City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, I'm going to call the meeting of the city council at Six Junction City Council to order for Wednesday, April 29th. Any agenda additions or changes? No. No. Okay. Um Yeah. Nice. It'll be a long meeting, apparently. [laughter] All right, next is the public to be heard portion. Um, if there's anybody in the room that would like to speak, please raise your hand and I will call on you. Anyone online, please raise your hand online. And Risa. Thank you, member. Um, last week there was a Facebook post that got a whole lot of attention about the community gardens and [snorts] what the costs are and all the rest of it. And I started looking into the community gardens and then there was another post discussing, you know, planning onions and all these truly great and wonderful things. And also I was looking through, I tried to find the application. I also um looked through Monday's wreck advisory committee, you know, paid attention to that meeting. And as I was looking through trying to find the um application and it's probably not up because the application time passed long ago. One of the things I kept thinking of is we now have this 1% for donations and and charitable uses, how wonderful it would be if there could be a couple of garden plots that could be that could tap into that funding. When I was growing up, we probably would have been able to get together the $40 for the annual, for this year anyway, the annual um

fee, but the supplies and the equipment and and getting seeds and getting plants and all the rest of it, we would have known that we couldn't afford to do that. And I thought, you know, this is a community garden and it's it's wonderful that this is available to people and there are options for, you know, planning onions that can go to Aunt Dot's and stuff, but if there if there's some way to be able to fund this for a couple of families who would need help with it, not just further expands the whole idea of community. So, I I don't know how it would happen. I don't know, you know, I realize this is the first year that we as a city or have have that fund available to us, but it would be great if it could really truly come down to that level in some way. Thank you. I I do know that they have spo- they have scholarships um at EJRP, so there's always that option, too, if if somebody wanted a garden plot, um I think they could probably apply for one of those scholarships that predates the um social services budget that we just Oh, that's right. I didn't know that they had scholarships. That's great. Thank you.

I mean, don't quote [snorts] me. I'm probably speaking outside of school here, but um I know that they're available. I just don't know what they're available for. Um so, I can't imagine that they would not be available for all of the programs that EJRP offers, but um for it's worth asking. I mean, we can certainly Yeah, I can find out. I don't know the answer off the top of my head. Can I ask a related question to that? It's just if nothing else to help uh the community understand the because that's now passed, what is the what is the timing that it would actually look like that that would actually be put into place or money could be shared? Because we have to get the money in in order for it to go out. So, what do you I I know that we haven't put that program together yet, but realistically, like Yeah.

I'm not thinking that we're going to be doing the doing this July 1. Yeah, it the funding will be coming in July. Well, it's FY27 money that needs to be built up first in FY27, not FY26. When exactly we can get it up and running in FY27, I'm not sure yet. But just so the community has a realistic expectation that it's not Yeah. Yeah. We're going to work on it, but not Yeah. Yeah. Okay, good. Cora. Can you hear us? Sorry. Did you say my name? Oh, okay. Um Uh I had more of a question than anything else. Um I was interested in the uh the bike lanes on Park Street, uh but I have another commitment tonight. I didn't know if there was a way to talk about that first in the agenda so I could just kind of hear what's going on with that or if that's not a thing. Move the agenda. Um we have other folks that are present here for other discussions. Um but you can certainly share your thoughts right now on that if you would like to. Um yeah, I mean, I filled out the survey before just kind of supporting the idea of having bike lanes there because I mean, I don't bike a lot, but I do occasionally and whenever I do, that's my least favorite road to bike on and it's directly outside of my apartment. So, it's always um I'm always kind of confused as to where I'm supposed to be in the traffic and I always kind of feel like there's a truck behind me. Um but yeah, I don't I don't think I really have anything else to say. I was just curious um how it was going to be moving forward, but I will read the meeting minutes.

Uh we also have the um recording will be online and um Town Meeting TV is here as well. So, you can grab it from us or grab it from Town Meeting TV. Okay, thank you. Thank you for your thoughts. Okay, anybody else? Not seeing any other hands. So, we will move on to the public hearing for the large user water rate setting. And I will open the public hearing and Jess is with us. Good evening. Um I'm going to share. Let's see. This. All right. Are you guys seeing the slides? Okay, cool. All right. So, we are here tonight to um just run through the public hearing for the fiscal year 27 large volume water user rate setting. Um the large volume water user rate is a rate that is charged for water usage to large users within the city. Right now, Global Foundries is the only large user that we have. Um so, we have a a large user rate setting policy um in place that was updated a few years ago. Uh we'll draw attention, I know there was some question earlier about um the policy currently references that this hearing would would normally be held with the second council meeting in May. Um the policy does allow for that schedule to be modified by the council. Um so, we are bringing it forward um at the end of April rather than May, um mostly because we were able to get

budgets pulled together for the enterprise funds in a much um timelier fashion this year. So, we've kind of accelerated the schedule for the um enterprise budget and rate setting process. So, just a quick overview of the water fund budget that was approved by council at their um at the end of March. The FY27 water budget is just over $2 million, which is about a 3.8% increase from FY26. Um three primary drivers for the rate increases are we've got um $50,000 increase in our contribution to the capital reserve for the water fund. Uh we also have just over $17,000 in increase to the admin fees that the water fund pays to the general fund. Um and lastly, we have just under a $9,000 increase in personnel benefit expenses, which is primarily health insurance related. So, what that means for the large volume water user rate is um actually a decrease from the current year. So, um we're looking at it it sounds like a large decrease at 7.98%, but it's really 9/100 of a cent. Um so, the rate is 0.158 per thousand gallons. And again, this is um a rate that is charged right now just to Global Foundries and the slide here kind of just walks through the calculation that is done um each year. I'll also add that this at the end of every fiscal year, um the the rate and the amount that we charge

to Global Foundries gets accrued up um, actual to budget. So, if Global used less water, they'll get a a refund or a credit from the city. If they used more, then they will owe the difference to the city. Um, Global also because we have a wholesale rate and the state water fee that we pay, Global pays those fees as well. So, those are strictly a pass-through from the city to Global Foundries. Um, that's it for the presentation. I'm happy to take any questions that there might be. Jess, how do we calculate the 13% of the uh city's water operating budget? How how do we land on 13%? Um, great question. I do not know the the policy that's been in existence for decades has always been at 13%. I really don't know the the rationale behind the 13. Um, so, I'm assuming it has to do with the total their percentage of the total water usage. Um, so, that's something that we can we can look back at and and re-evaluate going forward. Um, Glob- on their usage over years. And we haven't assessed whether that's changed at all. Right. [snorts] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, and this is an agreement that was made between um, actually, I believe IBM in the back in the day and the village. Um, and there hasn't been um, there's been no question or concern raised on Global Foundries' side.

They're very aware. When we updated the policy a few year years ago, they were actually involved in that policy update. Um, so, we can revisit that that policy review again and just have a conversation with them. I have two direct contacts at Global that I work with for this specific um, policy and charge that we bill. Thanks, Jess. Sure. So, Jess, if I can ask um, from the standpoint of again, the large user rate is going down, recognizing 7/100 or 7/1000. Um, but it's going down for the large user user rate while it's going up for the residents. So, can I have a better understanding of the justification about why it's going down for them and up for everybody else versus if the cost generally and the cost is being shared by all users, it would seem to me that that cost would rise for all, not lean toward one versus the [clears throat] other. It's all based on usage. It's all based on how much water is consumed by um, Global and city as a whole. Um, so, in this case, Global's rate is going down um, in part because they are they were they've used less water in the last year. They've used less water, which means that they're and again, maybe this goes back to what Alida was talking about, but it it doesn't feel right that I get that their usage has gone down, which then would potentially mean that

their overall bill has come down, but again, the equivalency of rate being shared, it it doesn't seem right that they would get a decrease even though they've spent even though they've spent less, it still costs more to deliver and the residents are paying more to deliver the water to them in this upcoming change, but they're going to pay less. So, again, maybe I'm simplifying this, but am I If I'm not explaining myself correct, please feel free to ask clarifying questions cuz Yeah, no. Um, the So, part of the difference in how the rates are um, what affects the rates is that Global Foundries is paying the wholesale rate and the state fees directly. Um, city customers are paying the wholesale rate and that fee also, that state fee as well. Um, in the in last year's budget, we projected, I believe it was like a 13% increase in the state fee, um, which didn't actually happen. There was no increase in the state fee. So, part of this um, the the large user rate was calculated higher last year um, than it needed to be. It's base- What we're seeing here is kind of a true up an adjustment um, to what last year's actual cuz this is all based on the prior year's actual um,

making assumptions to what next year's usage will be. Um, and then for s- This explanation revolves around the totality of the bill versus the cost per gallon. And to me, those are two very different things. And again, if we were to remove the state fee, so again, we're looking at the same piece of the bill for residents in comparison to the large user. If if I'm pulling out what you've said correctly, then theoretically, it has been adjusted exactly the same for both the large user and the residents for what they have the same. The difference being that 13% in the state fees. And that's why therefore, the residents maybe are seeing increase in their fee going into this year. Um, No, so, the fee you you can't really compare the fee that Global Foundries pays to the fees that the city's users pay. Um, the city fee that's calculated for residents is um, you're we're paying for the water and the operating budget. The fee that we're billing to Global Foundries is just um, basically a a service fee for the water flowing through our infrastructure to get to them. So, they're they're paying the CWD wholesale rate

um, for every water every cubic foot or gallon of water that they use um, as a pass-through. So, we're not billing Global Foundries. The rates I don't know if I'm making any sense. The the way Trying to again, dumb this down to the common denominator, so it's like, okay, that's fine. So, therefore, if we're just paying for if they're just paying us for basic operation because maintenance and such in order to make sure that this water flows correctly, I don't know that we can tease that out of what the residents are paying. Again, it doesn't feel good to me that the large user user rate is going I I'll just keep it that. I'll just close it there. It doesn't feel good to me that the large user rate is going down and the residents are paying more. This This is a shared expense. Um, and I don't know what that that rate is that decrease is small being 9/1000 of a cent, but what does that total look like in the amount that they use? Is it $50,000? Global Foundries is still paying more because they are also paying the increased wholesale rate. It What you're seeing this this um, uh large user rate is just like an admin fee. Um, it has nothing to do with um, the amount of It's not directly tied to uh their water consumption. They are paying that plus this fee, where the city users are paying just the water fee, basically.

