All this meeting to order, it is the regular city council meeting of Monday, September 19th, 2022. Our fearless chairperson Helen really is not with us tonight. So I, as her vice chair, will be serving in her stead and we are first going to be doing the Pledge of Allegiance. And Ethan, would you like to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance? To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, the nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Thank you. All right, and now I'm going to ask Jesse Baker to provide instructions for leaving the building in case of an emergency. Thank you. For those in the room, there are doors on either side of the rear of the auditorium. You can go out either one and turn left or right to get outside. For those joining us online, thank you for being here. If you would like to talk during any agenda item, please feel free to turn your cameras on and be recognized. Or you can put a message to me in the chat saying that you would like to provide comment. We are not monitoring the chat for comment specifically other than your interest in speaking. We'd love to hear your voice. Thanks. Thank you, Jesse. And now I ask my fellow counselors to let me know if there are any additions, deletions or changes in the order of the agenda items that you'd like us to make. All right, seeing none, we will carry on to number four, which is comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda. And if you're online, you can turn on your camera and we will be recognizing you. There's someone here in the audience would like to speak up if you would come up to the podium. Be sure that the conference will now be recorded. That's all right. And please state your name, your name and then you can certainly go ahead and ask any questions to Ashley Adams. And I was confused about whether I should speak now, or I'm speaking about the Climate Action Plan draft. It would be later when we have that agenda item. Okay, so there'll be time after the presentation of the draft for the public to speak. Yes. Around what time? Well, we're in for a long meeting. I noticed. Yeah. And it's so it could be, you know, getting close to 10 o'clock. Okay. Okay. So during that seven o'clock to 715 period would not be appropriate. Seven o'clock to 715. And councillors to weigh in on climate change related issues. You certainly could.  Do you want to speak more generally? It is really directly related to the climate action plan. Yeah, I can wait. Yeah. And you did send us an email earlier today. So we did receive those. And if it's related to that, please know that we have received us that comment. Thank you. I appreciate that. Yeah. And this off now. Sure. Thank you. Thanks. Anybody else who would like to speak on something not related to an agenda item? Okay, we will carry on then. With item number five, this is the time where councillors make announcements and also make reports on committee assignments. Matt, would you have something? Sure. Happy to. We met the committee for common area dogs met and discussed the council meeting was a recap of the council meeting was interesting being part of that. And the committee for common area dogs is very excited about the direction we're heading. They are concerned that the initial date for Middlebury fence company is not until December. And we're still hopeful. Maybe Jesse and her announcements can can answer if we have a better date for returning a Middlebury fence company so we can open up the dog park before the snow flies. But we're still waiting on pins and needles for that return of the Middlebury fence company. Tomorrow, everyone is invited to come out to the new City Hall Park. So we call it City Hall Park to see the dedication of the goose's the art exhibit. Five o'clock ice cream Rainer shine. And as a liaison to the fine arts committee, I will be there. And as we dedicate the geese for the goose's or how do I say it. It's trade marked as goose's goose's. Okay. And the artist will be there. Yes. So it's five o'clock tomorrow down here. A chance to meet the fine artist and the fine arts committee. And have some ice cream. Five o'clock tomorrow. I wish I could be there. My work schedule is such. Tim. You said ice cream, right? I did. That's pretty much said for me. Yeah. So let's see. It was a busy week. I think it was a busy week. I think it was a busy week. The energy committee met on Wednesday, I believe it was. And one of the results of that will be presented tonight. I think. I was able to go to the, um, the SBBA's, uh, annual summer celebration and, uh, at the, at the beta facility and got a tour. This is my second tour. And this was in the new building because the last time I went with Helen in the summer. So this is in their addition. So, um, and if you didn't know, um, previously there, they have, they had one aircraft and it had a propulsion propeller, but not the horizontal propellers. Uh, now they have two. The first one only has the propulsion. The second one does have the, the horizontals as well. And they did have video of it lifting up and hovering for a number of, I mean, you know, an amount of time.  They have apparently as they have not gone up and not gone straight yet with that vehicle. So they're getting there. And I've never seen so many airplanes in one hanger in my life as I did in there on Thursday night. And it was my first time walking through the Eldridge cemetery. I'm sorry. I wasn't even turned on. Um, so that was great. I took some pictures inside in the cemetery and it was a sunset and it was really nice. Um, I also, uh, voted if you didn't, uh, at the Champlain Water District on Tuesday as everybody was asked to do for their bond issue. And, uh, lo and behold, I bumped into our city, our city clerk and two other city clerks went from Colchester and went from Essex, I believe. At that point there were 1300 votes and that was about 6. 15 p.m. And I also went to, uh, Burlington electrics net zero fare on Saturday. It was from nine to one. And, uh, they had a lot of tents set up and demonstrations of e-bikes. You could test drive an EV if you wanted to. There were lots of cars there. More cars than I had seen it at previous EV test drives before. They had somebody from Vermont Energy talking about heat pumps. They had a, uh, like an early, but a children's electrical efficiency education table with a really great poster that I'll probably share later on Facebook. Um, they also had, um, a car share was there and they were talking about the fact that one of the, uh, challenges they have for trying to, you know, turn over their stock to be hybrid electric vehicles is that they, they don't have car charging stations right where the cars are parked. The cars are parked in the same location all the time. So they're behind because of the pandemic. I think they have some, some financing, but they just don't have the people to do it yet. So it was pretty interesting. And, um, it was fun to walk around. They had a big display of, um, of electric, uh, lawn maintenance vehicles. So zero turn radius mowers, uh, you know, a couple of ego mowers, like the one I have. And, uh, and they also had a display of, um, these shopping carts for people to take to, to, to walk with them, you know, doing, they want to go, they get out of their cars and go to the grocery store if it's not too far. And it's a heavy duty frame. It's very light though. And it has a Cordura nylon sack. And there's a two, two sizes, small and large. And they're trying to farm these out to nonprofits because they're a nonprofit themselves. And it's a, it's, it's a very ergonomically designed package. And the whole thing comes apart and you could take it and wash it, put it in the washing machine. So that was really interesting. I talked to Peggy O'Neill about that for quite a while. Cause I thought there was a great idea. You have one of those. They're great. Is it green? Yes. Okay then. Good customer. Um, so I'm glad I went to that.  And, uh, I could see what, uh, Tony DiPietro was talking about with, uh, challenges with ledge and some steep slopes and the ability to tumble. I did have some questions that we'll, we'll talk about another time about the areas that didn't get pulled out. So, um, that's all I had. Thank you. Thank you, Tim. Tom. So I was too, it was at the beta event, great event and a nice tour to see what they're doing there. And I was at the beta event, which was very populated and I had no symptoms. And I also went out Friday night to the Al Franken show. And I saw some people on this call here there again, a symptomatic. And I actually tested on Thursday and I was negative, but on Saturday I woke up and had a lot of symptoms and I am COVID positive. So I'm isolating for the next five days. I say that only because I see some people on the call that I ran into Friday night. As far as I was negative at that time, but who knows if I just spread it throughout Burlington at those two events. And my apologies if so, but, um, that's all I have. And I'm probably going to keep my camera off because my family has me cordoned off into my bedroom and it's not necessarily the best backdrop for this YouTube screen. So cheers. Don't worry about the backdrop. That's kind of common backdrops during COVID. I just have the announcement that I went to the second chart review committee. And, um, just kind of setting out its timeline and the questions that it wants to, uh, you know, um, review, they'll be discussing more, but they are starting to think about what kinds of questions, um, that they want to, they want to, uh, have the committee review before they hand in some recommendations, one on the, um, the, uh, makeup number of commissioners on the planning commission. That is something, um, that we brought to them after hearing, uh, from a commissioner, uh, during our reappointment process over the summer. And the planning commission will be discussing this and then, um, giving them some input based on their needs and what they see as, as the possible advantages or, or disadvantages of various scenarios. And then they'll be turning to the city council, uh, along with, I think some gendered language and, and things like that that I saw, which, um, I thought we had taken care of back in 2006, but it hadn't gotten done. So it was a, I think a good first, you know, experience for me. I think we have a really good group thinking about it, really good questions that they were