

26:05end and so something that comes up is

26:06like down at the bottom of Ethan Allen

26:08Parkway or in the

26:10>> the out in Apple Tree Point. They're

26:12clearly more than

26:14um a 3/4 of a mile. So there was someone

26:17from the general public

26:19who needed uh you know it was ADA

26:22um

26:23classified. Would they be able to they

26:25would ride potentially theoretically? I

26:28know nothing's planned yet, but they

26:30would ride they would call for a

26:32micromobility ride from their house and

26:35they might get as far as the shopping

26:38center, which if that was a mobility

26:40>> Yeah. Or like even, you know, you know,

26:413/4 miles gets you to just west of the

26:44bike path on the west side of North A

26:46and then you you get most of like the

26:49um Kazawa area type area, right? So

26:51there there are some pockets that are

26:53sort of outside of it. So, they could

26:54book the ride if if the line truly was

26:57at 3/4 of a mile for the zone. They

26:59could book a ride, you know, to the edge

27:01of the edge of the zone. Um, I think

27:03that's where there'd be a conversation

27:04with the city if there was some sort of

27:06if you wanted to sort of go on top of

27:08what is sort of that base level of

27:09service that GMT is operating. I think

27:11that's a conversation absolutely. We

27:13wouldn't take a rider and

27:16threequarters of a mile, have him walk

27:18threequarters of a mile to

27:20>> that's I mean the the the technology

27:21wouldn't allow it to be booked outside

27:23of whatever the parameters that we set.

27:25So it's really when we're

27:27setting this this up that's a

27:28conversation we can have around.

27:30So that's all be sort of worked out.

27:33>> Yeah. Because we the idea would be that

27:35you'd want adoption. You'd want people

27:38writing it. So you wouldn't want to make

27:40create a lot of friction about people

27:41writing it. But also there's the

27:43economics at right 30 $35

27:46a ride. So one of the things I'm

27:48wondering about is like one of the

27:50things that's come up before is

27:51ridership from the airport at night.

27:53People fly in it's midnight

27:55>> and they got to get to a hotel

27:57>> and they there's there's literally no

27:59way for them to get there's no taxis

28:02there's no bus service

28:04>> and there then they're sort of at odds

28:05and you can get an Uber for like $70

28:08or something. Yeah. So, if you could

28:10even have service like this

28:12that was like they use spot pricing, but

28:15you could do could would you be able to

28:16do spot pricing and and like say on

28:20could undercut Uber

28:21from the airport still you could maybe

28:23be actually even at 30 to $35

28:25per trip. You could be

28:28you could be profitable and

28:30undercut, you know, get some of that

28:32ridership for a certain market segment

28:34that is willing to pay that. Yeah, I

28:37mean that's certainly within the the

28:38ability of the technology to do that.

28:40And you know, if those people getting

28:41off the plane are going to the same

28:44hotel, that's that's all the better

28:45because you're not actually filling that

28:47that vehicle.

28:47>> Yeah. Hopefully they're going to hotels

28:49in the similar region so that u so that

28:52we could have a single vehicle that

28:54would pick up, you know, um a majority

28:56of them and transport them because

28:59that's that's where you can then make

29:00the economics work. Um if we're sending

29:03a vehicle that just has one person in

29:05it, then that's where it's the economics

29:08are really gonna, you know, harm us.

29:09>> Understood.

29:10>> Um and then

29:12>> and it also like for

29:14the thing to keep in mind is that

29:17um I don't imagine that this microransit

29:19would be Uber like in the sense that you

29:22don't wait for the instant that you need

29:23it. you know, we would want people to,

29:25hey, they know that they're going to be

29:27coming into the airport, you know, book

29:29in advance and and the more that that

29:31happens that then the more opportunities

29:33it gives us for ride consolidation uh to

29:36help control cost.

29:37>> You can even envision like a

29:39relationship with the airport or with

29:42the airlines maybe or whatever to try to

29:45facilitate some of that.

29:47Um, well, we would certainly want to

29:50uh reach out to the airlines and say,

29:52"We're happy to take your cruise to

29:54their hotel rooms for

29:56>> There you go."

29:56>> You know,

29:58um, and then in terms of the financial

29:59stability

30:01comment you made at the outset to this

30:03discussion,

30:04>> um,

30:05any prognostication on when do you think

30:08that

30:09might be? you know, you know, I I

30:12often joke that leaders have to be

30:14delusional in order to, you know, get up

30:15in the morning. And and um and maybe I'm

30:18being delusional, but I feel like there

30:21may be a pathway forward for us to have

30:24um

30:26a dedicated funding source, at least for

30:28GMT members.

30:30And um uh we're doing some work and and

30:33uh we'll be talking with the uh

30:36uh with our board about our legislative

30:38plans for next session. But I I I

30:41I think that

30:43events are conspiring that it's going to

30:44make it

30:45um more salailable this year than in

30:49previous years. And I certainly will be

30:52dangling this as a carrot

30:54um with the legislature to say that, you

30:57know, we would love to do this. We would

30:59yeah,

31:00you know, I think many legislators would

31:02love to see us do this, but until we

31:04have that dedicated funding source,

31:06that's going to not only resolve our

31:08current financial instability, but you

31:10know, I I I'm going to want that before

31:12we consider growing like this.

31:16>> Thank you. Um Andrea, since you came for

31:18this topic, do you have any questions or

31:20comments?

31:22>> Um I'm absorbing.

31:24I think um

31:27the question that comes to my mind, you

31:30mentioned companies that specifically

31:33develop software for

31:36um

31:37transit options like this.

31:39It

31:41does not seem to me

31:43that SSTA

31:45has that kind of technology.

31:48We struggle a lot with

31:50um

31:51okay, van A

31:53is pulled up outside and then van B

31:55comes and they're taking two different

31:58clients to very similar places.

32:00Um

32:01and

32:02um

32:03[clears throat]

32:05a lot of the time. Um,

32:08so I'm curious to understand, obviously

32:12if you had this program, the technology

32:15would reside within that program,

32:18but is there a way to improve the

32:21technology the SSTA is using

32:24to

32:25schedule rides and riders because it's a

32:27mess. They're actually migrating to a

32:30new system right now

32:31um that is part of this new statewide

32:34system for on on demand response

32:36management

32:37and um

32:40and so we we'll see if that improves uh

32:43their ability to do that.

32:44>> Is there a name

32:45>> HBSS?

32:46>> HBSS. Yeah.

32:47>> And but is is that

32:49>> he rides is the name of the

32:51particular product.

32:52>> What is it?

32:52>> He rides rides. Um and you know for the

32:54for the current ADA and D service about

32:5830%of the rides right now are shared

33:01rides. Um, so to your point earlier, if

33:03some are not, you know, it's never going

33:05to be

33:0780%. You know, that's that's probably a

33:09number we're not going to reach, but it,

33:11you know, could there could be some

33:12improvement there.

33:13>> And that's where, you know, as part of a

33:16future RFP, if we're looking at

33:18um a microransit and ADA service, we're

33:21going to include particular technology

33:23things. Yeah.

33:24>> In that RFP to make sure we get the

33:25desired outcome that the community is

33:27looking for. Mhm.

33:30>> And the other thing comment I would make

33:31just is that access to the hospital and

33:35especially to Tilly Drive

33:37is

33:38something that our folks really struggle

33:41with and so many services now

33:44um specializations are out at Tilly

33:46Drive and that's a long way

33:49if you don't drive a car.

33:51>> That's been a theme that we hear in this

33:53committee and at city council. Yeah.

33:57Um

33:58questions from No. I just want to say

34:00thank you chapen for um

34:03sharing the materials that you do the

34:05links and one link

34:07is the Vermont statewide microransit

34:10stem from May of 23

34:12that was done by the Vermont public

34:14transit transportation association and

34:16BRS

34:18and I would like that posted on our

34:20agenda

34:22and um

34:23>> and I believe in that in that particular

34:25item that Chip confided that does have

34:26the the will example that I had

34:28referenced because that was all during

34:29that

34:30uh time frame.

34:32>> Uh

34:32so Williston is not part of this study.

34:36>> That might have been a phase two, but

34:37yeah.

34:38>> Yeah. Yeah. So, and any other any other

34:40documents?

34:42There were two other documents that

34:43there were links to, but I wasn't really

34:45thinking they they didn't quite

34:48>> okay

34:48>> do the type of

34:50analysis that we were looking at. this

34:52this is good and that it's got

34:54um recommendations and prioritizations

34:57and you can sort of get a sense of what

34:59they've got. So if we can do that and

35:01also just to share it I you were on one

35:04of the um

35:05list the one of the email exchanges you

35:07know you got in there so it was like

35:09part of that but neither Merritt nor um

35:12Becca.