Yeah. I I think it's fair to say that the the two cannot be compared. They're two completely different methodologies. I get what you're saying, but they're can't be compared to each other. Anything else? I will beg to differ, but I will I will [laughter] leave it at that. But, okay. [snorts]

Mayor Tim? I'm good. All right. No, I'm not. Okay. Uh any public comment? Not seeing any, so I will close the public hearing. And we're going to move on to 6A. So, we're recognizing that this is Marcus and Elaine's last meetings. So, we have some resolutions [clears throat] for them, and Elaine is up first, and Brian, would you do the honors, please? All right. So, resolution in in in appreciation of Elaine Haney. Um whereas Elaine was elected to one of two open positions on the first Essex the first City Council of Essex Junction in April of 2013. And whereas during that time Elaine served as a council representative on the governance committee uh from January 2025 until December 2025. And whereas Elaine Haney was elected to the Village of Essex Junction Board of Trustees on April uh 2012 and served until April 2019. And whereas during that time Elaine served as vice president of the Board of Trustees uh in 2016 and 2017. And during that time Elaine served as a trustee representative on the governance committee from June 2018 until April 2019. And whereas Elaine was a member of the Village Planning Commission from 2004 to 2007. And whereas Elaine was a Brownell Library Trustee from 2003 to

2012. And whereas Elaine represented the City of Essex Junction on the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission as an equity leadership team member [cough] from 2021 to 2022 as an equity advisory committee member from 2022 to 2023 as a Board of Directors alternate representative from 2022 to 202021 to 2022 as a Board of Directors representative from 2022 to 2024 as an executive committee member from 2023 to 2024. And whereas uh Elaine represented the Village of Essex Junction on the CCTV uh Channel 17 Board of Trustees from 2012 to 2018 where she served as chair from 2015 to 2018 and later served as the city's representative from 2019 to 2024. And whereas Elaine's contributions to the Village and City of Essex Junction are too numerous to list. Um however, they include sound budget sound budget and policy development including the first strategic plan for the city improved governance and community engagement practices uh business relations as well as support of the Crescent Connector roadway project Two Lincoln renovations project the public works facility bond whereas Elaine spearheaded the revival of the social services grant program for the city and whereas Elaine will end her term as a city councilor on April 30th, uh 2026 concluding 23 years of dedicated service and leadership to the Village City of Essex Junction. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City

Council on behalf of the staff and citizens of the City of Essex Junction hereby extend our most sincere appreciation to Elaine for commitment and dedication to the residents of Essex Junction. [applause]

Oh, some stuff. You get presents. Presents. [laughter] Oh, yeah. It's tradition. Oh my god, that's so pretty. Look at that. Thank you. Trying to get rid of old t-shirts. [laughter] Thank you very much. Thrilled to have these things. A public works t-shirt. [laughter]

That's very exciting. Oh, thank you all very, very much. It has been an absolute honor and a complete pleasure working with all of you [snorts] and all the iterations of this council and the Board of Trustees and various managers and staff and um I just think Essex Junction is best, you know, one of the very best cities in Vermont, and we work really hard to be that way, and it's been an honor. Thank you so much. Thank you. Good luck, ELAINE. [applause] [laughter] ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP IS A RESOLUTION FOR Marcus Sird uh Oh, there wasn't a business item we were skipping to? Yeah, no. I'm sorry, pal. You're here for it. You had your chance to modify. Resolution in appreciation of Marcus Sird. Believe me, I tried. Yeah,

[laughter]

we did, too. Whereas [clears throat] Marcus was elected to one of two open positions of the first City Council of Essex Junction in April of 2023. And whereas Marcus served as vice president of the City Council from 2025 through 2026. And whereas Marcus served on CCTV Channel 17 Board of Trustees as the city's alternate representative. And whereas Marcus served on the Tree Farm Advisory Manage or the Tree Farm Management Board. And whereas Marcus contributed to the develop of the first strategic plan for the city, improved governance and community engagement practices, and provided support for the Crescent Connector roadway project, Two Lincoln renovation project, and the public works facility bond. And whereas Marcus will end his term as city councilor on April 30th, 2026 concluding 3 years of dedicated service and leadership to the City of Essex Junction. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Essex Junction City Council on behalf of staff and citizens of the City of Essex Junction hereby extend our most sincere appreciation to Marcus for his commitment and dedication to the residents of Essex Junction. THANKS, BUDDY.

[applause] I'M DEFINITELY NOT GOING ANYWHERE, EITHER, SO You get presents, too. You get presents, too. Listen. Thank you. Thank you. Guys, next time when they wake me up at 7:00 a.m. with a super soaker in front of my house, I'm going to wear this. [laughter] That shirt will get you a place to show my support. it does. Thank you. Will you wear it to the ribbon cutting when you come visit? There you go. That's a great idea. And the ground and the ground And then you're going to have a ceremony on the ground breaking, too. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Be sure we do that. Get the truck [laughter] in. Double them up there, and then yep, clean shovel. Exactly. [laughter]

All right. Sorry, guys. We have to get on to actual, like, you know, non-fun business here, but all right. On to 7A, discussion and consideration of the FY27 enterprise fund water, wastewater, sanitation, and stormwater rates, and Jess is back. I'm back. All right. So, in your packet, you have um a table that lists all of the FY27 rates for each fund um usage and fixed rates as well as the large water user rate, the wastewater wholesale rate, and the stormwater ERU rate. Um so, in summary, the combined cost to a city resident using the average 120 gallons per day um for water, wastewater, and sanitation uh will increase by just over 7 and 1/2% or roughly $62 per year.

[snorts]

Um as we just mentioned in the public hearing, the large user rate will decrease by just under 8%. The wastewater um treatment wholesale rate is also decreasing by 0.3% and the stormwater rate will increase by $34.59 per ERU per year. Um that's roughly just under a 64% increase um and just to to give a little more information on that, that is mostly due to the um addition of the capital reserve contribution for the stormwater fund. Uh so, um staff's recommendation is to adopt the rates that are being that are proposed um and these are all based on the budgets that were approved at the end of uh March. Happy to answer any questions. Council? Questions? We have been through these rates and through these rates and through these rates. So.

All right. Public Any public comment? None in the room. Seeing none online. Uh who would like the motion? I have it. Um I move that the City Council approve the FY27 utility rates for water, wastewater, sanitation, and stormwater as presented. I'll second. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. It is unanimous. Uh Oh. Nay. No, sorry. I heard you. Thank you [laughter] for Apparently, I need a hearing aid. You're voting no. Okay. Yes, thank you. Okay, still passes with four four to one. So. [snorts]

math. All right. Thank you, guys. Don't go anywhere, Jess. It's the Jess Morse show. So, finance department head brief, including the capital review committee. All right. Um so, I'm going to I'll run through kind of some highlights and um I'll do sort of a combined finance department and capital committee. Um capital committee is very integrated into the work that finance does, because it is all tied to the capital budgeting process um and planning process. So, that's why it's presented here as kind of a combined um uh conversation. So, we had another year of successful audits and monitoring visits um from the state of Vermont and continuing lots of process improvement around grants, which has um shown in our audits. Uh the annual financial audit has gone smoother and smoother every year um and still continues with no findings. So, hoping to continue that into the next um audit later this fall as well. Um we did hire another not another, a new um accounts receivable coordinator. So, the the person who was with us last time I presented to you guys uh left last fall. Um so, Allison joined us in October and she has she basically jumped right into the first round of utility billing at the end of October um and has been through a few cycles of that. She also was a a huge asset in helping us get the storm water utility um finalized and included in that first round of bills in October. Um

and she's already starting training on cross training on payroll, which has been a goal of the finance department since I got here four years ago. Um it's to have a a payroll backup. So, we are well on our way to that now. Um [snorts] we had a lot of things come down the pike related to federal and um best practice changes over the last year. Um that definitely have slowed down some of our work right at important times, audit and and calendar year end, but we were able to kind of work through gain um knowledge and understanding of what those new rules and regulations are um and continuing to work through especially the qualified overtime federal regulations. There's it got implemented for 2025 and then is continuing for the next 3 years um and we're still trying to work through how to track all of that and report it out at the end of the calendar year. Um as I mentioned earlier, we accomplished the goal of having enterprise budgets ready with the um general fund budget this year. So, that was super exciting and a huge improvement over prior years. Um and probably my favorite personal highlight of the last several months, uh as you all know, I serve on the Vermont Government Finance Officers Association board and we were lucky enough um to host the New England fall conference um last September at Jay Peak and the conference was very well attended, one of the best attended in there's six different states that host and we alternate we kind of rotate through

um each year. And it we had some awesome presenters, really great networking opportunities with not just fellow Vermont finance directors, but um New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut as well. So, it's kind of cool to see how other people do things, other um communities and municipalities do things that run the gamut from teeny tiny towns to cities that like have um uh finance departments that are larger than our whole city staff. [laughter]