asking. And of course we have Peter and Donna and Chuck after and Peter Taylor, I should say Donna Kinville and Chuck after who are, um, veterans and, and these things as is Jesse. So that's all good. All right. And Jesse, it's now time for your, your report. Thank you. Um, just a few updates from us tonight. Um, I want to let you know that our, one of our police sergeants and soy check is retiring at the end of the month after 23 years of service to self-berlington. Um, he also has a long extensive career at Vermont, your National Guard as well. So we will be celebrating him. Um, Dorset Street paving as you likely have seen the milling is complete. The contractor is working on adjusting the structure elevations and the repairing the crosswalks. And right now paving is tentatively scheduled for September 29th and 30th. So that will again be fairly disruptive, but hopefully only two days. Um, our fall street sweeping program has started. I actually was behind one this morning on, uh, Kimball have. Um, so look beyond the lookout for those. Those are really important pieces of our, uh, stormwater mitigation system. Um, dog park fencing right now, tentatively scheduled for late October, the last week of October, first week of November. So that's where, where we are is we won't, we will get a hard confirmation date as we get closer, but definitely not into December. Um, Tom and Adam have done Yeoman's work to get them here earlier. Um, I also want to thank you, Matt, for promoting the Goose's event tomorrow at five. And then just a reminder to the council that you actually have a special meeting next Tuesday night joint meeting with the planning commission to go over the, um, vision and goals as we embark on our comprehensive planning process. So you will see that agenda coming out. That will be seven o'clock next Tuesday evening. That's all I have. All right. Very good. So that takes us to the consent agenda. And, um, here we have several items, lots of reading to consider and sign disbursements. We have three sets of minutes from August 1st, August 15th and September 6th of this year. We received the fiscal year 23 August financials. We also authorized the city manager to negotiate and execute two agreements related to the raise grant award for the East West alternative transportation crossing project. That's the walk bike bridge over I 89. And we also have approved the clean water state revolving fund loan agreement for our three acre stormwater retrofit design projects. And finally awarding the engineering contract for water quality monitoring and testing to stone environmental. So I'd be looking for a motion to approve. Second. All right. And I just had a couple of corrections. And I really apologize for not finding them first time around on the August 1st minutes. I know Sue's not here. But oh, she is online. Great. Um, page three is the first one. And it's just because it really did change the meaning. Where we have. All right, just a minute. Okay, it is the second big paragraph, the one that starts with Mr. Hansen said in new construction in Burlington. So this has to do with Burlington's ordinance on renewable energy. And it is one, two, three, four, five. Let's see, one, two, no, third line down instead of and now one has applied for the exemption and no one has applied for the exemption. Did you catch that Sue? Sorry. So third line in the middle, that big paragraph in the middle on page three. Got it. Okay. And then on page eight, the special city meeting be warned for November 2nd. I just wanted to check, isn't that November 8th? Yes. Yes. Okay. So page eight in the middle of the page, Senator Chittenden then move that the council recommend that ballot language be put on the ballot of a special city midi, that a special city meeting be warned for November 8th, 2022. Those are the two things I saw. All good, Sue. Got it. All right. Fabulous. Anything else? All right. Very good. Really interesting stuff. I thought about this engineering contract going to stone environmental. There was a lot there. All right. I would then call the vote. All those in favor? Aye. Very good. And that was unanimous. So we all approve the consent agenda. All those items got passed. And now we are a little bit early, but this is the opportunity for counselors in the public to share information and resources on climate change. And I'm happy to start out just reading through the climate action plan that the task force put together. They gave several references to organizations that we could possibly join or look at for resources. And I was interested in the cities with nature. And I was inspired, I think, to see that there are hundreds of cities and regions that are working to restore ecosystems within the cities. And many of the reasons are outlined in our own goals and our climate action plan. But that it is something that is for our own health and sustainability that we have to have sustainable cities. And so I just thought about all the things that we have done in our own city that would make us, I think, eligible for being one of those cities that lives with nature. And, you know, that wildlife corridor is definitely a place where our ecosystems can be, you know, one of several, but I'm thinking about the Shelburne Pond corridor there. But there are several that we have within our city where we really are seeking to restore ecosystems, as well as here in city center where you're going to be tomorrow night with the gooses. That whole natural area was restored and bases, you know, constantly having to be managed. But I think that we have really made strides for that, that sustainable city. And I think back also to our land development regulations that we amended in February. And it reminded me of an article that we, someone passed along to me or I fell upon when I was reading the news about, you know, long ago there were cities, and these were cities that were in, I believe, Central or Eastern Europe that they, that they have, archeologists have uncovered. And that they were cities with nature, that they were really, you know, habitations that were surrounded by green space so that there could be agriculture within the cities. And I, and they were, you know, of course putting that into, into everybody's minds as a possible model for the future. So when I see cities with nature and all these cities signing up and really trying to restore these ecosystems, I think there's a, there's something that's being communicated and we're not alone. And I think that that's very helpful to know as we all, you know, face, face a lot of unknowns. It's helpful to know. I think that there are a lot of people working on, on similar things that we are. It takes all of us working together. Yeah, please, Matt. Thank you. It seems timely at the end of the month is the last opportunity for the public to submit comments to the agency and natural resources on the advanced clean car and advanced clean truck initiative. These are adopting California's rules requiring automakers to produce and distribute for sale in cities and compliant, excuse me, cities, states. Cars that will increasingly be zero emission until 2035 when every car on a lot in Vermont will have to be zero emission vehicle and a similar but slower ladder for trucks as well. So the last time to comment is the end of the month if you care about that issue. Thank you. And just go online and seek that comment. That would be available online. Oh, yes, absolutely. Thank you. All right. Agency natural resources. Okay. And this is also open to members of the public. Feel free to come up. Yeah, Tim. Yeah, of course. Usually you're not shy about speaking up. Jumping in there. So this is the item for to share public information right about climate change. So I just thought I'd share a few factoids at this point. If you didn't know oil is down to about $85 a barrel from a high of $120 a barrel in June. Natural gas was up to 950 a therm in the last two weeks. It's down to 788. So there are some corrections going on in the energy markets right now. I'm not sure why other than there was speculation beginning and the war in Ukraine has taken a turn. But, you know, still things are difficult. There are also some headlines in other states that are more dependent upon natural gas to generate electricity where those customers are being hit hard with large utility rate increases because of the price of natural gas going up. And I think that if we're a GMP customers, we're probably more fortunate because, you know, their energy mix is mostly hydro and nuclear from Seabrook and New Hampshire. So we're more protected from that unless there's a really huge heat wave that calls for isonium to pull in natural gas, fired power from somewhere else in the region and or in the wintertime same thing. So I also, like I said, it went to this net zero meeting or fair at BED and they had a great chart about what it, you know, the climate impact of going to school. And one of the nice features of it is it tells you what's the best and the worst way for a child to get to school in terms of the amount of CO2. So obviously the lowest CO2 emission is walking to school. And, you know, it's not possible for everybody. And the worst one is one SUV picking up or dropping off a student. And then towards the better end of that, though, is an all-electric bus, you know, hauling students around. And that was the fourth lowest emissions. And actually we do have two school district electric buses now, correct? Yeah. I think four. Four now? Are they all operating? Yeah. Okay. So you see one of those buses you can tell because they make a funny whirring sound when they go by. Is the blue is the bumper? Okay. That's all I have. Thanks. Thanks. All right. Anybody else like to take this opportunity? This is based on the recommendation by people who work with people who are dealing with eco-anxiety, which is the majority of people in the world, to feel that you're not alone. So if you don't speak up, at least I hope you know that it's on our minds and we're all with you. Okay. All right. Very good. We'll keep going then. So item number eight, receive the chief sustainability officer's annual report on the progress the city has made to enact the climate action plan and integrate climate change impacts into decision-making. And that's with our director of planning and zoning and chief sustainability officer, Paul Conner. Hi, folks. Paul Conner. Thank you