35:13>> So could we post it to the item on the

35:16>> that would that would be that would be

35:17that would be great and um

35:19>> thanks Rob. I would love to have the

35:22followup

35:23um

35:24ASAP

35:25um and

35:27you know include in that um some real

35:30brainstorming for

35:33um alternative

35:35revenue

35:37possibilities and the use of what we've

35:41uh got

35:42whatever they are already. So, we're not

35:44looking at new laws and then what kind

35:47of law changes might be

35:50necessary. So, that would include I

35:52think um

35:54possibly this is maybe where Chapen you

35:56could talk to Charles Dillard in terms

35:59of the city's

36:00um TDM

36:02um thinking right now and what what

36:05we're doing to see.

36:08I'm I'm in favor. I think that Becca

36:11is

36:12right in saying that we're in a way

36:14stuck

36:15>> and I want to unstuck us,

36:18unstick us. I want to be unstuck.

36:22>> And even to think entrepreneurially

36:24about this, you know, not like

36:26bureaucratically, but like how can we

36:28get in on some of the other

36:30transportation [clears throat]

36:31market, but something like this just to

36:33get the right.

36:34>> Absolutely.

36:35>> Yeah. Um, one of the things to help with

36:38the

36:39unstucking

36:41is that uh sorry for

36:43backing up

36:44that verb

36:46where

36:46>> I like the creative uh um

36:49turning nouns into verbs and and vice

36:51versa. The uh,

36:53um,

36:55one of the things that I haven't talked

36:57to you all about is that I'm very happy

37:00to report that uh CCRPC

37:02will be leading a study,

37:04um, that would examine

37:07the University of Vermont,

37:09um, transportation system, um,

37:11integrating, um, with GMT

37:15um, and also part of that will be an

37:17examination of,

37:20um, GMT

37:21taking over some of the

37:24uh hospital shuttle service. Um and so

37:27one of the things that uh you know we're

37:29looking at the parallel transit systems

37:31that are operating and whether uh it can

37:35be more financially efficient for other

37:37parties um if we unify.

37:40Um, the other thing that I want to make

37:42sure that we know when it comes to

37:43microtransit is that, uh,

37:46um, you know, probably four or five

37:48years ago, everybody was predicting

37:50microtransit would kill, you know, fixed

37:53route transit and that was going to be

37:54the wave of the future. And things have

37:56sort of settled down because of the

37:58realities that it, um, you know, that it

38:00is expensive, um, but it's also,

38:04um, we heard a lot of feedback in

38:06Montpielar uh with our service there,

38:09um, especially believe the population

38:11that that you're serving that,

38:14um, that the technology is a barrier.

38:16Um, but more

38:18so than just the technology as bar the

38:20barrier is, what surprised me was the,

38:24um,

38:24people saying, "You know, I don't want

38:27to be on somebody else's time frame

38:30a fixed .route" If I want to linger in

38:33in the grocery store because I saw a

38:35friend,

38:36you know, I'll just catch the next bus.

38:39But next bus,

38:41I don't have to like, "Oh, I got to

38:43finish this because my ride's going to

38:44be here in 10 minutes." And, and so,

38:48uh, you know, there's a certain amount

38:50of independence and freedom that the

38:52fixed route provides, uh, that I think

38:54that we want to, you know, make sure

38:56that we also recognize that, um, you

38:58know, I don't see this as,

39:00um, something where we're going to have

39:02GMT just operate four main rounds of

39:05fixed route and everything else be

39:06microtransit.

39:08>> Could I just comment on that? So,

39:11um, I don't think it, you know, that it

39:14has to be one or the other. And I think

39:16that in terms of

39:18looking at,

39:20um, the senior center, for example,

39:21people are basically exercising and

39:24recreating, and

39:26so

39:27they're already building in the

39:29expectation that they're going to have

39:31some social time within that; and it is

39:33a really different experience than going

39:35to the grocery store or going downtown

39:38for something. So, I think within

39:41what you're imagining, there are

39:44places where, you know, your hospital

39:46appointment, you might have to wait an

39:48hour and a half for your doctor's

39:50appointment that you didn't think you

39:51would. Um, but then there are other

39:54places that are going to be more

39:56predictable in terms of

39:58time to arrive and to leave.

40:01>> Yeah.

40:04last little bit. I I I

40:06went to Barcelona

40:08um in early September and we got around

40:12on their metro

40:14>> and it was just amazing because you

40:17could build really long ways. My wife

40:19can't walk as far as I can walk,

40:21you know, we were like there and they

40:24were very regular. It was just in,

40:26you know, it's a little confusing and

40:28stuff, particularly in a, in a really

40:30big city, but the idea that you were

40:33going to get transportation to be able

40:36to take you a decent amount of the way,

40:39um, and it, um,

40:41would serve not, you know, if say you

40:43wanted to walk your other means of

40:45transportation, you could still like on

40:47the way back or, you know, I can't do

40:49this anymore and and get into that

40:51system. and their pricing was really

40:55easy in terms of how they um were were

40:59marketing the you know the tickets.

41:01>> So, you know, was

41:04it was it was really quite great. And uh

41:07>> did you have an opportunity to try any

41:09of their highspeed rail?

41:11>> No, never did. We we did we were on

41:13trains. We actually went from

41:15uh some like four cities and went by

41:19train to the different cities including

41:21one that was like an eight hour

41:23train ride. It was funny because they

41:24were driving and I went

41:27I was recently surprised or I was

41:29surprised recently to learn that

41:31um Spain is only like second to China

41:33when it comes to new highspeed rail.

41:35They really invested you know heavily in

41:38and uh and making that a national

41:40priority.

41:41>> Yeah. No. So interesting. I mean, I

41:43think that as we build our transit

41:45corridors with more

41:47housing and so more people are are

41:50there, you know, we have to really build

41:52the system

41:54accommodating what we have.

41:56>> So, I'll just offer on that theme. If

41:59you need help advocating for what you

42:01need, our committee is always at the

42:04ready to sort of

42:05to to do whatever advocacy we can at the

42:08state level. I I'm sure that by the end

42:10of the year we will have a plan to

42:13provide to you and ask for your you know

42:15support of

42:16>> Okay.

42:17>> I'm working with the right public uh

42:20campaign.

42:21>> Oh yeah.

42:21>> And um

42:23although my idea of doing a candidate

42:26survey, a very simple one question

42:29survey did not fly.

42:31Um it would be really interesting to get

42:35your perspective and it's not really

42:37lobbying of who are the friends who are

42:40you know who are going to be returning

42:42to the legislature who are the

42:45um

42:46the foes

42:48and

42:49who are in the middle um

42:52based on your experience down there.

42:54>> Yeah. And

42:55that's invaluable in terms of our

42:57ability to

42:58uh to develop the constituency to

43:01um to get the sustainable funding source

43:04that as you know we have been

43:06walking arm in-arm with you uh for the

43:09last three years. Well, I think that u

43:12you know the thing that's becoming more

43:14clear to me is that you know we really

43:17need to highlight at the legislature our

43:19economic development impact because

43:22um unfortunately some of the things that

43:24public transit is good for

43:26is seen as partisan. So the fact that

43:30you know public transit is good for

43:32climate you know change solutions ends

43:34up making it a partisan issue.

43:37And uh and so I think that

43:39um you know my plan is for our

43:42um you know how we're going to sell our

43:44future financial stabil uh

43:45sustainability is making sure that

43:48everybody understands the economic

43:49impact that that we are actually having.

43:52>> Yeah.

43:53the the more that

43:55your allies know the players and what is

43:59important what the things that are

44:00important to them that's really what I'm

44:03trying to get at you know it's just to

44:06to understand the people

44:08>> who are engaged so that we can engage

44:11them like neighbors you know like verers

44:14yes and uh and and talk to them about

44:18>> you know what is important economic

44:20development for example

44:22>> I I certainly think that uh

44:25uh if we can convince

44:28>> um a way to overcome the

44:31bias against Chittnik County.

44:35[laughter]

44:35>> I I'I've thought about

44:37>> they'll erect a statue in your honor.

44:39It's uh

44:41I I've actually thought about like a

44:42political action committee called like

44:44good news from Chittening County

44:46>> that like let's let's all of the rural

44:50municipalities know this is what your

44:51tax bill would be like without Chitting

44:53County funds, you know,

44:56but but I digress.

44:59>> Appreciate that. That's one of the

45:00factors.

45:02>> Um is there anything else before we go

45:04ahead and uh thank our guests and close

45:07this item?

45:08And I am so sorry I if if you had told

45:11me that you would make it through uh

45:12your public um

45:14uh comment and all of that before the

45:17seven minutes.

45:19So I apologize for being late.

45:21>> No, you're leaving the fine.

45:23>> It's like you got to offer more service

45:24in Burlington next year.

45:26>> Well, that that'll be the punishment.

45:27And and you know why I was late because

45:29it was sending shape and an email. So So

45:32at least uh I have good excuse.

45:35>> Okay. Thank you so much for coming.

45:37>> Thank you. I appreciate the update.

45:40>> Thank you, Anthony.

45:41>> Yeah.

45:41>> Thank you for coming in to

45:44>> say hi to Agnes Harris, please.

45:48>> I will.