Um so, really cool to just experience that and and network with those folks. Um and so, the capital committee work that we've done, uh we switched to quarterly meetings a couple years back now. Um those are going really well. The timing seems to work really well for the committee and feeding into the the budget process. So, this past year we have worked on um re-ranking some existing projects. We got um updated project cost estimates for everything. Um we did get to rank one new project this year, which was cool. That was the Main Street shared use path. Um and all of this was done um in time to make past recommendations on to staff and council for the capital budget planning process for FY27. Um and looking ahead we're continuing on our um cross training policy updates, uh rolling out the next phases of Questar budgeting software. Um unfortunately, we're going to be a little bit behind where we wanted to be on that project um this year, just due to staff turnover. Um but staff uh finance staff right now is actually working through kind of some trainings to become super users to get the the department heads trained up on this um in the coming months, this system. Um One of the other big goals that we have is to um get all of our fixed asset inventory kind of in preparation for for year end and audit this year. Um we've got two big projects that we want to get done. One is updating our

fixed asset inventory, moving it all into our finance software, Nemeric um rather than currently right now it it lives in spreadsheets, which we all know can be a nightmare when you're trying to track lots of lots of things in different funds. Um the other thing we're working on right now is updating our key control document. So, this is the document that um I introduced to the city when I started um and we we kind of review and update every year. It's it's basically the document that details all of the internal controls and procedures that we have for cash handling primarily um but budgeting and um lots of other personnel management and everything are in there as well. And then on the capital committee front um continuing with our quarterly meetings, we're going to review and adjust existing projects that are on the ranked current ranked file. Um and we are also we started talking about the sidewalk policy updates that are coming down the pike and um having the capital committee somewhat involved in that process, just to sort of understand what the sidewalk policy is and how that relates to the capital planning work that we do for um various projects throughout the city. Uh and also hopefully have some input on that process and how it relates to the um portion of lot funds that are earmarked for sidewalk improvements as well. So, overall, another very very busy year. Um but uh the team just everybody shows up every day

willing to work hard um do a really good job and um you know, stay focused at the task. They're very flexible when new things get thrown it in our direction. Um and [clears throat] everyone's just had a really good sense of humor through it all. So, uh that's where we're at. Any questions for Jess? Yep. Jess, can I get a just a quick example, you know, cuz I love um upskilling and and development of personnel and you spoke very well about the conference and I'm just curious like what would can you give me an example of like something that came out of that conference that you either learned or you thought was interesting that maybe who knows, you maybe we'll be talking about something you learned in the future. I don't know. Yeah. Um so, I think probably the most interesting topic to me um was actually about very relevant to what's going on today, uh cybersecurity fraud um and we had so, there were uh FBI and state police presenters that were just sort of like telling us about the tips and tricks that these hackers and these fraudsters are are doing are using. Um

[snorts]

and one of the one of the most interesting things I think that came out of that is just one it's like fascinating to know that even the detectives who are chasing these guys down say they're 10 steps ahead of us. We're we will probably never be ahead of them. Um and uh so one of the really interesting things that came out of that that has also been brought forward by VLCT and a couple other organizations is changing the domain to a dot gov away from dot org. Um that alone lends itself to um less spam less junk less attempts at fraud which I thought was really interesting that like the dot gov actually does carry some weight. So um that's one thing that we are currently working on trying to figure out how to implement too. So Yeah. Can can I just I just want to touch on the the um the piece of it with the with the new tax laws that came down uh because we all heard the headlines there was no tax on overtime. The in reality of it is that was a headline. Uh and so I dealt with it a lot where I work it's it's qualified overtime and it's the only the half. So there had to have been some interesting struggles that it's April. We just came through tax season and I'm wondering how much of an undertaking for you and your staff was it to try and figure all of that out in the process in the time as you know I I mean I was still getting letters in February on how to deduct the

half of the overtime that qualified but then there was compensated time in there and if there was vacation time that was offset. So it was I don't know if you could just touch on that a little bit so we can cut through the headline and understand what happened behind the doors. Mhm. Yeah. So um it took I would say probably weeks to get this figured out. Um unfortunately it was a it was a rule that came down like in the late summer early fall. And so it applied back to January 1, right? And we had so we had to look back several months to try to figure out you know we had no our systems had no reporting mechanisms built in to just spit a report out. Um so there was a lot of manual work. This is another area where the the um government finance officers association came in like we all most everyone on the board is a finance director in a community and one of our um board meetings became kind of a think tank of like how do we do how do we do this? And everybody put their heads together um to to see you know what other communities were doing what do we have to do? And that was the big thing is understanding what we legally had to provide. Um and so we were able to kind of pull together the information manually for 2025 and get that out with um the end of year reporting to employees. We definitely had a lot of questions but we sort of took the route of um there was a kind of a standard deduction that you could do for 2025. 2026 is when the real reporting kicks in.

Um the interesting thing and very complicated thing about the city is that um qualified overtime the feds consider overtime um hours worked where the city considers um you get overtime for if you work 20 hours and took 20 hours of vacation time. Um so the the requirements are totally different. Our system does not separate out the reporting the way that the feds require it. Um so we are now having to track manually in Excel spreadsheets outside of our payroll system um what is actually qualified every pay period. Uh so it's a it's been a huge undertaking for the finance department. Um and definitely created a lot of manual work. Thanks Jess. I appreciate that. As someone who works for a a large corporation we got a letter in February that said they're not auditing this year. Take what you want.

[laughter] Yeah. multinational conglomerate just kind of threw up their hands and went we don't know what to tell you. So Yeah. [clears throat]

I just want to put that in perspective cuz it was uh you know it it was a lot for us. I can imagine what it was for you guys. So I just wanted to take a minute and express that. Appreciate the work behind the scenes to from everyone that that made an attempt to get the information as accurate as possible and the work that still continues. Yeah. [snorts] Cindy actually heard from um there are a couple other towns that use a a payroll vendor for their payroll. So like ADP or another one of those companies and heard that they told their customers it's on you we're not figuring it out. So [laughter] [gasps]

Yeah. Brian, do you have anything? I just thanks for thanks for all that. Um I my my question was do you see any challenges for budgeting and planning for this upcoming year on the um um if we were to happen to pull the election back by a month? Is that are you are you ready for that? I am ready. Um so my my former employment um we worked on the town meeting the traditional March town meeting date deadline. Um so I'm very comfortable with that. I've got a schedule actually already created. Um and I think the work that we did this this past budget cycle to move the enterprise budget preparation up um and moving our audit up last year as well into September we moved it up a month earlier. Um all of those things definitely set us up to be successful if we move to town meeting um next year. So I have no worries about it. I'm actually kind of looking forward to it. Yep. Brian, anything? No, I'm good. Thanks Jess. Thanks Jess. Thank you. All right. 7C discussion and consideration of the rebranding initiative entry signs and roll out timeline. Ashley is with us. Hello everyone. Hello. Regina's going to pull up my the signs for us. Um cuz I'm usually at home. So I was like oh I how do I do this tonight?

[laughter]

Um so in the packet you guys are going to see um some designs from place for our five entrance signs and for our municipal signs. Um in here they're labeled 1A for the entrance signs or 1B for the um municipal signs that we might replace throughout the city. Um the rebranding committee is suggesting that we move forward with concept uh A which is the first one that you guys are going to see. Um we felt that this sign uh was the most readable sign out of all of them. Um we felt that it also uh had the logo where it was standing out a bit more prominently. And then really it was um tying more into some of our branded items that we already have um already said that approved. So like our banner for instance. Um we thought that this tied in the best with um those other products that we're already producing. One of the things that we do need to consider with these signs. I guess I should go through all the signs. Let's do that first. Um so uh this is option A uh and 1B which would be anything outside uh the municipal offices or Brownell or any of our other signs in Ruthland City. Um concept B this one is has instead of it all being rounded it has that little cut out for the circle um icon. Uh again we thought that the full rounded was more smoother uh just made it a little bit more I thought cleaner whatever we were looking at this. So that's option two and this is what it would look like at the city offices. Concept C um this one is similar to concept B but it has the reversal of the colors where it's more dark. We preferred the lighter colors. We thought that it made the uh logo pop more um and made it stand out those colors more. So we shied away from the darker colors which would be the

next two um cut uh designs. So again that's what the municipal office signs would look like. And then with concept D, again, uh this one's very basic sign. Um and so, [laughter] I felt like it was very bland. Um and again, we didn't really like those dark colors. It We really felt that white helped make that logo pop out. And then that would be what it would look like at the municipal level. And then the last concept is concept D. This was one that was put in there, but even Place said to us, "We don't suggest this sign." Um [laughter]

and so, uh this was like when I even showed it to the department heads, I just skipped it. I was like, "No, this is not even going in there." But it is part of the the signage package, so I am bringing it forward today. But again, this is very hard to read, we feel like, um and would not be the best option of representing our city. So, those are the concepts. If you'll go back to the one that we're suggesting, which is the first one, option A, um just so that we have that up. Thank you. Um so, the other thing part of the sign package is we need a decision on the organizational um panels. So, right now, our current signs have an organizational panel. Um I didn't even know what was on this until I went and actually took a picture of it. I don't know if you guys knew what was on it before you saw the picture. Um but I am suggesting that we leave this off. One, um it is um something we're going to have to update if we do that. Um right now it has the farmers market on it. It's something that we would have to um update.