for having me here. So really this, as is described in our brief report this year, the big part of the report is the plan that you will be receiving this evening. So that's the big effort that's been a very, very involved effort by many dedicated volunteers, as well as the folks at the regional planning commission, Melanie and Anne, to put this work together. You see the actions, the science-based targets, and importantly behind all of that are the inventory and the targets that are developed in a scientific and measurable manner over time. And that's both at a city-wide level and then importantly in working with Lou Brzee and our staff, the government operations element of it, developing those baselines that can be tracked over time. So that's really the big part of the report this year. Ongoing with our operations are many efforts, including Lou's been working with our various different departments of understanding where fleets are for the coming years. We've worked with our new capital projects planner to integrate into our capital improvement plan worksheets, a box in this first year to give the department had the opportunity to speak to how they've looked at climate change as they've considered the matter and of course the multitude of ongoing projects physically being installed in the city that you've received updates on over the years. So that's really the bulk of the report and just wanted to give you all the opportunity to pose questions and or frame out how you'd like to see this in coming years. We have a product here tonight, so that will all be discussing that. Any other things that we need to know from Paul? And Tom, is there anything that you'd like to follow up with with Paul? No, thank you, though. All right. All right. Well, thank you. Thank you very much. We are so well before 730. I have a proposal. Yes, please. I'm all yours. So technically, although very excited, there are so many people here in the audience, we cannot start our public hearing until the warrant time of 730. Right. So given that we, that is where we are on the, on the agenda. And I am also going to take the executive privilege to say, I think that the climate action plan presentation is a, as a body of work unto itself. And I wouldn't want to interrupt that halfway through. I suggest we skip down to, to item number 13 on the agenda, which is the FY 22 year and financials. Okay. And we can take up that action now. And if we have additional time, Andrew can also do the table setting of the FY 24 budget goal discussions. That is something we could pause at 730 and take up the public hearing. Okay. All right. It's actually good that we're doing this one where I got pressure minds. Yes. All right. So we are skipping on down to the numbers section with dollar signs attached. The fiscal year 22 year on financials. So Andrew Bouldock. Sure. Thank you, Megan. So I think we've been forecasting this since the, our sort of Q3 projections way back in March, but the city is looking at, we're now closing our FY 22, which closed, you know, June 30th of this year significantly in the black. You'll, you can see in the, in the overview that I provide that we actually have a total surplus of $2 million. A huge portion of that 1.7 million of that is being above projected revenues. And I'll kind of walk through a couple of those kind of key, key revenues. One of the big factors that we saw is actually when we prepared the FY 22 budget, we are in October of 2020, meaning we were significant. We were very much on the conservative side when it came to revenues. We did not know where our local option tax would end up. And so in order to, to meet those uncertainties, we scaled back in terms of projected revenues at that, at that time. Also, in terms of planning and zoning, permitting and building inspection fees, we were also very conservative back in October of 2020. Since then we've seen in this past fiscal year, a big boom in those coming in. A lot of that, I think in one of the end of year financial reports is very much that can be very timing based. So if we get a big project coming in, in June, as opposed to July, that can completely sway our numbers because some of these fees are as big as $200,000 or $300,000. So these aren't single family homes being converted to rental properties because both fire inspection and electrical inspections were well beyond there. That is on logic and beta. Those are probably the two biggest drivers there. So just walking through the numbers, specifically local option tax on sales and use and room and meals. We were over 600,000 above our projections. Is that back to post pre-pandemic levels? Yes. It actually exceeds where we were in 2019. Sorry to interrupt. Thank you. Yeah. Fire inspections, as I said, and building and sign permits. That's above, that's 700,000 above projected, which is over 200% of what we initially budgeted. Another thing that has a big impact are unbudgeted revenues. So our FEMA relief came in, that came in about a year ago. So early in the fiscal year, we logged that that was 236,000. Also, we continue to lead the industry in our workers comp claims and low workers comp numbers that led to a workers comp insurance reimbursement of about 100,000 this last year. Is that from the state? That is from our insurance carry from your insurance. Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Yep. So all in all, that's 1.7 million in above budgeted revenue surplus. Also a note on cost savings. The significant cost savings this past year was in our captive health insurance. We continue to see incredible savings from this move that we made about three or four years ago. This is the second year we sort of fully realized those savings over 300,000 and unspent dollars in that budget line. So overall, the surplus again is two million dollars back at the council's meeting in August 15th. We had an initial discussion about surplus funding. Council approved three surplus funds funding allocations. One was to fund the trinity education center, $13,000. One was a memo by by chief Locke to meet some critical needs in the fire and EMS first replacement equipment. That was around $60,000. And then we also talked about how the bids came in significantly higher for the Dorset Street paving project. And we asked to set aside 200,000 to fully fund some of our spring paving needs. So the remaining unallocated balance at this point is 1.7 of surplus funds. So tonight we have a couple of recommended actions. We've again forecasted this a little bit in past meetings. The very first is if you remember last year at this time, we set up a special reserve fund for a captive health insurance. This includes tail covered coverage, which is called incurred but not reported. That's because we're self-insured. If we ever were to leave the captive model, there may be a little bit of lag on payment of claims about 30 to 60 days worth of. So our consultant recommended that we increase that number from 148,000 to 175,000 in the new fiscal year. So that would require a council motion to allocate surplus to that for that purpose. I don't know council's preference on whether to hold the recommendations till the end or if you want to kind of move one at a time. Do you have an idea? Wedge question for Andrew. So in the captives, it's just it's city employees. Or does it also include, it doesn't include fire and police? It does. It does. It's all city employees. But it's no other, it's just our city and the captive. No other. No, there are a number of other, both in the state, there are a number of other entities in the captive. Okay. As well as nationwide. I think there are over 500 total employers. Okay. So we're not, we're in a very large captive. We're in a big pool. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Right. So I understand why the consultant made that recommendation. I think it makes sense. So what do we anticipate the medical insurance benefit will increase this year? So we just got the initial projections. 6.4%. That's what they're recommending. Six. 6.4%. Increase. Wow. That's just. So the green mountain care board. Yeah. I'm just, you know, I know that they're asking for a lot more money. At the medical center and that whole system. And so I'm concerned that that will ripple through. And I know that there already have been projections for a specific insurers for individuals. Who will pay large premium increases. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I just want to pay large premium increases. So I'm just wondering if that was so. Six point four sounds manageable. Yeah. Yeah. Just in a, have a conversation scheduled with them on Thursday to further understand their projections. Yeah. But if I can just jump in that to just, to be very clear. That's about our FY 24, but it budget creation. That's 64. decide to leave the captive, we'll have claims that trail for about six months and it's to cover the cost of that trail. So it's setting us up for future options for the council to consider. Is that a forthcoming recommendation from the staff? Creating that fund? No, leaving. No. No. Okay. It's just giving options in the future. If you don't budget for that initially, then you're kind of locked in without a big buyout cost. Yeah. Six months is the tail. That's it. Is that what the, is that what the, that's pretty darn good. That's the industry standard, as I understand. Okay. Yeah. Great. Fantastic. And also there was a contingency funding that we also set up with this health savings fund at the end of the last fiscal year. I believe that was around 300,000 that council set aside as just a reserve on the captive if we do end up having a high claim year in a given year. So the consultant is not recommending increasing that amount at this time. All right. Well, yeah, there are several recommendations here. Yeah. So I can keep walking through the others. Yeah. That's, we still have time. So let's keep going. All right. Tom had his hand raised. Oh, Tom, sorry. Yes. I don't know if this is the right time, but Andrew, maybe if you could reflect as you start to look at next year's budget and the assumptions that we need to make overlaying it with what we made in the fall of 2020, which proved to be not too conservative, but definitely conservative. Do you anticipate wanting to assess our fee structure in these inflationary times? Is that going to be part of your budget considerations? Or is that not really part of the