45:49>> I will.

45:51>> South former counselor Busher online for

45:53a moment she's gone again.

45:56Um

45:57[clears throat]

45:58I will move us on to

46:01uh item 4.2,

46:03a draft policy on residential recycling

46:06collection. And thank you um Lee Perry

46:08here

46:09to lead us in that, but thank you for

46:11getting the memo to us. I know I was um

46:14asking for it last night. Yes.

46:16>> And I don't know if everybody's had a

46:17chance to read the memo and look at the

46:19ordinance changes, but you know, I

46:21figured we'd tee it up. I since we've

46:24had little time to look at it. Um I

46:27don't know if you're expecting action on

46:28it tonight or not.

46:30I think what we would benefit from is a

46:33conversation around what action and

46:35steps are we going to take. We've

46:37proposed ordinance language like to go

46:40to the ordinance committee. Is there

46:41appetite to wave all process and

46:45expedite the approval? That conversation

46:47can happen after Lee hits the wave on

46:50the memo.

46:50>> Okay. So,

46:52>> take it away.

46:53>> Take it away.

46:55Well, as it

46:56mentions in the memo, this is in

46:58response to a request that the

46:59transportation energy utility committee

47:01had back in September. Um, and as Chapen

47:05just said, we're also sharing the

47:06ordinance language which you received in

47:08the email today when we

47:10sent you the the posting. Um,

47:13full control is a legal mechanism that

47:16empowers local governments to direct the

47:18collection of solid waste, recyclables

47:21and the delivery of those materials to

47:23specific destinations facilities uh for

47:26disposal or recovery. And it's often

47:29associated with um the direction of

47:31where materials are processed

47:34similar to

47:35um

47:36you know powers that chall

47:39that they wanted to institute flow

47:40control. they can direct certain uh

47:43streams of waste to uh certain areas. Um

47:47in this case, the Department of Public

47:48Works staff is recommending the council

47:50approve a regulation that would require

47:52all residents to

47:54receiving curbside uh recycling by toer

47:57to use the the city collection services.

48:00Um

48:01and you know, we want to make it clear,

48:03we've been talking flow control in this

48:06process for quite a while. Um, and we're

48:09going to be using the terminology of

48:11u

48:12consolidated recycling collection now

48:15rather than flow control because we

48:18we're collecting the recycling and not

48:20really diverting those streams to

48:22different facilities. We're just trying

48:24to manage who collects the recycling in

48:25the city of Burlington. Um

48:28so adopting a regulation on

48:30consolidating residential recycling

48:32collection can create a legally

48:34enforceable obligation for waste

48:37generators which are the residents in

48:39this case

48:40to utilize designated haulers such as

48:43city of Burlington for collection their

48:45recyclables.

48:47Um

48:48and as I mentioned there's two different

48:50levels of

48:51uh you know flow control is regional

48:54which I mentioned chall

48:57and then locally

48:59city charter and ordinance uh

49:01can direct the salt waste collection

49:03within the city of Burlington.

49:06And [clears throat] the challenge with

49:06the existing regulation is that, over

49:08the last several years that we've

49:10spoken, more of the residential units in

49:12Burlington has decreased because they're

49:15going to you prior private hauler

49:17service or self hauling, and has,

49:21you know, led to

49:24less efficiencies in the collection

49:25system,

49:27more truck traffic in residential areas,

49:30and, as I mentioned, a reduction in the

49:32dwelling units paying into the salt

49:33waste generation tax that's creating the

49:36budget gap we spoke of at the last

49:37meeting of around $130,000.

49:40So the city has the legal authority by

49:44both charter with section 486

49:47and chapter 14

49:49and it gives

49:50chapter 14 gives the explicit authority

49:53to regulate the collection or council

49:55the explicit authority to regulate the

49:57collection removal and dispose of all

49:59solid waste

50:00uh which includes recyclables within

50:02city limits. So, DPW

50:04staff is proposing council adopt the

50:07attached regulation that was drafted on

50:10the ordinance that requires uh

50:13residential properties that receive

50:15um recycling services by tot

50:24mentioned this will support safer

50:26streets

50:27um reduced emissions and

50:29more equitable stable financial support

50:32for the city's recycling program.

50:34Um, and as we've spoken in the past, the

50:38recycling program is funded in two

50:40different ways. One with the solid waste

50:41generation tax that is collected by the

50:43private haulers from residents as well

50:45as the

50:47recycling tax that is collected from

50:49CSWD at the drop off centers. uh they

50:53have a formula based on the amount of

50:55trash that is brought in and then they

50:56can

50:58um extrapolate that and and

51:00let the resident know how much the the

51:02charges that they have to pay to the

51:04city.

51:05And we are still working with CSWD to

51:07update that um formula

51:11uh the calculation for how salt haulers

51:13are paying their fair share to the salt

51:15waste generation tax.

51:17[clears throat]

51:18Excuse me.

51:19and the attached uh proposed ordinance

51:21ensures that all residents who get

51:23curbside recycling collection get it

51:25through the city's consolidated system,

51:28but so

51:29achieves the community benefits that we

51:31spoke of.

51:35We were hoping to get this language to

51:37you in advance of the meeting, have you

51:38all review it um

51:40uh individually in hopes that we'd

51:43actually go to council directly after

51:44last meeting, but unfortunately given

51:47the review time and the city attorney

51:49being short staffed, uh we just got it.

51:52So, we thought we'd bring this language

51:53to you. And then, uh it's only one

51:56sentence. It's pretty straightforward.

51:58It says, "In ordinance, we're proposing

52:01to add the simple sentence of all

52:03residents receiving curbside voter

52:05service or the recyclable materials

52:08shall be required to use the city's

52:10consolidated recycling collection

52:12service.

52:14So,

52:15this doesn't change people self-hauling,

52:19doesn't change apartments in large

52:21buildings that get dumpster service. It

52:24only

52:25uh has people who are currently getting

52:28recycling pickup by totar

52:31whether from us or a private vendor to

52:33move to the city's recycling collection

52:36system. So, it would take uh locations

52:39such as Northgate, which uses a private

52:42hauler to collect recycling by totar or

52:45other uh properties across the city to

52:48kind of bring them back in to paying the

52:50RDU

52:51fee

52:52and restoring some of the financial

52:54health to our

52:56consolidated collection program.

53:00>> Um,

53:01so you ready for questions?

53:02>> Yes.

53:03>> Okay. Um, I'll go to Merrick first.

53:06Um

53:07[clears throat]

53:09the

53:11um is this

53:13all that like that needs to to be

53:15changed? There is There any do any

53:17changes need to be made to,

53:20you know, enforcement

53:22of of this? Like, because this would now

53:26set the

53:27scenario that if you

53:30do not

53:32call with the city and you don't do

53:33that, but you're still taking advantage

53:35of the toers

53:37and but but

53:39hauling through someone else,

53:41now you would be breaking an or you

53:43would be breaking an ordinance. So, is

53:44there any updates that need to happen to

53:46the enforcement aspect?

53:48>> You know, my take out of this is that

53:50we're we're covered by existing

53:52ordinance that license haulers and if a

53:55hauler uh breaks the law by picking up

53:59uh residential trash by to

54:01then they would lose their license. And

54:04the process of the licenses has me

54:07sign them every year. And there are

54:08five, I think, licensed haulers

54:10currently in Burlington. And the haulers

54:13would need to comply with this

54:14ordinance.

54:15>> Great. Thank you.

54:16>> And quarterly they do report all the

54:18residential pickups that they do. So we

54:21get a a print off of that. So quarterly

54:23we could audit as well.

54:26>> Thank you.

54:28So

54:29um

54:30I

54:31don't see and don't know that it is

54:33necessary

54:35to have a

54:37registration

54:39system

54:40for those who selfhaul

54:42for example

54:44I have to

54:46>> yeah

54:46>> um

54:47and uh I get it picked up got mine

54:50picked up today

54:52and

54:53uh

54:53you know the reason it gets picked up is

54:55because it comes on the treat and I get

54:57it out there and it does that. Uh but

54:59I'm not in anybody's system at all and

55:02whether that is okay or not

55:06um is is a question. Obviously the less

55:09uh administrative

55:11um work that we have to do, the less

55:13bureaucracy

55:15is

55:16um is preferable. And then it's just a

55:19question of

55:20are we

55:22um are we creating a system

55:24that needs to

55:26uh

55:27uh to be created um and to the extent to

55:31which um

55:33we're dealing with um

55:36uh Merrick's problem or question related

55:38to enforcement. Um

55:41that's where that sort of comes in

55:43because

55:44>> you [clears throat] can't really enforce

55:46somebody you don't know about. So

55:48>> yes.

55:49>> Yeah. So our yet

55:52no public program is perfect, but we

55:56believe that as long as we can come to

55:59reasonable arrangements with CSWD

56:01and Cassella, who

56:03operates the transfer station in

56:05Richmond that

56:07um self haulers would pay as they drop

56:11their trash off at dropoff centers.