can I interrupt actually? What Can you define organizational panel? So, it has it has specific organizations. Yeah, um Yeah. So, it has the Rotary, the Lions Club, um the Kiwanis Club, the five uh it would have been the farmers market, CVE, and then the Grange, which I had no idea what that was until I talked to Cindy. Um And so, if they're still around, I didn't even know that they were still around. So, um but um I feel like one, I as I said, we'll have to replace some of these. It's something that we would have to replace if we decided to put a certain organization on there. Um you have literally 3 seconds to see a sign. A billboard or sign, you have 3 to 5 seconds to read it. You're not seeing these signs. Nobody's seeing them. Again, like I said, I didn't even know what these signs were on here until I went and took this picture. Um and then the other thing is it does have a sort of favoritism. There are probably other organizations in our community that would love to have their logo on our sign. And how we would have to develop a process in order to put those um on that sign. So, I am suggesting that we leave that off and just have our beautiful new logo as our entrance sign. So, what I need from you guys tonight is a direction on the sign um uh which ones you guys like the best. If you want to move forward with option A, which is what the committee is suggesting, and your decision on if we're adding back in these panels, um and then or leaving them off. Um the other thing in the uh memo just talks a little bit about where we're at in the process. Uh Place uh we are we are almost ready to get this over the finish line, guys. We're just right there.

[laughter] Um so, we are I I had them to go back with the style guide and do two other things that I felt needed to be in the style guide. One of them is how our uniforms are for our employees. Um these um we have very specific guidelines on what our employees can have for their uniforms for our public works and our wastewater specifically. And so, I also wanted to differentiate the the T-shirts or the uniforms that our staff has and then what we have for the public because I'd love to sell merchandise at one point in time with our new logo on it. So, that needs to be different so nobody can be showing up with a public works logoed uh shirt. [laughter] Who would DO THAT? I'M JUST SUPER BIASED. [laughter]

Um so, water main break. [laughter]

So, we I have asked them to do those designs for me and also decals for our uh trucks cuz we have three different color trucks. Um so, I want to make sure that we have a logo that looks good on whatever piece of equipment that we have out there. Um and so, we also have been reviewing all of the templates the committee has, and I've also been having the department heads, since they are the main users who will be using these templates, to also be looking at them. We've done some voting at some department head meetings. Um we are very close. There are two other things that they need to get me, um and then we will be have all of our templates completed as well. Um and so, the goal is to have it by May 22nd. It's still flexible. It depends on what they send me and what I my changes that I have back and forth with them and how long that takes. So, um what that's what we're we're trying for. Um and then the goal is to start rolling out everything to staff by uh June 1st so that they can start learning the new logo. We can start slowly replacing everything internally, and then hopefully by July 1 we're at having everything out to the community, and I would love to have a sign unveiling around that time. So, that is

sell little super suckers. Like Tonka trucks. I love it. [laughter] That's cute. I love it. [laughter] I'm already [clears throat] I'm already got ideas for merchandise. So, then perking around in my head. [laughter]

Ricky will agree with me on that. Yeah, sure he will. Does anybody have any questions, comments for Ashley? Marcus. Uh I'll simply say that I agree that we should not do the organizational sign. And I'm fully prepared to read the motion as it's recommended in here cuz I also agree that option A, I think, is our best option. Any other? I I I I agree that option A is the best one. I'm not I'm not uh my only concern with the removing the organizational banners is I'm not sure that those organizations didn't pay for those. So, but um it doesn't seem to me like option A could support adding them back if that becomes a a something we want to do in the future. Is that a fair interpretation of that?

uh and and Tim was on the They were there because they helped pay for the signage, which has reached the end of its life, as you can tell by the uh signs that are missing the banners now. They've fallen and rotted away. I think I've been very close to these signs, yeah. Yeah. Oh, that's right. I forgot about that. [laughter] And one at least one doesn't exist. Yeah. So, so, The farmers market. since we're removing

Oh, right. we're removing that piece of the equation altogether, I don't have an issue removing the organizations. Okay. They're not going to them with a Yeah. request for anything. Uh yeah. Are Are you good? Yeah, no, I I I I I I think that it leaves the the option open if we were wanting to fundraise and and put those [clears throat] in, so. If we did, we would have to consider so, how these signs are currently done. They're closer down to the ground. So, right now our signs are pretty high off the ground so that that organizational So, it kind of does need to be decided or we're going to have to re-pull the signs. Does that make sense? Ryan. It uh that makes sense.

[clears throat] How how how um how high is it from the bottom from the bottom here to this? Ooh, I don't know if I have those signs. yeah, I get I get that we're not getting six feet 20 inches if you look at it to scale, 2 ft maybe. Yeah, I I don't know. Yeah, so, like I said, how the how option A is right now, it will be lower to the ground than what it is right now. Yeah. Um and so, we would need to think about that and and plan for that. If that was something that you guys wanted to plan and have it higher up or have it where like like it's situated right now. [snorts]

Thoughts? I think it is I my personal opinion is it's simple, it's clean. We're not going to anybody looking to fundraise for this. The Can I have just a quick refresher? The entry signs were included in the original rebranding budget, but I feel like when we did the ribbon cutting for two Lincoln, that the municipal sign was not allocated, correct?

That's correct. So, right now we have lot funding for the entrance signs and for the banners. Uh if we wanted to do the municipal signs later on, we would have to have funding for that. Um we did not put that in um and it wasn't an option at the time cuz we didn't know what our signage would be. We didn't know how much it would change, and so we didn't really want to move forward with a whole package. And but we knew that all the entrance signs were going to have to be replaced because they are very much deteriorating. Okay. Uh I'm more in favor of just having the the welcome to the city without the extra organizational logos. Um there is a motion that just asked about option the different options. Do you want me to separate No, I'm No.

Okay. That's fine. Um I will open it up to public comment if there's no other comment among the table here. Okay. Risa. Thank you. Um depending upon if they really are only 20 inches above the ground, if we get some super storm snowstorm, are they going to be high enough or are we going to lose our signs? Uh I Risa, I was uh merely guessing that based off of one of the renderings. [laughter] Uh it's not a it's It's not a height to scale. I'm I Yeah, it's [laughter]

Okay. So, I mean, I it's probably taller than that. I was just trying to give a rough idea. It's not the Like if you look at the existing signs, they're the our piece of it is 6-ft in the air, and then the the sponsored boards are underneath of that, kind of eye level. So, this proposal shifts those uh shifts everything down so that there's not enough room under our stuff for additional stuff. Right. And Reese [laughter]

We don't have to pay attention to the 20 in. That was I'm thinking, "Oh my goodness, I get 20 in here all the time." No, and I will be working with Ricky and the sign company on what's the best placement for this. This will not be something that like this is exactly what it's going to like the final thing. We This is just a rendering from Place, who's the designers. Then we'll work with the sign company once we get some quotes back on what the appropriate and with Ricky, our public works director, to make sure that all of that is worked out when it comes to mowing or when it comes to snow plow. Great. Thank you. Yeah. And that's what I'm I'm just sort of extrapolating from A, having been close to these and looking at them, and and from the design, it looks like sort of the bottom of of the slogan would kind of would would kind of be installed like about the same height as the as the current um you know, the current top three I keep forgetting the term you're using for like the the rotary and the organization. Yeah. Um so, um and I think to to Reese's concerns, I mean, we rarely get over the organizational panel panels on the the existing signs now, I don't think. So, do we do we Uh like you mean like snow wise or Yeah. I'd be surprised I'd be surprised. Yeah, I'd be surprised Yeah, and even even if we did get a even if we did get up at that height, first we're blocking the logo, then we're blocking junction, you know, you know, so I I don't I'd still Yeah, I I think and I'm asking if you think that we would be okay under that situation.

Are you asking about putting the organizational panel back? Okay, just like you're thinking like snow wise. Yeah. Yeah, I'm just I'm just trying to address Reese's concern [laughter]

about them Well, like Reese says, your concern of them being knocked over by snow or them being covered by snow and you don't know where the the city line is. I you know, I'm thinking back to when I was in college and in our snow storms, we had this handrail walking up the steep hill, and in this in the winter, we would lose the handrail, and I would say, "Why do you remove the handrail?" And they would say, "We don't. It's under snow." I don't want our welcome to Essex the city of Essex Junction signs to disappear. It would be such an incredible storm if they knocked over. It wasn't It wasn't how strong they are. It was the 20 in, and I'm thinking, "Oh my." Yeah, that But the the the to be clear, just so that I understand, based on the ask that we're being asked to consider today, though, we're just talking about design. I mean

Yeah. Yeah. the actual final form still will be need to be worked out.