mix right now, our fees across the board and some of these that came in over budget? Yes, absolutely. To answer your question about evaluating fee structures, there are a few of our permit fees that haven't been evaluated in five to 10 years or increased in five to 10 years. So that will actually absolutely be part of the conversation for FY 24. Good question. Thank you. Yeah, good. All right. Let's keep going with the recommendations then. Sure. So recommendation number two. So with the increase in inspection fees and the planning and zoning permitting fees, obviously there's a huge staff burden to that. With the seeing over 200 percent on the revenue side, we feel that we can we have the ability this year and looking at what will very likely be in the pipeline for FY 23 this current fiscal year. We've made the management decision to increase staff capacity in the planning and zoning side by two staff members in order to meet that just increased demand. What we're recommending here is setting aside some salary contingency funds just in case we don't end up meeting those benchmarks in order to fully fund those two positions. We're asking for 150,000 to be set aside for that purpose. With the caveat that if we do meet those benchmarks that 150,000 at the end of the fiscal year when we come to you again in the year would be put back into the city's fund balance. Very good. And then the last is to maintain adequate fund balance reserved to fund the Dorset Street Signals project. We talked about this back in August 15th as well. Our initial projections were that we were going to be a little over a million over budget for that project. If we were looking to move forward with construction this year or at least you know design phase this year, we had the RFP went out in August. We got responses two bids back this past Thursday. We're still evaluating those bids. They're looking to come in at or around projections. We'll come forward with a further discussion when we award the bids likely at the next council meeting. But currently, again, we're looking at at least over a million dollars were we to proceed with that project this year. We've identified it as a very significant community need to move to move that forward. So we're just it's not in the official council action that we're recommending. We're just recommending that we at least haven't that much remaining in the city's fund balance above the minimum fresh threshold that we should be maintaining in our savings account in order to meet that that project. So there will be a later discussion of that. But just to sort of we're putting a lot into the fund balance, but just just so you're aware that if we come forward at a future time, that would be an additional last at a previous meeting. It was mentioned that there could potentially be grants to cover that cost to. Yeah, we already have one grant. It's a million dollar grant with that we received just five or so years ago. It requires a 20% municipal match as well. So the to do the signals has cost that much money. Yeah, so yes. Yeah, very expensive. Just as thank you, Councilor just as a point of clarification, the money can't be spent now. That's why you're asking for this stipulation, right? We can't. Yeah, we don't know a specific dollar amount right now, but you need that set aside for when that dollar amount comes. Correct. Okay, got it. Which is right, the bulk of it. Because when we look at next year's budget recommendations, it would almost be too sweet to kind of move it into next year. But you're right. And then I think finally, it's just helpful to talk about. Oh, I think I'm missing one. Sorry. There's also the South Brownington Pension Plan talked about this a little bit again in the August meeting. The affordable, sorry, not the affordable housing, the pension advisory committee and our actuary have both recommended to Council that we sent about 100, 100,000 aside to fund our long term liabilities in the pension plan. The goal would be that in future budgets, setting aside money now would anticipate savings in the future. This would also increase our total percentage that were funded by a small amount. I have a question on that. Yeah, please. What is the balance on our $8 million loan that we took out back in 2012? I don't know off the top of my head. Do you know Ballpark? Is it like, I don't know. I have no principles like at this point. So yeah, but we did refinance that right with a different bank and we found considerable savings right before Tom left the city. Yep. Yeah. FY 21. We refinanced that with TD Bank. Yep. Was there any consideration to taking some money and paying down principal on that loan versus contributing it to the fund itself? Yeah. The pension advisory committee talked about that a little bit. But in the end, the recommendation was to fund the... Put it in the market. Yeah, put it in the market. I wasn't at that meeting, sorry. Yes, that's why I'm asking. Okay, thanks. And then finally, just on the total fund balance. So last year, Council with the surplus was able to dedicate a large, over a million dollars to go into the city's fund balance. That's... Our auditors have recommended for years and we've scraped and clawed to bring the total amount in the city's saving account to above 30 days of operational cost expenditures. We finally met that number last year. If the city were to allocate the remainder of surplus this year, we would get much closer to the target amount, which is 60 days worth of operational expenses. We still wouldn't quite be there. We'd be at 14.58%. But again, we're in an incredibly sound fiscal position with making that investment into our savings. So know what action is needed on that point, but just wanted to make you aware. What are the next steps here? Will we be revisiting this then in October? So there are three recommendations we're asking for tonight for funding. One is the health care, 27,000. One is for the pension plan, 100,000. One is 150,000 for the planning and zoning capacity. Again, that would be as contingency funding. Okay. And we're still holding off on the remainder. Correct. And with regard to the contingency fund, that would... I'm trying to just see how this all smooths over as we then eventually have to go and ask the voters to cover. We just looked at next year's forecasted numbers. How would that contingency fund be smoothed over in those numbers? Yeah. So we'd have to make up that budget capacity in FY24. Right. So, I mean, there's other funding mechanisms we could look at. Again, I think the fact that we will be receiving revenues far above that amount will be able to ultimately offset that or help offset that FY24 budget planning. So when we're reading the maintained current levels of operations, I said include that 150,000 contingent. That's what I needed to know. It does. Thanks. So one more comment is that I would like to have somebody spend some time analyzing that $8,000,000 loan and what the value to the city would be for paying down some more of the principal and just some more details about the interest rate and where that loan is headed. And could it be refinanced again? Because I don't know what the interest rates are now, but they've been going up, but it'd be nice to know what it was. Just some details would be good. It might be nice to not retire that loan, but pay it down some more. Before having that information, Tim, would you be? Well, we're going to take some action tonight on four items, but this could be a fifth item for another night, right? Because one of the items is putting money towards that pension. That's a different, it's $100,000 right into the SEI fund itself. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, I just want to say that I absolutely support the funds for our planning and zoning staff. They are overworked and that is an important job that we have here at the city. But my question is about that is we're adding two with $150,000. What about Delilah's position? Is that include filling that position or has that been reorganized? What's the status of our planning and zoning department, Jesse? Sure. So yes, Delilah's position has been filled, has been retitled as a development review planner one, kind of a more introductory level review planner. The idea would be to hire a second person at that level and then have those two review planners report to Marla. And so creating a permitting team where we could strategically strategically direct certain kinds of projects. So while the review planners would have general knowledge, they would also develop specific expertise on form-based code on other areas of our code. And then the second new position would be a second city planner position. Excellent. Well, I wholeheartedly support that. All right. Well, we have then those three requests. Would you like a motion? Sure. So I move that the city council approve adding additional funds to the health care reserve fund to the tune of $27,000. I also move that we, where's the motion? I was number one. Number two, that we add staffing contingency of $150,000 for planning and zoning staffing. We also allocate fiscal year 22 surplus funds to the south brilliant pension plan to reduce long-term liabilities and the amount of $100,000. And finally to, that's it. That's it. Sorry. Is there a second? Second. All right. Any further discussion, Tom? No discussion. All right. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. That was unanimous. Okay. Very good. So with 10 minutes, I would recommend we just break for 10 minutes and not start the FY24 discussion to stop it. That's a pretty big discussion. It is a big discussion. All right. Very good. So we will be on recess for 10 minutes. Thank you. Here before you during the first reading, we gave a brief overview of this ordinance and the purpose of the ordinance is to regulate heating and water heating systems in new buildings in the city. And they would be new buildings that are not permitted by January of this year, 2023, this coming year. And we have essentially mimicked what the city of Burlington has proposed, which is to regulate heating systems to mean that they are 85% of the building's load design is renewable, which we define as by electricity, wood pellets, or other renewable fuel. The ordinance also addresses water heating systems that would have, does not have the 85%, but that would have to be fueled by the same components, electricity, wood pellets, or wood chips, or other renewable fuel. Since we met last time, we've spoken to people who are familiar with the process that Burlington went through and some other experts in the field. And we made some amendments to the ordinance that you had addressed last time. And really, 10,000-foot level, the changes that were made were to incorporate references to the residential building energy standards that we had not incorporated in the first draft, and also incorporate reference to multifamily building energy standards that, as we understand, is going to come online within the next year. So it's a new code book that is going to come online. So we felt it was important to address that as well. In addition, when referring to hot water or water heating systems, we had originally referred to it as domestic water heating systems. That has been changed in the draft before you to service water heating systems. That was done because both in the commercial building energy code and the residential building energy code service water heating systems are defined in domestic is not. Lastly, third, we aligned all our definitions to the terms as they are used in the codes and the standards. And lastly, we added some language to ensure that compliance with this ordinance continues after the initial build. So if you were to change fuel sources or if you were to change heating systems, you would still have to comply with the ordinance. That was a hole in the ordinance that we had patched up. So you'll have a red line version in your packet and for you to consider as you hear the comments today. Thank you. Did you want to say something as well? No. Okay, very good. So I will just like to have a show of hands for the people in the audience here physically with us. How many of you would like to speak? Okay, so that's a fairly lengthy line. If we could just have maybe three just kind of to know who's up next, we're going to alternate between the people online and the people here present. But if there could be some, you know, some anticipation of who will be speaking next that would just kind of facilitate the process and help us get out a little bit earlier. I will do so. Thank you. And when you do come up to the podium, please do give us your name as well as where you live or if you're speaking as someone who does business here in South Burlington, it will be helpful for us to understand your perspective as well as your experience. And I ask that also of the people who are online. All right, so we will start with here in person. Please come up and make sure the green light is on. There we go. Hi, I'm MJ Rial with the South Burlington Energy Committee. This letter was sent to the city council last Thursday. Dear Helen, on behalf of the energy committee, I would like to convey the committee's support for renewable energy heat standard ordinance to the city council. I respectfully request that the committee's statement be entered into the record at the public hearing for ordinance on behalf of the committee. The committee approved the statement with 10 in favor at our meeting Wednesday, September 14th. The energy committee is available to assist and advise upon request by the council. We believe this energy, this renewable energy heating standard ordinance will greatly benefit the community and will help us to meet our climate action plan goals. Thank you for all you and the council members do on behalf of South Burlington. Thank you very much. And someone online. I do want to note that if if folks provided written comment that I would have received if you sent it directly to the council, I may not have received it. But if partners presented written comment, it is linked off of the council agenda as well. So just to note that as you are making your remarks. All right. So Drew S is online and just turn on your camera if you would. Very good. And please give us your full name as well as your perspective while you're here as a resident as someone who does business in South Burlington. Sure. Hey, can can you hear me okay? We can. Thank you. Great. Okay. Yeah. I live in South Burlington off of Joy Drive. And I teach in Winooski directly under the flight path off of Canal Street. And your full name, sir? I just like to. And your full name? Oh, Drew Schatzer. Thank you. I just want to insist that before we accept this climate action plan that we account for all emissions that that come out of our airport and include those in the climate action plan, all greenhouse gas emissions. We can't afford to wait for another agency to do this for us. There really isn't much incentive for them for other agencies to do it. The people of South Burlington are being irreparably harmed almost daily by these criminal assaults on our community members and littles being done by our leaders to protect their constituents. I've spoken to many of our city councilors directly about this illegal basing and have been met with shoulder shrugging and we're outright dismissiveness while thousands continue to suffer. I've even reached out to our chair just a week ago, sharing a clear path toward legal action to begin holding these abusers accountable and have gotten no reply.  And we're asking that you all use the tools at your disposal to hold the airguard accountable for these criminal training operations. And I think collecting data is a powerful way to do that. And we shouldn't bury our head in the sand anymore and show their shoulders at it. It's up to all of us to be bold. And I mean, we can be polite about it. We can thank them for their service. But that doesn't mean that they can continue to do irreparable harm to our community members. As a teacher here, my classes get disrupted almost daily, sometimes cumulatively like over a half an hour each day. And I'm counting on you folks to be this change that we need to make this stop. So please include the F-35 in the airport's greenhouse gas emissions in our climate action plan. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Schatz. Can we make a comment about that right away? I think we're here just to listen, right? So I just want to clarify what this hearing is about. Point of order. This commentary is on the ordinance before us. So I appreciate the previous comments. But I think Councilor Barrett, you're just going to raise that. We want to keep the comments here on the heating ordinance and not the F-35 in the climate action plan, if I'm not mistaken. I think it's responding to the fact that the airport emissions are not included in our climate action plan, but that is not part of the ordinance. So that is a valid point. So yeah, Mr. Schatz, the next agenda item, the climate action plan is perhaps the one that you wanted to address. So that will be after this public hearing. Okay. Next person here. Good evening, Councillors. My name is Scott Gardner. It's been my pleasure to live in South Burlington for over 40 years. I think that this ordinance will make South Burlington a better place to live. And I'm here to speak in favor of it. By way of background, not only have I lived here, but I've worked here for 40 years. For the past 20, I've worked for Building Energy, which is an energy services company. We provide solar, heat pumps, energy audits, thermal reconstruction, and heat recovery ventilation statewide. We are a recognized leader in these fields. I have struggled since 2006 to find answers to efficient and clean hot water in buildings. The buildings we work on and that we remodel or we build are either net zero or net zero capable. The technology is there for us to adopt the ordinance. It's going to be difficult. There'll be a transition period. But frankly, it seems to me this is all about money. I think we all recognize the carbon problem. We recognize that if we don't take action, we're going to be in trouble. We're struggling. I've read many of the comments that have come on the ordinance, and I see you are populated with a wide variety of people who are going to speak primarily in favor, but you have Champlain Housing Trust, which is against the ordinance primarily because of hot water. You have Redstone against the ordinance primarily because of the hot water. We can do this with solar thermal, with pellet technology, and heat pump hot water heaters. Building designs need to be modified. It's not the end of the development. I know from my own personal experience what it takes to make these changes. You can't say, oh, it's more expensive to produce hot water with electricity in a commercial building than it is with natural gas. I mean, you can say that, but it just simply is not true. We are not counting the cost today, the carbon cost of natural gas. So I would encourage you to listen to everybody, but to vote in favor of this ordinance, and thank you for your time. Okay. The next person online is Kai McElforley, and again, this is with regard to the ordinance for renewable energy heating. Okay. Can you hear me and see me? Yes, we can hear you. We cannot see you. Okay. You should be able to see me now. Okay. Just briefly, I've been trying to advocate in my home, my home city of Burlington on issues related to this particular proposed solution, and been meeting with lots of resistance. And I just thought I'd throw out what my feeling is in regards to what you folks are struggling with. And that is just to say that I've encountered an increasing number of people, both owners and or users of heat pump technology who have discovered who are very who realize that they've made a mistake with installing this technology in their home, whether they went into it with the wrong impressions, or they were sold a bad bill of goods. The end effect is that the experience is that folks are having actually increasing their effective greenhouse gas emissions, they're paying more money after installation and or reliance on these systems than they were before doing so. And obviously that's an issue. I'm aware that a lot of the rosy projections that were made over the last decade are slowly being locked back. So I would just urge caution. I would also point out that I think any plan that doesn't focus its attention on massively increasing the efficiency of the envelopes of buildings, you know, we're dealing with a really antiquated housing stock, maybe not use folks so much because you're a newer city quote unquote, but and certainly you probably have some of this problem. And that is that, you know, it's all well and good to