56:13There will be some self-haulers who may

56:16throw their trash at the dumpster at

56:18work.

56:19those folks are going to fall through

56:21the cracks and if they put out the

56:22recycling, they're going to get it

56:23collected for free.

56:25Ultimately, we could build a different

56:27system, charge it off property tax. You

56:29know, there's all the pieces that we

56:31wanted to talk about as part of our

56:32larger study for consolidated

56:34collection. We're really looking at a

56:37tweak here to keep us financially

56:39solvent for the next, you know, five to

56:41seven years while we have the larger

56:42consolidated discussion. So just to

56:45um

56:46boil it down,

56:49there are

56:50enough

56:52uh or there are

56:54u

56:55a significant number

56:57of

56:58um

57:00people getting their recycling

57:03through toing

57:05with private haulers

57:07that because they're not being picked up

57:09by the city system, they're not

57:12being charged.

57:14That is correct. Well summarized. The

57:17challenge ultimately will be will they

57:19push to be dumpster served if we

57:22implement this. Ultimately this is the

57:25small least invasive tweak we could

57:28figure to kind of realign our finances.

57:30If it doesn't work, we're going to have

57:32to turn a couple other knobs. But this

57:34was the

57:35easier knob to turn.

57:37>> Okay. No, I I I appreciate that. I think

57:39I just made a comment, um, which is

57:43that,

57:44um,

57:45while I support this and I support

57:48being,

57:49um,

57:51prepared at least mentally to, uh, to to

57:54turn other knobs, the whole question of

57:57the dumpster,

57:59um, recyclables, you know, collection

58:02and dealing with it through that, I

58:04think, is

58:05a nut that you really

58:08eat to start thinking about,

58:10um, if you haven't already. And just,

58:13you know, so if, I mean, because if you

58:16get collected by

58:18dumpster, you get recycling collected by

58:20dumpster.

58:21>> you that's the way to basically avoid

58:24our system

58:25>> correct

58:26>> and that is therefore a giant loophole

58:30in the flow

58:32the complete control of the flow

58:36>> if we want the complete control because

58:39often when you get to dumpster service,

58:40you're talking commercial. Commercial

58:42has different needs. They usually need

58:44nights and weekends and 5 day a week

58:46collection.

58:47>> Sure.

58:48I I think that I think that goes back to

58:50the question of the social

58:54um

58:56piece

58:58of the of

59:00solid waste generation and disposal and

59:04it not just being a private

59:06function. So,

59:08um,

59:11let me just say that I really do think

59:13that, um, while that question does not

59:17have to be answered now,

59:19>> Um,

59:20answering it sooner than later

59:23is important. I don't

59:26think that I think that, you know, you

59:27can do it in the tiers of residential

59:30and commercial, or you might even break

59:33down commercial in some fashions

59:35because, uh, an office use commercial is

59:39going to be different than a restaurant

59:40use commercial. Going to be different

59:42than an industrial

59:44maybe. Uh

59:45>> then you have commercial properties that

59:47have apartments above them.

59:49>> Yeah. So there's this and and you know

59:52and so I I really do think that that's

59:54an area

59:55of that's a loophole

59:58that

59:59we should close and not necessarily wait

1:00:03for the consolidated collection study

1:00:07because we're dealing with the sol with

1:00:09the solvency in the short term of the

1:00:13recycling program. So, I'm not talking

1:00:15about collecting,

1:00:17you know, and getting in the garbage

1:00:20>> um or the compost,

1:00:23trash and compost, but um

1:00:26the recycling that is dumpstered.

1:00:33Thank you. Um

1:00:34I had a question about and I think I

1:00:37understand because I had some of the

1:00:38same questions that were asked

1:00:40>> by

1:00:41America Jean. Oh, I'm sorry, Becca. I

1:00:43didn't like I recognize you. I'll turn

1:00:45to you next if you have questions.

1:00:46>> Oh, thanks, Mark. Um, no, I I had some

1:00:49of the same questions that American Gene

1:00:51asked and um I I'm generally

1:00:54supportive of this direction. It was

1:00:56helpful to hear that um

1:00:58we are

1:00:59doing, you know, we have if this doesn't

1:01:01work and get us as far as we need to go,

1:01:03you have kind of another list of ideas.

1:01:06So, I think that is wise and

1:01:09um in general, this sounds good to me.

1:01:11Thank you.

1:01:12>> Yeah. Thank you. Um I had a question

1:01:14around um like who's most impacted by

1:01:18by this and so like it seems it seems

1:01:21perfectly reasonable on the surface.

1:01:22Well, right

1:01:24if you're um if you're using the system,

1:01:27you should pay for the system,

1:01:30>> but so those people who have chosen not

1:01:32to to use 900

1:01:34RDUs have

1:01:36migrated out. Um,

1:01:38and where where are those mainly

1:01:42located? Are there classifications we

1:01:44understand who those folks are?

1:01:46>> Um,

1:01:48yeah, as Chapen pointed out, you have

1:01:50the North Gates.

1:01:51>> North Gates.

1:01:52>> Um,

1:01:53I think Southwind years ago was a big

1:01:55one that we used to collect that then

1:01:57went to a private hauler.

1:02:00Um,

1:02:00you know,

1:02:01>> and the self hauler. Any new self

1:02:03haulers as well? Right. Except we're

1:02:05do we get are we getting all the CSWD

1:02:08money that we think?

1:02:09>> Yeah. Yeah, we they they report monthly.

1:02:12>> Um,

1:02:13you know, we have some smaller haulers

1:02:16in town, but

1:02:18they're

1:02:19they aren't they aren't collecting any

1:02:21recycling

1:02:23or trash. So, Northgate as an entity

1:02:25would then

1:02:27um have a a higher

1:02:29they would have a a pretty significant

1:02:32monthly bill that they don't have now.

1:02:35>> They used to

1:02:36they don't have now they pay Cassella

1:02:38directly. Uh I believe it's Cassella who

1:02:41serves them, but now Cassella is going

1:02:43to pick up

1:02:45for us.

1:02:46And so instead of having Cassella send

1:02:48one truck to pick up their private

1:02:50service and to send another truck to

1:02:52collect the city's consolidated

1:02:54recycling, it makes no sense from my

1:02:56standpoint.

1:02:58>> So I think this is good governance. We

1:03:00do need some time to talk to

1:03:03the folks who migrated away from the

1:03:05city service and explain they're going

1:03:06to get charged the

1:03:09solace generation tax once

1:03:11uh we enact this ordinance that they

1:03:14need to plan financially for that. So

1:03:16that enacting this ordinance should it

1:03:18be approved would basically

1:03:21uh be the first step and then you would

1:03:24um

1:03:25go to those impacted at least the large

1:03:28>> yeah

1:03:29>> users of the system who are impacted

1:03:31explain the changes.

1:03:34We've sent letters to the haulers

1:03:36explaining our process and policy and

1:03:39sent them the uh the ordinance language

1:03:43sourcing language.

1:03:45I'm still waiting to hear back from a

1:03:47few of them.

1:03:51>> Okay. Yeah.

1:03:53Um are there any other questions on this

1:03:54topic?

1:03:56[clears throat] Um do we is there any

1:03:59action at this time? Do we or do we

1:04:04>> given the shortness? It's okay if

1:04:05there's no action as long as I think the

1:04:08key would be helpful. We would then plan

1:04:10to bring this to the council for I guess

1:04:12the first reading for an ordinance and

1:04:15then the question is whether you want to

1:04:16send it through the whole ordinance

1:04:18committee process. Um

1:04:20you know that that's your choice at this

1:04:22point. I think the piece for us is the

1:04:24longer this goes on, the

1:04:27we're we're we're struggling to meet

1:04:28revenue goals. So,

1:04:31>> so I would uh move to

1:04:34send this to the council for next

1:04:37meeting

1:04:38uh for first reading and

1:04:41um referral to the ordinance committee.

1:04:45I would

1:04:46also include

1:04:48the

1:04:48request

1:04:50that

1:04:51DPW

1:04:52in the meantime because we're now

1:04:53talking about a couple of weeks right

1:04:55till like

1:04:577th or 9th whatever it is you've got

1:04:59some time

1:05:00uh to to do

1:05:02the

1:05:03um

1:05:04do the outreach

1:05:06to

1:05:09the people who are going to be brought

1:05:12in under this regime. this new change.

1:05:16Um and uh do that engagement.

1:05:20Um

1:05:22and that engagement should include that

1:05:25this is being sent to the

1:05:29full council for

1:05:31um

1:05:32uh first reading and referral to the

1:05:34ordinance committee.