Yeah. Yes, this is just a design, what it's going the the physical look of it. We have not talked to a sign We have not sent this to a sign company and said, "Hey, what would this look like? What would the dimensions be?" We have not done that yet. This is just clearly we have to get the design so that then we can then send it to them. So, it sounds like it's we're leaning no organizations and ready for a motion. But Okay. Marcus. I move the City Council approve option A for the city entrance sign design, and should I add the no organizational I don't think

to not include the organizational sign. No? I think we're fine. Okay. So, She heard us. [laughter] All right. Yeah, thank you. I need a second. I'll second. All in favor? I. I. Okay, I think that was unanimous. It was. Okay. [laughter] Regina, do you want me to stay here for the kiosk? Sure. All right. All right. So, discussion is 7D, discussion and consideration of the Railroad and Main Street kiosk. [cough]

So, I'm going to share my screen again. This is another sign. Um a sign that has been in kind of rough shape for a while, uh Railroad Avenue and Main Street. Um we brought a um update to the council back a couple of months ago. Um so, ultimately, this side of the sign that we're looking at that faces um Main Street. Um this was done with byway funding, um federal funding through a CCRPC program. Um that funding comes with a set period of time that we can't change um these signs, not in any big way. Um we are able to update all of it, but it needs to retain all of the concept of this being a wayfinding sign, part [clears throat] of the larger byway, um scenic byway in uh along Lake Champlain. So, um we have worked with CCRPC to get all of these panels redesigned and updated. So, again, it's not talking about the farmers market, it's talking about the city of Essex Junction, not the village. Um a whole slew [snorts] of things change over time. Um so, the question before you is what do we do with the top? So, there are holes right now from some old clocks that were really like you plugged them in or something um that didn't work. Um this first option is replacing those with signs uh with clocks, I'm sorry, uh that require um little maintenance. They um keep themselves updated. They're connected um with ethernet. Ethernet, yeah. Um

So, [cough] that is option A. Uh option two, uh similar with the clocks, but a different color um of the Essex Junction component of it. Um option three um is not a clock, just the logo that we were just talking about. Um this is um I These clocks will be low maintenance, but this will be even lower. [laughter] Or take it off altogether. Um This is my least favorite, just out of curiosity.

[laughter] Um but so, those we just need some direction from the council on this, and then also this memo includes um overall the cost estimates as we've pulled them pulled them together so far. Uh we will need um to probably use the economic development fund to be able to um these updated. Thoughts? I just want to say in defense of the clock back in the day, [laughter] [cough]

the intention was to have a nice elegant clock like that you would see getting off the train. And we ended up with like these two classroom clocks that weren't even weatherproof. [laughter] Where did they even come from?

They came from a classroom. As soon as they went up, I was like, "That's not what we meant." So, I'm happy to see them go. I like option three. Uh Brian? Yeah, no, I like I like option three. I mean, I did hear some feedback about the clock, but from those constituents that said said I don't worry about it. So, like as long as it looks central and pretty as a downtown exposure, which I think we get with option three. Um that said, and it's it's clearer that the design that the design of option three for in the on the big screen here that the Essex Junction is in yellow because that's just Photoshop. Yeah, this is leave it yellow there. That's that's inconsistent with the style guide.

Yes, yes. Uh yes. As I told Regina when we were talking about this, I was like, "It's going to be a rough mock-up." [laughter] This is me cuz I don't have the logos, I don't have anything right yet. Um and so, it's it's me playing with Photoshop um on this. So, yeah, it's uh it will look a lot better. [laughter] I think I think if it were I think if it were the the the black that is in the style guide, it would look great, honestly. So, my like my new show kind of question, in option three, the logo is you know how we just talked about the signs coming into the city are just like this,

Mhm. but then the top of this looks like the other one. Is that going to be fixed, or is it No, so this would the the idea of this is we are not If we're doing just that option three, we're not changing the actual structure of the sign. Um but yes, it does have that characteristic of option two, [laughter] but that would require us, obviously, to build in a new part of that. So, that's going to cost more money, which we can, but again, it's if that's what we want to do with this sign. Um [laughter]

I like the the clock is lovely, but I'd rather have the $7,000. Yeah, the or the clocks themselves are 2,500 out of the school budget. Yeah. Marcus. Uh I'll I agree with everything that's been said so far, outside of the fact that I am not a fan of option number three so much. I I would probably rather find a different way to lock it up whether it's just straight right rectangle on top cuz I don't I didn't like this option two in the last you know in our previous discussion. So I'm not a fan of this particular lockup. So I I'd rather again square it off that way it's a couple of boards relatively cheap top that goes on it that can be done in a in a I think a nice cleaner lockup personally but then again I'm not going to die on this hill

[clears throat] for this either so if the council wants number three I'm happy to go along with that. Tim represented four options. I don't think that you have a fifth right? [laughter]

He is creating a fifth. I mean in theory it's just it's saying standing the the top there across to the top of the but yeah I you know I reached out to a bunch of people and everybody was kind of indifferent about clock versus no clock. I told Regina that I have a soft spot in my heart for clocks because when I go home to New York there's a clock four-sided clock in the town [snorts] square and it always just kind of reminds me of home when I pull in but I you know I don't know if that like everybody I talked to was kind of indifferent about it. So if you guys are happy with three I can certainly you know go I'm fine with that. That clock is probably exactly what Elaine and the trustees were thinking.

[laughter] I'll show you a picture after. Yeah for the record No they were classroom they were indoor clocks so like I will say the picture is not the real clock either. That's not what it would look like so just just [laughter] in case to temper anybody's expectations. Appreciate that. Yeah and can I can I just say if we're going to have a clock that is historic Essex Junction it should be one like a time and temperature clock like it was on the Merchants Bank. Oh god. [laughter] Let's not do that either. Okay. My only concern about not having a clock is how is Marty McFly GOING TO [laughter]

HOW IS how is he going to get there? You know he's going to be stuck. It'd be a nice teachable moment trying to get the youngsters to read AN ANALOG. [laughter] NOT FOR the 22500 BUCKS YEAH YOU KNOW [laughter] ALL RIGHT I'm going to open up for public comment. Any public comment on this cuz it's just getting unruly now. [laughter] It's really early to be unruly guys. All right I'm not seeing apparently my mouse doesn't want to work but I'm not seeing any hands up unless Regina do you see any? I do not see any.

Okay. All right who wants to take the motion? lost in my clock pages I oh What happened to me? Sorry computer. I got it if you guys don't. Yeah go ahead. Go ahead. I move that the city council authorize the use of the economic development fund in an amount not to exceed $7,000 for the kiosk replacement project. I'll second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Tim did you vote? Aye. Okay. Thank you. All right that's unanimous. Getting late in my day.

Thank you guys. All right 7E discussion of traffic calming policy and update. [snorts]

So as you may recall on December 17th the city council had adopted an updated traffic calming policy that changes the process through which residents and stakeholders can request roadway modifications to address speed and safety concerns. So we took a bunch of the the previous speed concerns and complaints that we received and uh did some desktop analysis to get to a preliminary look at what the priorities come out to be and also how the scoring system is is working.

[snorts]

What you see on the screen right now is the results of that. Uh So the darker the color for the circles the higher the priority. If it's you may also recall that the traffic calming policy had several thresholds you had to these locations had to exceed in order to proceed for further engagement and and and design work. Um and the locations that are x'd out here have kind of been cut uh by not passing those thresholds. So I mean I I would say that the these thresholds are kind of intentionally conservative. We're trying to focus efforts where it would have the largest impact and you know maybe we locked off a little little too much but um but I I think at least in the in the short to medium term this is probably a good thing. I mean it it helps focus efforts where I I think that it's it's likely the most needed. I'll point out as well that um Park Street so Park three Park four those those two locations stand out as at the highest priority based on the scoring metrics right now. Um this and I I think it's it's timely now that say the next item is going to be the consideration of changes to the striping and lane layouts for Park Street. Um this is really just an update. I think the intent here is that throughout the summer when we have capacity to advance this we'll we'll uh take uh you know we'll do some public engagements and hold the required public meetings uh

for some of these high priority locations and uh take it to the next step with the within the available resources. But I'm here for any questions. Marcus So um we're obviously going to be talking about Park Street so I'll s- so looking at these priorities and thinking about what we have ahead and what's been allotted for this year there are five uh in the high priority so cuz Park if Park Street is theoretically taken care of by our next discussion then as we go down the list then we've got five other items. Can we tackle those five items or is there a way that you're going to prioritize within this high priority cuz I have a feeling we're not going to be able to do five projects based on what No that's right. That's right. So the process the policy spells out a process of how you get to the final priority score. This is actually a preliminary priority [clears throat] score. So it's going to be based on um public feedback of that that will tell us a little bit more about the land uses and the and the the specific um uh needs over there the kind of public support there is for changes in each area. And there's also uh you know there there's a a design component to it as well. I I think it's it's written so that uh uh we can from among the the highest priority spots uh but not necessarily the highest um just based on what's what is the most feasible and what what makes the most sense when it when there's an opportunity to implement. Other questions? Brian

One of the things that stands out to me on this map and maybe you know forgive me cuz just cuz it's my neighborhood um is that that North Street does not meet thresholds but Grove Street does. Um one of the things that I tell my constituents who and again this is the most common thing that I get complaints about. Um it is um one thing that you can do is park a park on the street and it makes the street narrower. Um my theory is that the people on the corner of North and Central park on the street and that and that is um slowing down traffic on North Street. Um but that's my theory. I was wondering if you had if you had um any theories behind some of this data that that that would back up whether that theory has any basis or not. I I I don't. I I don't have the the details behind that at the moment. I can tell you there are a lot of land use factors that that feed into whether or not they they hit the cutoff. So uh it might not just be it might not just be the speeds. Fair enough. Thank you. So you didn't want to know about the one right in front of your house? Just kidding.