develop new technologies and and try and sell them to the public. But if you're dealing with a with a horrible housing stock, how effective is it really to install this, you know, bright fancy new equipment when you know you have buildings that aren't insulated or horrifically poorly insulated. And so not focusing primarily on, you know, bringing every building commercial and residential up to like a passive house standard before you thought before folks are sold this bill of goods, i.e. install this, you know, fancy heat pump or this fancy whatever is is I think that the responsible way to move forward, particularly when we're talking about public monies being part of part of the solution, but also for private monies. And I just don't see a lot of emphasis, both, you know, at the municipal level or at the state level, to focus on the primary problem, which is, you know, the front end, if we can reduce demand, increase efficiency, we can, you know, and I'll just use it. It's not 100% true. But, you know, if you can heat a building with a light bulb, with a single light bulb versus, you know, a massive heating system, we should be going more towards the former rather than pretending like the latter doesn't isn't the reality. So that's all I'll reserve the rest of my comments for later parts of the agenda. Thank you. Thank you. And I just wanted to inform everybody that this is a new construction. So I think that's important to know as well. Next person in line. Good evening. My name is Laurie Smith. I live in South Burlington, have been a Vermont resident since the mid 70s, and not very good. Temporaneously, so I've got something written to read to you. I applaud you counselors in the city of South Burlington for considering this ordinance and encourage its immediate implementation as reinforced by the just released energy action network annual progress report continued business as usual is not an option if we're going to prevent catastrophic climate change. We do not have time to debate this point. The debate has been going on for decades and we are already experiencing the impacts of climate change both globally and locally. These changes will spiral out of control if we do not make systemic changes immediately. And Vermont is already behind on its climate commitments. As a former builder and developer, I know that there is hard work that needs to be done to ensure that the transition away from fossil fuels happens quickly and equitably. But we have the capacity to raise rise to this challenge if we work cooperatively towards that goal. The systems and technologies already exist and are improving rapidly. In most cases, these systems when integrated properly are less expensive to install and maintain them conventional fossil fuel systems. Getting positive results requires a shift in focus and a whole systems approach to our built environment. The time for action is now. I've lived in an all electric house for the past seven years near net zero. Proper installation and air sealing are very important for comfort in a home heated and cooled by cold climate heat pumps. But this is easily achieved in newly constructed buildings. The added cost of properly constructed thermal envelope can be minimal and are quickly offset by the reduced mechanical systems needed and pay dividends over time by the reduced heating and cooling demands. Over the past seven years, we have had no utility bills other than for electricity used by our EV. Even that's been minimal. I've lived most of my life convinced that gas is the best way to fuel for cooking. Owning and cooking on an induction stove has totally changed my perspective and I can't imagine ever going back to cooking with gas. In fact, every investment that we have made in our home efficiency has dramatically improved the quality of life in our home. Where there are economic inequalities, I encourage providing incentives to help offset any hardship incurred by this ordinance. But the transition to renewable energy in our buildings is a critical step in our efforts to reach net zero carbon emissions in Vermont. And lastly, if and when the state of Vermont passes a comprehensive statewide energy policy for buildings, South Burlington can adopt that policy. Unfortunately, unfortunately, the state is not leading this effort. And South Burlington, along with Burlington, has the opportunity to lead by example. Please vote yes for this ordinance. And thank you for your willingness to take action on this critical issue. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. And next person online is Nick build. Oh, I'm sorry, John Hemmelgarn. Excuse me, John. John Hemmelgarn. Just on muting. Very good. Good evening. Thank you. You can hear me, I assume. Yes, we can hear you. Right. My name is John Hemmelgarn. I'm a partner at the architectural firm of Black River Design. We're a large commercial and institutional design firm that does work throughout the state. Oops. Couple of technical difficulties here. I'm sorry. They're still coming through loud and clear. Yeah, I know, but I couldn't hear myself. So we have Black River Design Architect support the proposed ordinance to require all new buildings in South Burlington to be fossil fuel free with current technology, including heat pumps and biomass boilers operating buildings without burning fossil fuels is achievable and cost effective for new buildings, which are required already to meet the Vermont commercial or residential building energy standards. Going fossil free, fossil fuel free is an internal Black River Design goal already. The American Institute of Architects created the 2030 commitment program to encourage architects nationwide described for what South Burlington is proposing to do now. That is dramatically reduced fossil fuel usage in buildings in the coming years to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The knowledge base among architects, engineers and contractors, along with the technology and equipment available to them are at a level where providing heat and hot water with electricity and sometimes biomass is an easy lift, if not normal practice. The technology available to achieve these goals is far advanced from five years ago and the rate of advancement continues to accelerate. We expect the ability to meet these goals will become simpler and simpler every year going forward and applaud your efforts to encourage this process. The city of South Burlington is in a position to make a difference, both in your own city by creating infrastructure that is compatible with current long-term climate goals and in the region by setting another example, establishing this as a workable strategy for addressing climate change. We encourage you to support this proposal. Thank you. Thank you. All right, next up here in person. Good evening. My name is Michael Bayema. I'm here both personally and professionally. I'm a resident of South Burlington and I work at a company called ReArch which is a construction management and real estate development firm in South Burlington. First, I'm only here to talk about larger commercial projects which is what we have experience and success in developing and building on behalf of our clients. I was reached out to by several members of the community and a member of the energy committee to provide our expertise and opinions on the on the regulation and first I'd like to say that you know we are very proud of being involved in several net zero projects that are coming out of the ground here locally and across the state but I would be remiss to to if I if I didn't mention that these projects are quite expensive and that there are trade-offs always in implementing newer technology. I've heard from several members of the you know community that you know the costs of these projects are cheaper or that they you know are comparable to fossil fuels and while the equipment may be of similar cost oftentimes there's unanticipated costs such as bringing electric service to these properties that otherwise would not have such significant amperage that are now required to have large electric services in order to service their boilers and heat pumps. The additional costs that people seem to be starting to realize now is that many of the models that were created to model this technology are now being retracted because the cost of electricity has increased so much in the past five years and that is likely to continue because we are putting greater demand on our grid we're electrifying all our vehicles we're electrifying all our systems and so that means the demand for electricity is increasing and the cost of electricity is increasing. So if we are to appropriately accommodate this need we need to work on increasing capacity on the grid side and making sure that costs for consumers when it comes to electricity don't significantly balloon and these are all things that are totally achievable and I don't mean to say that we're not in favor of the regulation I think that it's well intentioned and its goals are well meeting. I think that from a macro perspective there will be some projects that don't get off the ground if this regulation is implemented and that will be because both operationally and in terms of upfront cost the regulation is going to cost more and so there will be projects that don't get off the ground as a result and so I think our opinion is that maybe the city should restructure how they're looking at this and instead of mandating that all new construction have all electric heating systems maybe they incentivize projects to use all electric heating systems as many of the members of the community have stated this is entirely possible and can be achieved quite easily and in projects where there isn't a budgetary constraint additional heating systems like geothermal can be added to supplement the inefficient relative inefficiency of all electric systems as compared to fossil fuels during the very very cold months of the winter which is where all electric heating systems suffer on larger commercial projects so um that's all I have to say thank you very much thank you very much all right now Nick Filtgen and apologies for earlier Nick Filtgen very good and we can't hear you we can see you but we cannot hear you okay can you hear me okay yes we can great great good evening yes my name is Nick Filtgen I'm a resident of Burlington and I do business in South Burlington as a consulting engineer I'm