1:05:36We don't

1:05:37[clears throat]

1:05:37>> and they can contact us and

1:05:40>> that's so that's the motion and let me

1:05:43you know second that then

1:05:44>> yeah second

1:05:45>> and then uh right

1:05:48and and then you know my my my my

1:05:51goal would be that you are doing enough

1:05:54good engagement

1:05:56>> so that I don't get and Mark doesn't get

1:05:59flooded at the ordinance committee and

1:06:02uh we

1:06:03and then we can we can turn it around

1:06:04this thing could it back to the council

1:06:07at in the last meeting in November

1:06:11>> and uh be signed and

1:06:14uh 21

1:06:15day the 21st day after it's signed

1:06:19[clears throat]

1:06:19>> uh would go into effect. So you're

1:06:21looking

1:06:22>> at

1:06:23December,

1:06:25>> but it's if you

1:06:27but

1:06:28>> we'll see how the impacted folks respond

1:06:29and

1:06:30>> yeah,

1:06:31>> we're going to know many of them. Uh Lee

1:06:34knows some of the property owners

1:06:36directly. We're not going to know all

1:06:38property owners, but we'll do our best

1:06:41to reach out directly to them and

1:06:43continue to engage the haulers and ask

1:06:45them for their help.

1:06:46>> Yeah. I mean, this hauler based actually

1:06:48is really not the individual because

1:06:51you're getting the individual like me

1:06:54at the solid waste.

1:06:55>> Yeah.

1:06:56>> transfer station.

1:06:57>> Yeah.

1:06:59>> So,

1:06:59>> great.

1:07:00>> I got some. Your your motion is

1:07:02generally to support us bringing this to

1:07:05the council on the 9th

1:07:08>> as the first reading.

1:07:09>> It is to move that it is to ask you to

1:07:12please

1:07:13do that

1:07:14>> and it was seconded by um Merrick. Um,

1:07:18and I just want to be clear, it's a

1:07:19two-part motion, right? So, the first

1:07:21part is to bring it to council for first

1:07:23reading, and the second part is to do

1:07:27outreach to

1:07:28those you identify as impacted, the

1:07:31bigger property owners or any of the

1:07:33property owners that you know, but

1:07:35certainly the ones that are going to

1:07:37>> potentially see

1:07:39like different like significant

1:07:41differences in their solid waste

1:07:43disposal bills. Yeah.

1:07:45>> Um,

1:07:47and so other discussion on this,

1:07:51Becca, I don't know if you have

1:07:52anything.

1:07:53If you do raise your

1:07:54>> Okay.

1:07:56>> Um, and I don't either. I'm supportive

1:07:58of this as well. I think it's a

1:08:00conversation we need to have. Um, and we

1:08:02have $130,000

1:08:05um,

1:08:06service that's being provided and not

1:08:09being paid for. So, um, it would be good

1:08:11if we could we could get that

1:08:13fixed. Um so

1:08:15[clears throat] if there's no other

1:08:16discussion all those in favor of the

1:08:18motion as presented

1:08:21>> by saying I I

1:08:24>> any

1:08:25anybody against no okay that's unanimous

1:08:29>> and thank you Lee for that work thank

1:08:31you for your memo and

1:08:33>> yeah

1:08:34>> that together and I'll thank you in

1:08:36advance for your memo and the next item

1:08:37case you had the first piece of uh

1:08:40>> yeah

1:08:41>> agenda

1:08:42detail that was nailed down last week

1:08:44when you provided the CNG

1:08:46memo. So, we'll turn to that item next.

1:08:49>> Sure. So,

1:08:51as this states in the memo, the city's

1:08:52been operating a CNG refueling facility

1:08:54here at 645 Pine Street since 2007.

1:08:58And it was a partnership with a federal

1:09:00transit administration and the

1:09:01University of Vermont.

1:09:04And the the facility is used to fill up

1:09:06various city vehicles over its lifetime.

1:09:09uh

1:09:10UVM buses, transient um

1:09:14traffic, you know, uh

1:09:17there's a lot of uh built recycling

1:09:19trucks in Canada that were going for

1:09:21delivery in the southern states that

1:09:23would use the the facility to refuel on

1:09:26their way there.

1:09:27And um

1:09:29you know, in recent years, we we started

1:09:31phasing out the CNG

1:09:33vehicles

1:09:34uh use

1:09:35because they're expensive. There's a lot

1:09:37of constraints in fleet maintenance on

1:09:39working on those vehicles because they

1:09:42are full of compressed natural gas. So

1:09:44when you pull them in to work in the

1:09:46shop,

1:09:47you have to pull them out every night. I

1:09:48don't care if you're doing an engine

1:09:50rebuild tear apart, you still have to

1:09:53pack everything up, pull it out at

1:09:54night, bring it back in in the morning.

1:09:57And it it is just

1:09:58inefficient and costly.

1:10:02um

1:10:04and the cost to maintain the equipment

1:10:06and the limited use by DPW

1:10:09um

1:10:10and the discontinued use by UVM

1:10:15cause a def a deficit in the the fleet

1:10:17maintenance budget. Um

1:10:19the cost to maintain the equipment is

1:10:21really expensive. Uh uses a lot of

1:10:24electricity every month, a little over

1:10:26$4,000.

1:10:28Uh and our last full budget is around 97

1:10:31a little over $97,000

1:10:33in expenses. That is gas, electricity,

1:10:37parts,

1:10:38not only our fleet technicians labor,

1:10:40but any technicians uh that we had to

1:10:43have come to do specialized work.

1:10:46Uh every 3 years the the pressure valve

1:10:50in that uh CMG facility need to be

1:10:53uh inspected and recalibrated. Uh that's

1:10:56around a little over $12,000 every three

1:10:59years for that. We recently had to

1:11:01purchase a motherboard for it, which is

1:11:02the viewing screen and everything. It

1:11:04was an unexpected repair that was around

1:11:07$17,000.

1:11:08Uh that came out of our fleet

1:11:10maintenance budget. Um

1:11:12so you total all those up and the

1:11:14expenses.

1:11:16We weren't using the facility. We only

1:11:18have the one recycling truck left. It's

1:11:20our oldest recycling truck and you know,

1:11:22as stated, very unreliable.

1:11:25um

1:11:26UVM

1:11:27could not burden the cost of what we

1:11:30needed to increase our per gallon fee

1:11:33uh to help cover our expenses.

1:11:36So they moved to a refueling uh facility

1:11:39of Milton.

1:11:41So

1:11:42after that we we decided, you know, we

1:11:45really sat down and talked about

1:11:47decommissioning the facility and what

1:11:48that would look like. We turn the power

1:11:51off to build the facility so we wouldn't

1:11:53have the expense of the electricity and

1:11:55we just turn it on at various times when

1:11:57we needed it to fill up the recycling

1:11:59truck or what have you.

1:12:01Um

1:12:02the transient filling stops have all but

1:12:04ceased. We rarely see anybody come in

1:12:07for for any CNG.

1:12:09So we started talking with FTA

1:12:12on decommissioning the facility, what

1:12:14our options were.

1:12:16Um,

1:12:17you know, we could either outright sell

1:12:19the equipment to

1:12:21uh a local vendor. We reached out to

1:12:23Cassella to see if they were interested

1:12:24in a fast fill.

1:12:27They they couldn't support installing

1:12:29that kind of infrastructure. So,

1:12:32um, we wrote a memo to FTA that we are

1:12:35going to pursue public auction, you

1:12:37know, fair market value. So, we're just

1:12:40waiting for a response to see how the

1:12:42proceeds of that auction

1:12:44um how it'll be divided up between

1:12:47public works and FTA because of the

1:12:50grant.

1:12:51>> Yeah.

1:12:55>> Um

1:12:56do you want me to stop with that because

1:12:57there is a second piece on the sale of

1:12:59the recycling trucks as well.

1:13:01>> Is there other questions on the um CNGs?

1:13:05>> No, I'm in support of

1:13:07making this So yeah, so when once we get

1:13:11approval from FTA

1:13:12to to auction the materials, we'll be

1:13:15seeking council approval

1:13:17um to sell the assets. Uh similarly with

1:13:21the recycling trucks.

1:13:24>> So do you need any action on our part on

1:13:27that? I guess we should take these

1:13:29independent of one another.

1:13:30>> We have a proposed motion at the end

1:13:31that mixes them both if you're so

1:13:34inclined. uh it's liquidation of assets,

1:13:37recycling trucks, which obviously the

1:13:39council has kind of debated and

1:13:42made a policy direction on

1:13:44the CNG facility would be new, but the

1:13:46thought would be to have you move to

1:13:48basically recommend the council approve

1:13:50the liquidation of assets. So tell us

1:13:52about the recycling

1:13:54truck liquidation and then we can

1:13:56entertain a motion on

1:13:57>> since the contract with Cassella starts

1:14:00in January 1st 2027

1:14:02uh we don't need the recycling trucks

1:14:04anymore. We did offer to sell them to

1:14:07Cassella

1:14:08at um

1:14:10>> appraised value.

1:14:12Uh I had a conversation with them today

1:14:14to see if they were still interested in

1:14:16them and they said they are not. So we

1:14:18will have to post them to a public

1:14:20auction site.

1:14:21um

1:14:22and

1:14:23go from there.