[laughter] What what I want to say to my neighbor that lives right there is that like yes you're right it is your end of the street still not still not the worst part in town we're getting to. [laughter] Any other questions for Chris? All right public any public comment? All right yep Uh so I'm on the John Nolen Bike Walk Committee. Just one comment.

John, you can come to this mic. I'll just come over here. Uh so just one thing about this cuz we went over it at the meeting just last uh a week before last 2 weeks now. Um so this is data from three previous years. None of this is recently submitted. Um so in order for it to really get the the wheels moving on these, we will need people to resubmit those. Um so there's there's not going to be like an immediate movement on a lot of these. And who knows? Maybe some of these problems just magically solve themselves. Um So we'll we'll see. Um but of course it'll be depending on people really bringing it back to the uh attention of uh of the city now that we have adopted this new policy. Just wanted to put that out there as well. Can I ask a follow-up to that, Chris, for you? I mean, would that be true that we that we can't act on this? I feel like you've got enough data you had enough data to put this map together that we could be proactive if if we had to if we had to wait for another complaint, but I feel like we could jump on something without waiting for another complaint to come in. I I think we can uh and the uh you know, my intent is to uh take uh some of these to the uh to the public engagement step and and you get the the the final score here. Uh Meaning that we're going to reach out to these Right.

sections Right. and invite them to a public meeting. That's right. That's right. We'll we'll probably stick some signs into in in the in the green belt over there for a couple of weeks to say that there's this meeting coming up about traffic calming exactly right here. Yeah. [snorts]

So yeah, it's I think we welcome you know, additional feedback, but I I think we can treat the previous uh concerns and complaints as you know, as valid. Any other Brian? That that that was an interesting point. Do you have the the the dates at which these were these were collected? I assume they were more recent than they than they were. My In in my concern is that a lot of the complaints certainly [snorts] in my the quindrant the quindrant it's a term I that that I live in is strongly it's strongly affected by high school traffic, right? So if it was if if the measurements are taken during the summer that they're going to be different than if they're if they're in you know, you know, you know, the last day of school after all the seniors just got their driver's license, right? So that yeah, I I just like to see that if you have it. I don't need it today. So they any speed data that's associated with this was was what's Officer Greg had put together in the past. I don't remember exactly when the measurements were taken. Any measurements we need to take going forward, I would certainly be considering whether or not I I suspect that school traffic is a is a big component of it and you know, we have some uh uh some help allocated from with CCRPC's equipments to do this this kind of a speed study uh some of which can be done you know, during the school year and some of it will Right. I Yeah, I understand that temperatures are a factor, but you know, but the spring spring and fall can you know, is is different than uh different than July for the purposes of both both my neighborhood and y'alls. Like by Hiawatha, right? Yeah. I fixed my parking problem. Anything else? [laughter] I just want to make a note that in looking at the map and all of the speed

studies that don't reach the threshold, but they're all along certain lengths. I just think it's still worth looking at. Like when you look at Cascade and Dunbar, I mean like the entire length is people are complaining about that. Uh actually so it doesn't mean just because there are multiple points along each street, it doesn't mean there were multiple complaints. Uh people are usually not as specific as uh about the the location. They usually people just say Cascade Street. Um for the methodology to work in terms of uh evaluating land uses, we had and um and and you know, what's around there and counting the crashes and whatnot, we had to specify a segment length and a buffer. I see. So we replicated them on a on a regular interval. Uh so so that is to make sure we didn't accidentally pick a spot that didn't qualify, but then just a little bit over it would. So yeah, I wouldn't I wouldn't um uh consider the the number of spots you see as as much as just the name of the street. Hm. But wouldn't you say though that if there were there looks like there are four different ones on Cascade, does that mean four different times a request of some kind came in for a speed test on Cascade?

No, that is

what that means. That is not what that means. It mean it means we got one or more uh complaints on Cascade Streets and then we were just methodologically testing different segments of Cascade Street in case one of them did hit the threshold. Okay, thanks. That's helpful. [snorts] Yeah. Anything else? Okay. All right, we're moving on to 7S which is discussion and consideration of Park Street Complete Street Improvements Public Engagement Results, Parking Data, and Alternative Selection. All right. So yeah, there's a there's a memo in your packet that's uh details out the the high-level points over here, but you know, a lot of work has has uh uh been completed with the uh with a design uh and the outreach about the Park Street proposed changes. Um Some of these slides you've seen before, so I'm it's in your packet if you want if you want to see them in detail. I I will focus on the new material. Um So Yeah, I think it's a it's it's a obvious that Park Street is a critical gap in the bike network over here. I think for most people using this corridor on a on a bicycle, it's it's the the weakest link is what matters in terms of their perceptions of a of a safety along anywhere they're trying to go and this is currently it's for many people going south.

[snorts] Um These changes to Park Street and this this type of project has been called for in several different plans in the past. Um [snorts] Connect the Junction calls for both a short-term implementation of uh uh what we're talking about over here as well as long-term changes that involve a separated cycle track in the future. So Park Street does have some significant safety issues. There are high observed speeds and uh we believe that the wide lanes are not helping. [snorts]

Um Without you know, without bike lanes with with this gap in the bike lane network, there's there's always a need for drivers to cross the center line to pass cyclists and that is uncomfortable and risky for all the road users. And parked cars in all situations have the potential to impede sight lines. Um 109 crashes were reported, five with injuries, and two with two pedestrian fatalities in recent years. [snorts]

So important to note what the parking impacts may be of any changes here. So this is just a summary of what parking spaces are what on-street parking spaces exist right now. I also note that just on the uh northern edge of this this image which is the left side is the Park Street School parking lot with 41 spaces. So um at the high level, the three alternatives are to maintain existing conditions. That's called alternative zero here. Uh there's adding buffered bike lanes fairly wide buffered bike lanes with alternative one and alternative two would be bike lanes with parking on one side. This is what the cross sections would generally look like. It depends you know, it changes a little bit uh for different different sections.

[snorts]

So I'll note that there is no big change proposed for for zone A. So zone A is the part that is in front of 34 Park Street. This is the part that was changed with the Crescent Connector. There was previously more uh angled parking on the east side which became a turn lane for the Railroad Street. Uh so the only change proposed here is the addition of some pavement markings. Um I will this these are just images of what what the plan view of these alternatives look like. I don't think I need to go through in detail. It's all in your packet and it hasn't really changed from before.

[snorts] So, um staff believes that alternative ones and one and two would both improve safety, but particularly alternative one. Um partly because of narrower lanes, which should encourage lower slower and more speeds. And 11 ft are still wide enough to accommodate trucks, buses, and emergency vehicles. Dedicated space for each user helps manage conflicts between moving traffic and parked cars and improved driveway visibility. This is a summary of the expected benefits and tradeoffs. Um We talked about safety already. Um

[snorts]

Bike network connectivity you know, obviously fills in the gap. There's We don't expect traffic impact. And when I say traffic impact, I'm talking about moving traffic, not parked traffic. Because the two travel lanes are maintained and there's no change proposed to any of the turn lanes. Um on-street parking impacts alternative one would result in 23 fewer parking spaces on-street parking spaces than there are right now. And alternative two would result in 15 fewer spaces. In terms of cost Um you know, this is this is these changes involve the changes to pavement marking only. There's no curb or utility work. So, if it's coordinated with the annual re-striping work, there are some efficiencies there. Um So, you know, we expect that there there is a it should be possible within the available funds, but you know, we'd have to work through the implementation details and quotes and whatnot. In alignment with adopted city plans, we already spoke about that. In terms of public engagement, a lot of work was done between March and early April through multiple channels. It was on the website, it was on social media. We put out press releases. In fact, this was picked up by two news stories on TV. We did mail and in-person outreach to adjacent businesses and property owners as well. And there was a public survey. In terms of the public survey, there were 149 total responses. Out of the respondents, 75% of them say they travel this corridor daily or weekly. So, um just at a high level, I think it's it's a

The survey showed that most the respondents respondents did travel by driving along this road at least part of the at least some of the time. There's overlap. You know, cyclists and people who walk here also tend to drive. In terms of safety concerns, the biggest safety concern that people raised was a drivers going at unsafe speeds and the second was about close passes. The speed um observation is backed up by the you know, the Essex Police Department speed study that also fed into the traffic calming analysis. 75% of vehicles are exceeding the 25 mph speed limit and the 85th percentile speed is 33.1 mph. Um Most of the respondents uh say they actually rarely use the on-street parking. Um but we asked if the park if the parking was reduced or removed on one or both sides, uh how would that affect you? Um 20% of the respondents did say they would be less likely to visit and I I think that is a real reason for caution.