personally and professionally committed to environmental sustainability and I've been fortunate enough to help the city of South Burlington with their buildings reducing fossil fuel use by doing energy audits and mechanical system assessments of their buildings two brief comments that I want to make tonight the first is about the scope of the impact of the proposed ordinance so some people have mentioned and made clear that this applies to new buildings and I just want to make sure it's very clear that that is a key point of this and that the state of Vermont has one of the most stringent energy codes in the entire country and with the newest update virtually all cost-effective energy efficient improvements will now be required by code and we additionally have one of the top three efficiency programs in the nation with efficiency Vermont and with green mountain power incentivizing heat pumps so because of all that as people have some commenters have already mentioned that the need the load for heating these buildings is significantly reduced to the tune of 90 to 95 percent so I'm just trying to point out the fact of the scope and scale of the possible impact of this ordinance so it's reduced because it's a new building it's reduced because people are already doing it and it's reduced because it's already being incentivized by efficiency Vermont and green non-power so certainly there are costs to the city to implement this and I just recommend that they weigh you weigh the cost of implementing it versus the potential impact certainly on existing buildings it's a completely different situation and the impact it that's possible is very significant but it's it's different with new buildings and the second point I want to make is more of a as as I'm an engineer and I design these mechanical systems and again it's mostly on commercial buildings I wanted to bring up the point about the technical and economic feasibility of the different options so a lot of people's experience and views are based on the residential buildings that they live in and those are quite a bit more simpler than commercial buildings so implementing the ordinance that Burlington has done is a good step in the right direction however there are still instances of technical feasibility and economic feasibility that are still challenges where the technology we have just still hasn't caught up with what we'd like to do you know a few basic examples are just kitchen ventilation for restaurants heating up the makeup air we don't have a feasible solution for that right now dryers commercial dryers for hotels for multifamily buildings we don't have a good solution so it's really important to um it when you're coming up with this ordinance to consult with people who are technical experts on this and to make sure all your bases are covered before you do thanks for your consideration thank you very much next up here in person hi i'm sam swanson i've lived in south burlington since 1998 um i've served in a lot of different capacities on different programs that address climate change and have been doing so for decades i appear today to just share with you a couple of practical experience from my work on interfaith power and light i serve on the executive committee of interfaith power and light we're trying to move congregations across the state to address climate change to pursue net zero goals and to do that not only to get the buildings of congregations reduced but also the individual congregants and i am a member of ascension lutheran church in south burlington which in 2005 set a goal of pursuing climate objectives and now is aiming for net zero but we have a building that was built in 1970 and we have we've had building energy come in give us an audit we've had vermont energy give us an audit we've had vermont gas give us an audit we've invested in the highest efficiency heating system that we could buy we've installed insulation at every opportunity but as several speakers have observed about the difficulty of dealing with old buildings it's very difficult and very expensive to get anywhere near net zero and going out and buying um and it's just the point that i think this is so crucial for i'll speak in the my experience with the church speaks to a commercial building the problem is that if we don't get the existing if we don't get the stock of buildings built right it's very hard to go back and retrofit the cost is reduced to the initial purchaser or the initial builder but the people who own that building we're spending a lot of money that if the building had been properly uh constructed at the beginning and the heating system was amenable to installing heat pumps or any of the other technologies that are now available to heat buildings we would be able to do that retrofitting with a building that's got a boiler system with a distributed hot water system it's very hard practically impossible to make the kinds of improvements that you want and as a homeowner i've pursued a similar path starting when i bought my current home in 2007 i put the best possible heating system in that heating system is i was reaching the end of its life and i'm looking for a new one i've called in people to look at the installation of heat pumps and on a retrofit basis because the way the architecture of the building is is laid out it is sometimes very difficult to heat a building on a retrofit basis with uh the the current renewable technologies my point is that the stock that we're building in vermont and south burlington is one of the fastest growing communities in vermont where there is a significant amount of construction going on we've got to gradually improve the the stock of buildings so that when people who move into these buildings face their electric bills and their own whether they have a personal commitment or not to achieve net zero you can't get there it is very difficult to get there on a retrofit basis so i think it is just crucially important that you that you establish these codes for new heating systems that will gradually improve the stock of buildings in south burlington thank you thank you and online we have ray ganda if you would turn on your camera there you are yes uh i followed this heat pump issue for about two years now and so i'm i simple oh my name is ray ganda i'm from south roames and i'm a resident um i just simply want to say i support the effort you're going through right now i support the proposal that's it thank you all right thank you it's short and sweet but we see an electric water heater behind you maybe it's gas i don't know hi john boson golf course road um i think i was here on the 15th of august when you all uh heard the presentation first and i spoke at that meeting in support of the ordinance um to have heat pumps and new construction here in south burlington but like some of you um i'm on a pretty steep learning curve here and i left that meeting with some questions uh about how heat pumps can be used in multi story multi-family buildings and um not so much in single homes single family homes but in apartment buildings and large buildings um that houses many families and individuals both renters and owners and i believe some of you um maybe was counselor chitin and i think also had that question and i left the meeting um without very good answers and i think it's a good question and we need to be sure that it works in multi-story multi-family buildings for me heat bumps in those larger residential buildings are important because i'm a very very strong supporter of affordable housing in the appropriate locations i'm a longtime donor of shambling housing trust and been involved in some major projects with them i believe providing a home for people is essential it makes them um better citizens and more productive uh residents in our community and building affordable housing for people uh makes them feel at home in our community and i don't want that new technology uh to be absent from those who need affordable housing so i took it upon myself to learn more about heat pumps in multi-family buildings multi-story buildings and i began to talk with architects who've designed larger residential buildings with heat pumps and then i visited those buildings where the heat pumps are the source for heating and cooling from the architects at truox and cullens and was Lucy and Duncan i learned that the co-efficiency performance with heat pumps is much more efficient than gas truox and cullens will design nothing but zero carbon neutral buildings beginning in 2030 i think we heard that from the gentleman from the other architectural firm in fact they've actually begun doing that now the architects that i learned from the heat pumps aren't what they're going to be in the future they'll probably get better but they work well now they work in multi-family and multi-story buildings sometimes heat pumps are too large for smaller units and sometimes you need two heat pumps to take care of a larger larger unit but buildings all of them have the condensers on the roof and there's one condenser for each unit in the building and they all have wall units up high inside to bring in the hot air in the winter and the cool air in the summer i went ahead and i visited cambion rise on north ave in burlington where one building has 108 units and it's four stories tall all the heat pumps there work well they're all on the rooftop for each individual apartment renters and owners have individual controls for the heat and air conditioning and that comes through the heads that are up high in each room natural gas is now used for the hot water heaters and it's like a hotel residents don't have their own hot water heater they don't want them of course on different floors above the ground but we know that the technology is there to do hot water well differently especially if it's just electricity each living unit i found out has an exhaust system as well to bring in fresh air i wish i kind of had that in my house in the wintertime when we get the windows closed month after month but these buildings are designed to bring in fresh air as well the facility manager says that the heat pumps are highly cost effective for the residents renters play one monthly fee just one fee for heat air conditioning hot water and internet service other very large buildings that i came across out there were one with 70 units it was three stories tall they're all using heat pumps and the other