1:14:25Uh

1:14:27as I said before, we do have some older

1:14:28trucks. I don't think that they're going

1:14:30to bring much money, but we did include

1:14:32in the motion and typically what we

1:14:34include in our fleet

1:14:37uh purchasing memo of

1:14:40uh public auction or disposal at fair

1:14:43market value for scrap metal. Um,

1:14:46but we we do believe our two newest

1:14:48trucks and probably the third truck

1:14:50still have significant value because

1:14:52they aren't that old.

1:14:55[clears throat]

1:14:59>> Okay. So, how old are they?

1:15:04So,

1:15:05uh, every seven years we replace a

1:15:07recycling truck and we didn't replace

1:15:09them for I believe the last

1:15:14two years once we started the process of

1:15:17potentially

1:15:19um contracting out recycling.

1:15:22So, we

1:15:23>> the newest one is three maybe four years

1:15:25old.

1:15:26>> Newest one is three or four. The one the

1:15:28other one is late

1:15:31is older than that.

1:15:32uh

1:15:33this contract is going to go

1:15:35for seven years

1:15:38>> and uh here I am I'm asking leading

1:15:40questions uh

1:15:43>> or rhetorical ones and uh and having

1:15:46trucks sit

1:15:47is the death nail of a of of a vehicle.

1:15:50Right.

1:15:51>> Correct.

1:15:52>> So [clears throat],

1:15:52>> right. um keeping it around in the uh

1:15:56uh in the event that we

1:15:58do consolidated uh we do our own

1:16:01consolidated or

1:16:03some other recycling at the end of that

1:16:05facell

1:16:06>> we

1:16:07will need to get a truck anyway because

1:16:11>> finance

1:16:12trucks because there'll be

1:16:14crap kind of sitting around

1:16:16>> yeahments and or taking up space you

1:16:19know drive

1:16:20>> when we get to a consolidated did,

1:16:23you know, we we look at the potential of

1:16:26split body vehicles to collect two waist

1:16:28streams at one time,

1:16:30you know. So, if

1:16:32say we get a

1:16:33truck for trash and then we get a truck

1:16:35for recycling and

1:16:37um compostables,

1:16:40a different truck.

1:16:42>> Okay. Yeah. No, I'm I'm

1:16:47what what I'm hearing is that

1:16:49um

1:16:51regardless of

1:16:53whether we we sell or not

1:16:55>> now we are going to need to be buying

1:16:58new vehicles.

1:16:59>> Yeah.

1:16:59>> If we're going down

1:17:01>> in seven years, who knows what the EV

1:17:03technology is going to be. Y

1:17:05>> in

1:17:06in recycling trucks, you know, hoping it

1:17:09gets better. It's getting better in a

1:17:11lot of things.

1:17:12>> Yes. Yeah. If we want to move to China,

1:17:14it'd be really good.

1:17:18>> I'm good.

1:17:20>> Do you have anything?

1:17:21>> Um,

1:17:22no. Um,

1:17:25makes sense to me. Their life their life

1:17:26cycle is seven years. This contract is

1:17:29seven years.

1:17:30>> Okay. Becca, anything

1:17:34>> CNG or

1:17:35>> I'm good.

1:17:36>> Um, I just had a question about the

1:17:38timing of the auction. Obviously the

1:17:41Cassella

1:17:42contract wouldn't start till beginning

1:17:44of the year. Um and then so you would

1:17:46sometime after that would go to auction.

1:17:48>> Yes. Okay.

1:17:49>> Yeah. And we have to wait for FTA too

1:17:52for the CNG. So there's some thought

1:17:55that we'd bring a joint memo together to

1:17:58the council once we had FTA clearance.

1:18:01Uh if FTA strings us along, we may bring

1:18:04the recycling trucks through, you know,

1:18:06early January.

1:18:08Uh, and then FD hope is FDA gets back to

1:18:11us by then.

1:18:13>> In terms of the FTA

1:18:16um

1:18:17process,

1:18:19uh, I'm I suspect that you've got to

1:18:21like when you do leasing and you've got

1:18:23to talk about the governmental um,

1:18:26action that authorized it, you know,

1:18:29there's the form, the resolution form,

1:18:31got all that. It's got dates. um if we

1:18:34were to

1:18:36pass this now

1:18:39and uh FTA

1:18:41didn't decide until early

1:18:44well mid 2027

1:18:46then um would we need to do this again

1:18:49do you think

1:18:51>> I think this is just a recommendation if

1:18:53this was a final council action to

1:18:55liquidate the assets I think that might

1:18:58reset

1:18:59>> a date from FTA but this is a

1:19:01recommendation to the council so I think

1:19:03That's fine.

1:19:05I

1:19:07I'd make I'd move to uh approve the

1:19:10proposed motion.

1:19:12It doesn't have a date for when this

1:19:14goes to the uh to the board of finance.

1:19:17I I probably would say and transmit it

1:19:21uh

1:19:22immediately upon passage. And then if we

1:19:25have to deal with it, do something

1:19:26again. If it gets lost,

1:19:28>> if it gets lost in the

1:19:30CEO's office and not down here,

1:19:34>> um

1:19:37I mean, I'll second.

1:19:39>> We have a motion and a second. And I

1:19:41think I also agree. I'm just wondering

1:19:44if the proposed motion is kind of

1:19:47the way it's written. It seems like it

1:19:49should be

1:19:50like like like

1:19:51a one two-part motion to me. Correct.

1:19:54I'm I'm nitpicking now.

1:19:56>> You know, I encouraged nitpicks picking

1:19:58of nits last night.

1:19:59>> So, one for the one for the um one

1:20:02action is the CG.

1:20:04>> Okay.

1:20:04>> And the second action is the recycling

1:20:06vehicle. Not that I think that they'd be

1:20:08taken up separately, but you never know.

1:20:10>> Do you want them moved separately?

1:20:12>> I mean, no. We just like to have like a

1:20:14like we often see motions where

1:20:16>> Okay. They're not just a narrative like

1:20:18this one. And so I'm totally niping.

1:20:22>> I think they would having two motions.

1:20:24And this is a friendly amendment to my

1:20:27motion.

1:20:28>> Just a one and a two.

1:20:30>> Change.

1:20:32>> No, I think that I think that the artful

1:20:33way to do it is just

1:20:35>> to graphically make it

1:20:38more

1:20:40distinct so that

1:20:41that people understand that it is

1:20:44two things. a bullet for the bullet for

1:20:47CG and bullet for

1:20:51actually

1:20:51>> I don't I don't pick a lot of nets

1:20:53either but just

1:20:59>> can I just chime in quickly Mark?

1:21:02>> Absolutely. I just wanted to say I can

1:21:04tell Gan and Mark that it's been a

1:21:06really long time since you actually

1:21:07combed knits out of a child's hair

1:21:10because the way that you're talking so

1:21:12nicely and joyfully about nitpicking

1:21:16>> is not in line with my experience.

1:21:19>> I have I because my eyes are ne have

1:21:22never been good

1:21:23to be quite honest. Wendy Co, my sweet

1:21:26wife, was always the nitpicker. And

1:21:30>> that's some emotional labor right there,

1:21:32Jean.

1:21:32>> I I I I [laughter] understand. I I'm

1:21:34very supportive of it. And

1:21:37you know, like I was really a fan of the

1:21:39shaved head approach.

1:21:41>> Yeah.

1:21:42>> I'll be I'll be more sensitive in my

1:21:44choice.

1:21:45>> Yeah, I'm feeling very

1:21:46>> No, I

1:21:48[laughter]

1:21:49was good. I love it. This is great.

1:21:53[clears throat]

1:21:53>> Okay.

1:21:54>> The grandkids are still around. But uh

1:21:56>> so um

1:21:57when that comes

1:21:59to

1:22:01>> well do you want to do it before or do

1:22:03we want to assume that you'll do it the

1:22:04way we described? I think I'm

1:22:07comfortable with the latter.

1:22:08>> Yes. I think I'm very comfortable with

1:22:10trusting that you'll figure it out. So

1:22:12do it.

1:22:12>> Okay.

1:22:13>> We understand. Yeah. Maybe let's just do

1:22:15it in two motions.

1:22:17>> That's fine too.

1:22:19>> Yeah. um that they whatever is easier to

1:22:22just make it clear that they're two

1:22:23distinct sales.

1:22:25>> Okay.

1:22:27So, the first motion I I would say would

1:22:30be the transportation energy utilities

1:22:32committee recommends the board of

1:22:34finance and city council approve the

1:22:36sale

1:22:36of

1:22:37CNG equipment associated with their

1:22:40refueling facility.

1:22:42>> Period.

1:22:48in any I guess in any facility

1:22:52not purchased

1:22:53uh be auctioned through any of the

1:22:56various online public auctions or if

1:22:59has no value

1:23:01uh

1:23:02the equipment will be hauled away for

1:23:04scrap at the current market price.

1:23:07>> Sounds like

1:23:09the plan.