[snorts]

Um this is a summary of uh the respondents' supports for the project goals. Um And overall, this is what the survey respondents thought about the their preferred alternative. 46% of the respondents preferred alternative one, which is remove uh which is the buffered bike lanes and remove parking on both sides in zones B, C, and D. The second most popular was alternative zero, which was to leave things as they are altogether. And the third is and 26% supports alternative two. So, together 73% of the respondents seem you know, wanted an alternative that made a change. So, in terms of the open comments, they're it's in your packet says all of a summary of all of the open comments. It's listed there verbatim. Um And there were a lot of them that that seemed to be supportive. Um but I really wanted to dive into the the concerns and you know, see if we could do anything about it. Um We broke it down into four themes. The first theme was that the bike lanes won't get enough use. It's talking about seasonal ridership. They don't see many people on the streets right now using the bike lanes. Um People question whether or not the demand justifies the tradeoffs. The second theme is about how the design people think the design leaves out people who cannot bike. It's about accessibility, mobility limitations. Um elderly customers, winter conditions. The third is about uh narrowing

lanes and how some people think that will potentially make traffic worse. They talk about congestion at five corners, large vehicles impact on car throughputs. And this I can you know, respond to a little bit over here because the best we have writing on the best practices on lane width. The National Association of City Transportation Officials has uh has an urban has published an urban street design guide that talks a lot about uh the best practices for how to allocate space on streets and they say um try to avoid 11 anything wider than 11 ft. In fact, if you have multiple lanes going in the same direction, only one of them needs to be 11. The other ones can can generally do fine at 10. Um VTrans uh set out a directive in 2015 that stated directly that Vermont state highways should have a maximum lane width of 11 ft for all directions of travel. Um I mean, they left out a carve out if if there special circumstances. And I also know not this is a class one um city road, so you don't actually have to follow this, but uh you know, it's good enough for a for a highways that are that are meant for high volumes and and and and higher speeds. Uh I would say 11 ft is generally sufficient for cities as well. The last one theme four was about removing parking and how it may impact businesses and customers. It's about convenience, business viability, proximity. So, we will talk about that parking in a little bit here. But we wanted to in our outreach, we really focused on reaching out to businesses directly because they I think

they're they're the ones that would be most affected by any on-street parking removal. So, yeah, we mailed both to the property owners and to the business storefronts directly. Um This is this is how the support um for the different alternatives broke down. And um I'll summarize now just you know, a little bit of additional work we did to study the use of on-street parking in the area. So, a little bit of background. Um It kind of matters because we had a lot of concerns from businesses in zone A. In 2024 or around that time, 10 parking on-street parking spaces on the east side, which is the top over here, um were removed and turned into turn lane for um the Crescent Connector project and some makeup spaces were were provided further further north on the Crescent Connector. Um So, just to make sure any of the count any of the data that's for the the vehicles that were parked there in the past are captured in the study, we we retain them and assign them to the west side just to be conservative so that we don't lose that that's that's potential demand. Even though we know that some of those folks may um not have parked there. They may have just you know, parked somewhere else entirely or off-street if they if if those spots weren't available in the past. Um notably in this area, overnight parking is prohibited from December to April. And the west side of zone B, which is in front of Rocky's and the convenience store has a 1-hour time limits.

The parking counts that you see in the packets are combination of these sources. 11 of them are from Google Street View data, which spans from 2008 to 2012. We We know they're all from the summer and fall. We don't know exactly when in the day they were taken. 17 of the counts were from a 2019 Stantec study. This is the the village center area parking study. They were spread over these three days at specific times. One of them was one of these counts was done by UVM engineering intern, and 13 of these counts were done very recently by city staff and actually a member of the bike walk advisory committee. Um, specifically for this study. So, focusing in on the counts for the most recent method, these were point-in-time counts that that evaluated both on-street and off-street parking utilization. We spread them out over different times of the day and different times of the week, and we made sure we covered the the statistical peak demand times for a variety of businesses. And we can tell when these businesses are the busiest because Google tells us. Um, so one of these counts was done at around 10:00 p.m. on a Friday during the the the busiest time for a Park Place Tavern. And this screenshot was taken by David actually right before he went out to count it there.

[laughter]

Um, to show that that that is that it is it wasn't you know, it was busy actually. So, um, putting all of that data together, this is what we this is what we see. Um, zone A has fairly high utilization, 51% over all the times that that were counted. And it kind of drops lower and lower as you go further south. Um, I think for the businesses here, it's not really just the average that matters. It's kind of the peak demand time. So, this only looks this summary looks at only the top five highest demand periods that were counted in this the most recent count. And, [snorts] um, you can see that yeah, like the zone A is heavily utilized. Zone B um, kind of. And then zone C and D, not really. Yeah, so what did we learn? Um, overall the area has plenty of off-street parking, but unfortunately it's not shared between businesses. So, that means that just because a space is is free, it doesn't mean it's available to people. You can see it, but you're not allowed to use it sometimes if it's if it's a competing business. Um, you know, we hope that can that that can be improved in the future, but so that is a reality right now. And and as a result, some customers and some businesses rely on street parking and city baseball lots for overflow. The west side spaces have higher turnover, and that's reflected with the 1-hour time limits, but I think it's has to do with the convenience store and Rocky's.

Um, and um, parking demand at Park Place Tavern and Green Mountain Clippers, which is owned by the same couple and is basically in the same building, sometimes does exceed available off-street spaces. So, so the the customers may need to use either on-street spaces or the city lots nearby. Um, but proximity to on-street parking was you know, I I think I think that was a big issue here. And the count data suggests that a lot of times when people are using on-street parking, it's not because off-street parking is not available. It's just because the on-street parking is more convenient. Um, and I think I I acknowledge that the sensitivity to walking distance varies by you know, by person and also by business type. But um, [snorts] just for comparison, you know, 600 ft would get you from the middle of a Hannaford's parking lot to the to the rear aisle. And um, this is a this this is the park this is the project area with a scale bar over here just to show you know, what kind of uh, walking distances we'd be talking about with any of these options. So, um, yeah, I mean I I think that's that's the end of my slides over here. I think my hope is that the city council will be able to choose a preferred alternative today. Um, so that we can uh, move towards final design and implementation if it's possible to be hopefully coordinated with the annual re-striping efforts. Tim, can I ask just a point of clarification for the conversation? The current spaces in front of the liquor store and Rocky's are designated as 1-hour parking. Anywhere in this conversation is there

an opportunity to designate the parking spaces in zone A in front of 27 Park Street as a limited time parking space? That was

part of this conversation or is that a separate conversation? I think is what I'm asking. There was no proposed changes to zone A, right? I mean I I that would require an ordinance change. It can be done. I think I think if there's strong desire by the city council to do that, we can note that it can be kind of a condition of one of these of your final approval if you want, or can be a separate conversation. There is no such yeah, that that was not considered

Thanks. That was the clarification point. I uh, and I will kudos to everyone because I talked to those businesses up and down, and they said they were flooded with information. So, there was uh, a lot of outreach that that was done. And I appreciate that. But what I what I have noticed is those zone A spots when they are full are full of the same cars from the time the businesses open till the time the business is closed. [snorts] So, I have a very strong desire [laughter]

speaking for myself to get some sort of ordinance change for those spots, whether it's a condition of this or not. You're saying the same cars parking there all day? Yes. Are employees parking there? Yeah. Yep. Yes. Brian. Yeah, that sort of drove a question for me. Do we have the ability to enforce 1-hour parking at all anyway? Um, police? I know it'd be police. It would be the police. It would take a lot of proactive work. Um, we clearly don't meter in any way, shape, or form, which sets you up with a whole other meters or even a much more advanced system of paid parking, which would really kick in a whole other enforcement system in a much more um, efficient way than the police just monitoring right now.

and not to that, but part of that is you know, it's a main thoroughfare. They're coming and going all the time. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. No, I know. Yeah, no, it's not like we have any sort of They're not We're not out chalking tires. So, I I [snorts] I I would note though that the the current three spaces that that are signed for 1-hour parking only, I we the data doesn't suggest that there is um, an availability problem over there. So, it's not They're not being parked in there.

I The The 1-hour parking in front of in front of the liquor store and the in the ice cream shop is a convenience parking. And people come in and go. I will say and I I did spend a lot of time over there this week watching traffic. What I what I did notice was the food service deliveries that come in from US Foods or from Performance Foods or from any other various vendors. Uh, they're they're parking on the street cuz they cannot get their [cough]

vehicles physically into the lots. Uh, so uh, and then I did happen to catch an owner of a bar on Railroad making a liquor purchase uh, and trucking out essentially a truck bed full of alcohol because that is where So, it's literally case by case. Uh, just food for thought. But the the food service piece of it would is going to inevitably cause an issue where there is a delivery parked in the bike lane. [snorts]

If the bike lanes are changed. And I think it's just important to draw attention to that. Yeah, that's it. What? So, um, in observation, a couple of things. First off, to note on the accessibility issue, all the handicap parking is in these associated retailers and that it's in their parking lots, not on the street. Which would seem to suggest to me that we by ordinance or by the design we believe that the parking lots are the safest place for people who have accessibility, you know, have mobility issues to access these particular retailers. Would you agree? Yes, uh I I I actually would. Um it's it looking into the um into where that sentiment seems to be coming from the most, it is zone A. I think it it I think there might be just some history behind what's uh the business's previous experience was, where the most convenient accessible spots actually were, right in front on the street. Um and they're no longer there. The other thing I I wanted to note is um look, every time a municipality talks about removing parking, it's the same complaint. That you're, you know, accessible it's all the same. I I just have to assume there's a study out there, there's some work that's been done to see whether or not retail businesses or any business has really truly seen drop-off because of the impact of losing parking in close proximity to their front door. Because this just happens so often that I find it hard to believe somebody hasn't studied this somewhere.

There's a lot of I mean there there are a lot of compounding factors, you know, for for studies like this, but I I I I think I have I have read some studies you know, about this topic and uh I I nothing stands out um that that would strike me as a as a uh a real caution over here. Um Yeah, I I I think there's uh you know, if you're looking into the long run, you're not those few spaces in front are current customers, but they're also, you know, making it easier to get to any of these um businesses by other means and uh you enabling different modes in the in uh of travel in the future is is also um to the benefits of some of these businesses. And I think it also depends on the business type. You know, the businesses that are mostly driven by convenience um are going to be you know, the most uh you know, and if it's let's say if you're a gas station, uh like I I often won't cross I won't drive to the I won't cross over to the other street to to to to fill up my gas tank if um if it wasn't if it's not convenient, I'll just keep on driving to the next one.

[laughter] Um but if I wanted to be somewhere that is a and it as a destination, I mean I I think that's different. Like it was karaoke night on Friday night. [laughter]

Well, that that's why I think in again in my own observation of watching other municipalities go through the same discussion and and such, what appears to end up happening is the same complaint happens. It happens throughout the transition period. Once the transition period is done and people get used to it, much like I feel like people got used to the Crescent Connector existence then the sentiment starts to change cuz they start to realize or they've adapted. And so I'm I'm not sure whether or not there's fact there's any facts to to back up their claim versus again, my observation again, watching multiple municipalities go through this cuz I've had to talk about this on air, so I'm a little familiar with it. The other thing um that I just want to note and I hear you on the drop-off uh for some place like Park Place Tavern. By the nature of the trucks they use, though they still can get them in there. It's just inconvenient because of the nature of that parking lot. But they could.

I wouldn't want to try. But yeah. But they they could navigate it and yeah, yeah. I'm just telling I'm just saying that it's it's uh you know, very a reality that I think [clears throat] we'll encounter. And I and I think in again, having worked around that that industry and seeing some of the difficulty of suppliers dropping off to businesses that are in odd, weird locations they all figure it out, you know, they'll either adapt with a different truck or they'll, you know, delivering at a different time. So Again, it was just just something to call attention to. Yeah, yeah. Uh and so if I might again uh we had a very Vermont winter this year. And what

[cough]

what I noticed as I traveled the road was that the 8-ft, I think they're designated as parking spaces were were more than half eliminated by snow banks this year. Like that's, you know, just how much snow we had. So in in keeping that in mind, if we're losing essentially 4-ft of road uh and you have a where we have 7-ft bike lane and a and a 4-ft buffer potentially, we've reduced the bike lane to 3-ft and then where you might actually see some riding into that buffer. You have any concerns about that? And there's only like this year there were only so many places you could put the snow. Um I mean and again is this is an abnormal winter compared to what we've had recently, but I don't know which way to trend, you know, whether this is a swing back the other way or just an abnormality [cough] that you can't plan for. But in your professional opinion, do you have any concern with essentially losing 4-ft of the 7-ft bike lane and then pushing out into that 4-ft buffer or do you feel like a 4-ft buffer is substantial enough that it still offers an amount of protection that you're comfortable with? With a 4-ft buffer, I I I'm I am pretty sure and it would be it would be better than uh all the other painted bike lanes we have in the city um in terms of space to handle uh uh some kind of snow encroachment. Um is it perfect? Probably not. I mean I I think it's quite different when there there are different ways of you know, clearing these these streets and and lanes and in in the cities where we see physical protection uh of of bike lanes and and cycle tracks. You know,

you use a sidewalk plow instead for a or a snow blower to create a just a separated path and that's um uh you know, I think that that would be ideal. That's how you prevent the the snow kind of encroachments throughout the winter of of the edge of the road. But um with the with alternative one, um it would at least be better than all all the other on-street bike lanes we have right now. Alternative two, little iffy. Thanks, Chris. I appreciate that. I uh will just put a plug in there that there was money in the general fund for a new sidewalk plow as most of our time last year was spent off in the shop.

[laughter] So, yeah, yes. I'm going to open it to public comment. Public comment, anybody in the room? [snorts] Hey all, David Auchey, uh bike walk committee. Um yeah, I just want to come out um in support of option one. I was really astounded by the amount of support we got at the committee meeting 2 weeks ago. Um just overwhelming uh folks of all different um shapes and sizes. Um and then uh you know, you mentioned [music]

um a concern possible concerns of do we know if people are um would stop visiting businesses if we were to do this. We know people aren't cycling on these roads because they are unsafe. You know, there are there are people I have a young child, we got a box car. Uh I'm as confident as of a cyclist as as they come and I I'm willing to get my elbows out, but it is that actually is fairly harrowing to be a lot of people's first entry point into our city. Um especially with those 14-ft bike 14-ft lanes. Um people cars are really really really taking advantage of those. Um so yeah, just want to voice my support.

[snorts]

Thanks, David. Anybody else? John. Yep, much like David, just want to put out there that the overwhelming support that we had turn up in person for the public event um was a surprise to me cuz I did go through all 50-something comments in one field and 70 in another and the six from our area businesses and I was prepared to hear uh some of those negative comments in person. But I feel like the the data and what we've heard from people really supports this project for all reasons. It will it will reduce speeds, it will not increase traffic. Uh it will provide a safe corridor that is going to connect our neighbors in Williston to wherever their destinations might be, either here or beyond, um which does not currently exist. And option one is really the only the only one that's going to give us a a safe corridor for those folks looking to get through there. Um yeah, just speaking to support that. Thanks, John. Anybody online? Raj. Yeah, I'll just uh throw my support in there for all the reasons that have been said for option one. Um I tried to listen as much as I could. Um I had some work stuff I was doing during this debate. Um just a couple quick points. Um there's been a a lot of feedback on this, most of it positive. I think as as Bike Walks pointed out, um there's a lot of support um for option one or option two. Um relating to uh the comment about the the spots being full all day, I think generally with parking and what we've got coming in all of our corridors and what we're expecting over the next 10 years, I think we just have to start getting our heads around the fact that proximate business parking on street on our main thoroughfares is probably just not something that's going to stick around or be possible to stick around. Um And

take the opportunities to to make these changes to transition to alternate transportation and promote it. Um that in a conjunction with narrowing the lanes and doing the the traffic calming, I think is what people are really looking for right now. So, please listen to the input we've had. Um and yeah, thanks for your time. online. Daniel. Yeah, Daniel Legorreta, also on the Bike Walk Advisory Committee, also wanting to echo all the things that have been said up to this point. And uh yeah, I also want to really emphasize how much better alternative one is over alternative two, where, you know, you retain the parking on one side of the street. Cuz in a lot of ways, you kind of get these problems that are somewhat exacerbated when you have parking on only one side, right? You think about the um accessibility concerns. If you're parking on one side and then you have to get to a business on the other side, you're prompting a lot of kind of rogue crossings uh across the street. And then um when talking about these buffers, I mean, if you look at kind of the overhead shots of the different alternatives, you see that at times, you know, the buffers shrink and expand, you know, depending on the different parts of the road. So, having that bigger buffer, you know, in the best sections where you do have kind of the maximum amount of space for uh the cyclists, that makes a really really big difference cuz, you know, at times you have to surrender that space, but then if, you know, you kind of set the precedent earlier on in the corridor that you that cyclist can take that space, it means that the drivers will give them the space because they've seen kind of the amount of space that they should be giving. Um which again, 4-ft buffer is the legal passing distance

that a car should take when passing a cyclist within the state of Vermont. So, you're also just encouraging the correct behavior on the count of drivers. So, yeah, wanted to echo what everyone said and then really put in that extra push for alternative one. Thanks, Daniel. Uh is there any other public comment online? And my computer has now decided to freeze for the second time, so could you be my eyes for me, please?

Yes, I don't see any other hands online. Okay. All right, I'm going to bring it back to us. Is there any other more any other discussion before I entertain a motion? Does anybody want to pick one alternative and run with it? Go ahead, Mr. Sarder. Based on my concern of for the safety, primarily over anything else, I'm going to move that the City Council select alternative one for the Park Street Complete Street Improvement Project and direct staff to proceed with final design and implementation. Is there a second? Second. Uh all in favor? Aye. Aye. Sounded unanimous to me. So, thank you, guys. Thank you. Thanks, Chris. Thank you. Thanks, Chris. You put a lot of work into this. Appreciate it. All right. Um entertain a motion to for consent agenda. So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Unanimous. Council [clears throat] member comments and city manager report. Um we were due at McGillicuddy's half hour ago.

Yep. [laughter] Duly noted. Can't have the party without Elaine [laughter] and Okay. Entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Thank you. Thank you all. Good night, guys. [music] [music]

Mhm.