1:23:10>> Okay. So that first vote, Jean, if I

1:23:13understand the friendly amendment is to

1:23:15focus specifically on the CNG facility

1:23:18on this boat.

1:23:19>> I think we have a I think motion is to

1:23:23approve the combined thing, but we're

1:23:25but we're asking you to like

1:23:28different even though the action is the

1:23:29same. One is CNG, one is

1:23:32cycling.

1:23:33>> Yeah.

1:23:35Okay.

1:23:36Don't get stuck in the mud. All right.

1:23:39I I'm regret bringing it up now, but

1:23:42we're we're half married now on this

1:23:44idea.

1:23:45Let's keep going.

1:23:46>> Okay.

1:23:47>> In for the penny.

1:23:48>> So, um, all those in favor of the motion

1:23:52as

1:23:53presented, indicate by saying I

1:23:55>> I

1:23:56>> I.

1:23:57>> Any opposed? That's unanimous.

1:24:00That's our

1:24:03last deliberative item.

1:24:05Thank you

1:24:06for bearing with us

1:24:08with

1:24:09>> Yes.

1:24:10>> Um I have uh

1:24:13>> we have we we're not done yet. We're

1:24:15almost done. I just have to get back to

1:24:17the meeting agenda.

1:24:19>> Okay. Next is um our director's report.

1:24:24[clears throat]

1:24:24>> Great. U I was asked uh I think by the

1:24:28chair to give a

1:24:30brief update on South Union Street.

1:24:32There was some interest, uh, that we've

1:24:34heard on Front Porch Forum expressed by,

1:24:38uh, bike enthusiasts to look at a change

1:24:41to South Union Street. Specifically, as

1:24:44I understand, it was to look at changing

1:24:46South Union Street to oneway northbound,

1:24:49create protected bike lanes on,

1:24:51uh, South Union

1:24:53and,

1:24:54um,

1:24:56yes, and and

1:24:58create a different traffic pattern. Um

1:25:01we have heard about this. Uh it's been

1:25:03there's been an online petition.

1:25:06Uh

1:25:07we do not have a scoping study or a plan

1:25:10that indicates like

1:25:12uh a clear design of

1:25:15or there's been no public process around

1:25:17redesigning this. We are open to

1:25:20uh looking at a future scoping study

1:25:23that would look at this. We do have a

1:25:25birectional bike facility on South

1:25:28Union, South Wooki, one street to the

1:25:31west.

1:25:32Um, we do have South Union on the paving

1:25:35list for next year. That's in part, I

1:25:38think, why the bike advocates were

1:25:40pushing to have us look at something in

1:25:43advance of the paving schedule. At this

1:25:45point, we are,

1:25:47uh, interested in proceeding with the

1:25:50paving,

1:25:51uh, with the current traffic layout.

1:25:54To, as, as we've reviewed the Front

1:25:57Porch Forum posts, there's been a

1:25:59diversity of opinion even on the Front

1:26:02Porch Forum posts themselves, some

1:26:04saying,"Well, the bus traffic

1:26:07is southbound on the street."What would

1:26:09happen to the existing GMT service?

1:26:12There's other people saying, you know,

1:26:14there's going to be more circulation

1:26:15around neighborhood streets because if

1:26:17it's one way, in order for people to get

1:26:19to their houses, they're going to have

1:26:20to circulate around

1:26:22other adjacent streets and people on

1:26:24adjacent streets are expressing concern

1:26:26about increased traffic.

1:26:29So, our recommendation is to go ahead

1:26:32and pave the street. We are exploring

1:26:34traffic calming as part of that as there

1:26:37is a traffic calming request on this

1:26:38street. And then, as part of

1:26:42um a scoping study in the future, we

1:26:45could look at and engaging the public in

1:26:48a process to evaluate

1:26:51what design elements whether we change

1:26:53traffic pattern, what that would mean to

1:26:55GMT,

1:26:56fire response and then be able to engage

1:26:59the broader community and not just have

1:27:01one element of the community propose a

1:27:03change to our transportation system. So

1:27:06that's the update on South Union Street.

1:27:09happy to answer any questions.

1:27:11>> I'm gonna let Becca lead on this since

1:27:13it was her request.

1:27:15>> Yeah,

1:27:15>> thank you. Um,

1:27:17yes. So, that's great, Japan. I I mean,

1:27:20I think I'm in general aligned with what

1:27:21you're proposing. I will make what I

1:27:24would see as a slight adjustment in the

1:27:26framing there. Yeah,

1:27:28>> I I mean I think yes, the petition is

1:27:32uh is being championed by a lot of bike

1:27:35advocates, but I've actually se you know

1:27:37this is my for the most part it's my

1:27:39district and I know the names pretty

1:27:41well. And

1:27:42um I will say it's a really well-rounded

1:27:44group of folks. It's it's people who

1:27:47are walking their kids to Edmonds. It's

1:27:50people who are champions for bike

1:27:52advocacy and it's just regular residents

1:27:54on the street. um many of those you so I

1:27:58I've actually really enjoyed watching

1:28:00this conversation unfold because it has

1:28:02felt different and more collaborative

1:28:04and more

1:28:05um

1:28:06inclusive than some of the other

1:28:09more um

1:28:11controversial topics not just in

1:28:13transportation. So

1:28:14way to go uh W six residents for for

1:28:18being um neighborly appreciate it. So,

1:28:21uh, and then, same thing, I have heard

1:28:24certainly loud and clear the the the

1:28:27cons along with the pros. But I wonder,

1:28:30is there, could we put this on this

1:28:33committee's agenda more formally to get

1:28:36the scoping study

1:28:38like formally placed into

1:28:41the

1:28:42DPW's

1:28:43work process? Like, how does, how do we

1:28:45go about starting a

1:28:48a scoping study? Because I would like to

1:28:51maybe just take some some steps and and

1:28:53allow, since the conversation's going

1:28:56strong right now. I I think that this

1:28:58committee would be great to invite

1:29:00people to

1:29:01um to kind of walk them through what to

1:29:04expect and

1:29:06um

1:29:07so on so on and so forth.

1:29:11>> Yes. So our scoping studies are largely

1:29:13funded by the Chin County Regional

1:29:16Planning Commission. uh we submit them

1:29:19each fiscal year. The timing is pretty

1:29:21good

1:29:22uh in that we start putting our work

1:29:25plan together for the next fiscal year

1:29:27starting July 1,

1:29:28usually in December or January.

1:29:31So,

1:29:32um we can put this in

1:29:35the pot and if the two would like a

1:29:39briefing on what the various uh scoping

1:29:42study candidates are and where you would

1:29:44like to put your relative priority, we

1:29:47could have that as a future agenda item

1:29:49in probably December, but uh I can check

1:29:52with staff.

1:29:53>> Okay. I think that would be great. Yeah,

1:29:55that would be nice to have the context.

1:29:56I do imagine

1:29:58uh that there you you will get some

1:30:01questions in that conversation just

1:30:03about the paving coming up next year and

1:30:06you know the traffic calming that is on

1:30:09the potentially on the table. I've also

1:30:10heard a fair amount of questions about

1:30:12that like

1:30:13>> regardless of the of the oneway change

1:30:16you know what what does traffic calming

1:30:18look like for South Union? What did the

1:30:20study come out with? Is it going to be

1:30:22um speed bumps? Is it going to be

1:30:24bumpouts? Is it blah blah blah? you you

1:30:26know the whole list better than I do,

1:30:28but um just as long as we're all cool

1:30:31with that conversation,

1:30:33>> maybe going slightly off topic of the

1:30:35scoping studies um at some point. So

1:30:38>> So just so I'm clear so I'm clear. Um

1:30:42the

1:30:43topic for December would be

1:30:44upcoming CCRPC

1:30:47funding requests. One of which would be

1:30:50the South Union scoping study

1:30:52>> which we could list what we have is

1:30:55under consideration if the committee

1:30:57could provide a a general uh sense of

1:31:00prioritization

1:31:01>> uh of interest to us. And if and then in

1:31:05terms of having it going slightly off

1:31:07topic, I would look to Becca to invite

1:31:10her constituents who are having this

1:31:12conversation that I have not seen

1:31:13because I don't

1:31:14>> Yeah,

1:31:14>> I don't participate in that public that

1:31:16front porch forum, but um

1:31:19I would uh then we would just have them

1:31:21here for

1:31:23public forum and then potentially to

1:31:25participate in some of the discussions.

1:31:27We talked about those earlier.

1:31:29>> That sounds right.

1:31:29>> Okay. Yeah, that sounds reasonable. Is

1:31:33others want to weigh in on this?

1:31:36>> Sounds good to me.

1:31:37>> Okay.

1:31:38>> Um Okay. Well, there we'll do that then.

1:31:41And I have it noted for one of the

1:31:43December topics. Um

1:31:45are there other

1:31:47other things for the director to report

1:31:49us to us on?

1:31:50>> Uh not at this time.

1:31:51>> Not this time.

1:31:52>> We know you were up late last night.

1:31:54>> Next time. Next is a counselor items.

1:31:56Are there any counselor items?

1:31:58>> I'm a little brave right now.

1:32:00I have um I have two updates. Um last

1:32:03meeting um I was asked to

1:32:06look at the

1:32:07um

1:32:08accountabil the council accountability

1:32:10list and I um looked at it

1:32:13as requested.

1:32:14>> Thank you.

1:32:15>> And um I've asked director Longa at the

1:32:18airport to come back and talk to us

1:32:19about the

1:32:21uh emission reductions um efforts there

1:32:25at the airport. He's

1:32:27um said that he'd be willing to come in

1:32:29December. Um and so once we decide on a

1:32:33December, I'll let him know. And once we

1:32:35decide on a December date,

1:32:37um

1:32:38we'll we'll have him in

1:32:40um along and we'll so that we'll have

1:32:42that in December as well along with this

1:32:44CCRPC

1:32:45prioritization. Yeah.

1:32:47>> Discussion. And then I also talked with

1:32:50uh Director Ward

1:32:52about coming back to us

1:32:54um

1:32:55with an update on the carbon pollution

1:32:57impact fee. And I also lumped in uh

1:33:00rental weatherization progress even

1:33:02though that wasn't part of the request.

1:33:04Um, and he's doing some initial work to

1:33:07see

1:33:08what's happened and he and I are

1:33:10tenatively sk scheduled to talk midmon.

1:33:13And then

1:33:14based on the amount of

1:33:16information he has, he'll we'll decide

1:33:18whether or not to have him in for

1:33:20Q&A or whether or not we'll ask him just

1:33:23to provide us with a written update of

1:33:25some kind. But, um, I'm thinking it'll

1:33:28probably be

1:33:29be the former. I'm just um letting him

1:33:31do a little bit of homework before we

1:33:34um schedule him to come in and and we

1:33:36don't have that. But that may also be in

1:33:38December because it will be unless he's

1:33:40got some material then and that could

1:33:42bring it potentially bring it into

1:33:44November. But

1:33:45>> um just as an FYI, those two sort of

1:33:48future items are up there on the

1:33:50horizon.

1:33:51>> Um that's all I got.

1:33:53So, the next thing we need to do is

1:33:57schedule our uh

1:33:59our next meeting tenatively for the 24th

1:34:02of

1:34:04um

1:34:04November. And I'm guessing that's during

1:34:07is that Thanksgiving week? I haven't

1:34:10>> And is that a problem for anybody? Do

1:34:12people care?

1:34:17>> I care.

1:34:18We also have a,

1:34:20um, I mean, I imagine it I mean, I won't

1:34:22speak for city staff, but I do imagine

1:34:25it that it's a

1:34:27week lots of people take the full week

1:34:28off, so it could be an issue. But we

1:34:31have a council meeting on Monday that

1:34:33week

1:34:34and, it's it's would be another double

1:34:36header, and I just can't make that work

1:34:38with, uh, kids being out of school and

1:34:40everything going on with the holiday.

1:34:42>> Fair enough. Um

1:34:44so do we want to look for alternative

1:34:46dates?

1:34:47We uh we did look at any other days this

1:34:50room is available and there there's

1:34:52nothing the week prior or the week after

1:34:54but that doesn't mean um you know we

1:34:57can't find another space. Busher room uh

1:34:59Busher conference room is also taken.

1:35:01Uh we have uh we have the engineering

1:35:03conference

1:35:05>> which isn't I mean if we're having

1:35:09uh well I guess I don't know what it

1:35:10depends on what's on the agenda but if

1:35:12we have something that is of interest to

1:35:14the public the engineering conference

1:35:16room will probably not be

1:35:18sufficient

1:35:19>> sufficient um

1:35:21>> if you all

1:35:22have

1:35:23>> what about the spark space

1:35:25>> works

1:35:26uh after hours we have to pay for that

1:35:28space pretty handily.

1:35:30>> Oh really?

1:35:31>> So

1:35:32Yeah, unfortunately.

1:35:33>> Unless BED is on the agenda.

1:35:35>> Right. There you go. That's the chair's

1:35:38we can make that happen.

1:35:41>> Can you tell me more about those that

1:35:43that PUC case

1:35:46>> maybe you all work on a date that works

1:35:48for you and we'll put our creative

1:35:50minds. There is the middle of the day

1:35:52option as well. I would I would I would

1:35:53like to at least

1:35:55rather than play um

1:35:57doodle tag,

1:35:58I'd rather us come up with a date now

1:36:00because it's just

1:36:02>> Yes.

1:36:02>> Um if we can come up with something.

1:36:04What about a

1:36:06um could a midday meeting work for

1:36:08anybody?

1:36:10Could that work for you, Becca?

1:36:12>> If it was midday the week before, are

1:36:15you saying

1:36:15>> the week be uh midday the week before? I

1:36:18think I could do well I have charter

1:36:21change on the 19th.

1:36:23Um

1:36:25I'm I'm a little bit limited. I could do

1:36:28u noon on the 17th but I probably will

1:36:31only be available for an hour but that

1:36:33that's fine with me. I don't I don't I

1:36:35mean I don't want to hold everybody up.

1:36:38>> Tuesday

1:36:39off right we're at a time.

1:36:40>> I I can't afford to take two days off.

1:36:43>> Fair enough. Uh I already

1:36:45>> maybe

1:36:47meeting. Yeah.

1:36:48>> Um, I could do Tuesday the 17th at night

1:36:51as well.

1:36:52>> I have that open.

1:36:53>> I could do that.

1:36:54>> Tuesday the 17th at night. I think I

1:36:57probably have it open.

1:36:59>> Um, so um we could just maybe we book

1:37:02that. Um, and we'll find a space. TBD.

1:37:05>> Yeah.

1:37:05>> Yeah, we will find a space. Um,

1:37:08>> you know, even if it's um

1:37:09>> in city hall,

1:37:10>> city hall contoys or something.

1:37:12>> Bush. Busher was not available. Contos

1:37:14might be. Um, certainly. Yeah, we also

1:37:16should see who's in there. Maybe,

1:37:18>> right? We can have conversations with

1:37:21folks.

1:37:22>> So, are we talking a 5:30 start on

1:37:24Tuesday the 17th?

1:37:27>> Sure.

1:37:28>> Or 5 or

1:37:29Yeah,

1:37:30>> I know. Is it

1:37:32>> What's the earliest people can start?

1:37:36>> 5:30. 530.

1:37:37>> 5:30. It is

1:37:38>> correct.

1:37:39>> For 5:30 the 17th. Uh, location TBD.

1:37:43Do we want to talk about December

1:37:44scheduling here or

1:37:46hunt to next meeting?

1:37:48>> Yeah, if we could if people are up for

1:37:50it.

1:37:50>> I think that would be helpful.

1:37:51>> You want to wait? Yeah. Helpful. Okay.

1:37:53>> Yeah.

1:37:54>> Okay. So, what's uh fourth? The 4th.

1:37:56>> The 22nd

1:37:58>> is the 22nd.

1:37:59>> Yeah.

1:38:00>> Which is a sounds like Christmas week to

1:38:02me.

1:38:02>> Yeah, that is right.

1:38:03>> Um

1:38:04and is that that's a school week.

1:38:06>> It's

1:38:07it's the school is in session then. It

1:38:10is also a double header which believe me

1:38:12that I brought up with Ben.

1:38:14>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

1:38:14>> Having a council meeting on

1:38:16Christmas week. But

1:38:18um I I'm actually free that day.

1:38:22>> We could have a Christmas party to a

1:38:24Christmas party.

1:38:25>> I would love that. We could drive. Could

1:38:26we like decorate a fire truck or some

1:38:29sort of cool vehicle?

1:38:30>> Have candy canes or something. Or maybe

1:38:33something more

1:38:34um culturally neutral. I don't know. But

1:38:37we'll do something. cupcakes perhaps.

1:38:41Um

1:38:44I don't know what about that for folks.

1:38:46The 22nd of December

1:38:49the room is free

1:38:50for this.

1:38:51>> Um

1:38:53I'm not sure yet.

1:38:55>> I I would say sure.

1:38:57I haven't looked at the calendar.

1:38:58>> Why don't we um why don't we tenatively

1:39:01say we're going to do that um and then

1:39:03we can um

1:39:05recalibrate if necessary at our November

1:39:07meeting. Okay, we can check with staff.

1:39:10It sounds like there's a couple agenda

1:39:11items percolating and we can understand

1:39:13the schedule for those staff members and

1:39:15let you know.

1:39:16>> Okay.

1:39:17>> Yeah.

1:39:20>> Okay.

1:39:23>> Okay. Then that brings us to the end of

1:39:26our meeting. So

1:39:27with no further business and absent

1:39:29objection, I'll

1:39:30adjourn at 7:12.

1:39:33>> Sounds like a good idea.

1:39:37Thank you.

1:39:38>> Thank you. Thank you, Becca. Um, I

1:39:40[music] heard

1:39:46[music]

```*