architectural firm was an oski and duncan have that building along with one with 30 units that's two stories tall they found that there were people who were worried about the lines that might leak i've heard this from several people but utility lines including plumbing lines are everywhere in a big building in the walls between each unit especially in a multi-story building the lines for heat pumps are copper they're just like freshwater lines they last forever and they've had no issues with leaks no incidents both affordable housing units that i visited at cambrian rise also have solar on the roof heat pumps are clustered in the middle of the rooftops and the solar is placed along the edges it was interesting to go up and observe that so both heat pumps and solar are accommodated solar covers the common areas in the building the electricity in the hallways and also for the use of elevators and i found that the elevators use 15 percent of the electricity in these buildings it's quite a lot to have for an elevator but it appears that there will always be always be just opinions about what works and what doesn't work and there's no one ideal system for every building but we know that heat pumps heat pumps work in multi-story and multi-family buildings and can be customized for each situation i trust that answer will arrest some of your fears it certainly was an important thing for me to discover and it's very important and concerned to have that question especially for affordable housing and we'd like to think that making this new form of heating and cooling available to those living in those kinds of housing situations in multi-family multi-family story buildings is available to them as well heat pumps clearly is our our pathway forward we cannot continue cannot continue to use natural gas for everything we tend to think of natural gas as clean and inexpensive and in abundance it's not inexpensive anymore and it's abundant but it's not clean natural gas is commonly a byproduct i think you know this of oil extraction especially during hydraulic fracturing and oftentimes is so overly abundant maybe you've seen this that it's vented into the atmosphere and burned off at the extraction site both of which vastly increases the carbon pollution associated with the natural gas process chain we can't do that anymore one of the key greenhouse gases released from venting and leakage is methane and research shows us that methane when released into the atmosphere is more than 80 times powerful than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period it's methane emissions paired with a variety of other pollutants that natural gas releases that packs a serious punch a very serious punch into our healthy to our health safety in our environment we've only got a few years left to get this right and turn the corner to ensure decades of healthy living not just in south burlington but on our planet the ordinance before you helps us get there you need to vote for a please heat bumps must be a part of this equation we know they work and we know they are far better for our environment thank you thank you next online is rosa and greco if you could just turn on your camera rosa and there we are yes i yeah i didn't expect it a good evening counselors my name is rosa and greco i live on four sisters road in south burlington my conference will be very brief and not near as technical as what you've heard i support all of those who spoke out in favor of this ordinance i'm obviously well i'm very much in favor of this ordinance really recommend that the council enacted as soon as they can i don't have the technical data to give you i just have personal experience with heat pumps and with both with a heat pump hot water heater and heat heating in your conditioning we we moved here in 2007 did a lot of efforts to make our house more energy efficient and primarily to save the environment in 2013 we turned in our rented gas hot water heater and bought an electric heat pump it has been absolutely fabulous well going on next year will be 10 years for never never been without hot water and then in 2015 we bought a heat pump heating and air conditioning unit we have a major unit and i don't know the technical terms the i think is tensor outside the house with two lines one on our main floor and one upstairs on our second floor and we have a very very large house way too large sorry we got this large house but it does a superb job it it's incredibly efficient when you're talking about the kinds of heat and humidity we've experienced over the past few summers it's almost instantaneously cool i cannot tell you how much we had expended in these because back in 2012 we bought solar panels and we haven't had an electricity bill since march of 2013 so i can't tell you how much they cost us because they you know they to buy them but we don't have any bills because we generate our own electricity more and more than we use so that's our personal experience with both of these devices they've come a long way i'll bet you they're the technology is is far advanced than it was when we bought it when we lived in maryland there were heat pumps but boy these are way better than the ones that we had when we lived it in another washington dc stop herbs in maryland i urge you to pass this ordinance because i urge you to think long term to think large the alternative to not doing this is business as usual we cannot afford to do business as usual you all know this i know that the climate crisis is so severe we have to do things differently heat pumps are not brand new we're not inventing the wheel many many places use them you've heard examples many examples tonight but lots millions of people are using them across united states in the world so it's not as if oh my gosh this is a brand new thing it's not it's proven and and it will only get better but the alternative is to keep using fossil fuels natural gas is a fossil fuel as you heard it's a major polluter it damages the human beings and the the planet and to continue using that is just going to make make the lives of our children and grandchildren unbearable so thank you very much for listening to me i really urge you to pass this and all bold environmental actions such as renewable energies and the what you're talking about here thank you very much thank you miss him and next here in person hi my name is noah hyman resident of south berlington for about 10 years now and i'm here to talk about a couple things today i happen to have the opportunity to go to the climate solutions caucus i happen to win the primary for chitin eight in south berlington to join the legislature um uh i was there um at the invitation of chris piererson who um was a co-founder and of course a lot of what was happening at the climate solutions caucus is germane to this meeting tonight um i um i did want to uh talk about um a couple of the things that um um we talked about there so there's been a lot of anecdotal conversation tonight and so uh what was just released was the annual progress report from the energy action network the energy action network is um it's berlington electric efficiency from our green mountain power from our electric power from our gas from our public power supply washington electric co-op it's uvm it's dark myth um it's like seven or eight of uvm's colleges and of course businesses and just about heat pumps if i can approach you if you can have this copy here's the data real data it goes back to 1990 most of that data and besides the cost being better with a heat pump versus oil or gas those other fossil fuels will produce roughly 60 tons of co2 60 tons versus less than one with a heat pump and we haven't even talked about that part of the climate crisis um also um what was what did come up a lot is another one here this has to do with the uh the president's new um and these are the extra incentives incentives that will be coming to citizens now this is roughly the real dollars um the um the fact that we already have the fact that we already have incentives from our utilities and um and the state this is extra money that will reduce the installation of appliances heat pumps electric cars and ways for the state of vermont to meet its its climate goals um i believe in this change locally because it will lead the rest of the state i think it's an important step such a an important town in the state i mean we are number two now behind burlington as of january first ahead of rutherland um and i think it's a real big signal that to the two largest um municipalities in the state are adopting these these measures um this information i also sent out to i just passed up to you guys is also available on the white house's website and the u.s. house of representatives um also supporting this specific um endeavor in south burlington um the vermont league of cities and towns uh recent climate action municipal paper uh it's number two um i'm sure it's available for you as well is asking us to reduce our fossil fuel consumption by 40 percent by 2030 as regional um global warming solutions as the regional global warming solutions act of 2020 um is encouraging us and encouraging the use of energy efficient um appliances specifically in homes and cars which is about 75 percent of our statewide emissions there's extra money that is one time um we don't get this kind of influx of money uh very often in vermont and to assist the state this would put you if you were to buy a heat pump for your house for your new construction this would reduce the payback time on that um by roughly 20 to 25 depending on the size that you you did also to some more anecdotal stuff um i had a mid-century modern house that was hemorrhaging electricity and heat in a way that i couldn't even comprehend when i bought the house i was getting gas in electric bills in excess of a thousand dollars a month um so much so that green mountain power thought we were a business i had mr gardener and his company out to the house he did an energy audit and i think he said it was the second worst he's ever seen in his career and i scarcely have an electric bill now and i use heat pumps and my house is cozy and comfortable i'm raising my children in it they love it and i do too and i hope that you adapt these adapt these changes thanks thank you thank you and the next person online excuse me amy amy demetrovitz and i hope i pronounced your last name correctly close it's demetrovitz hi um i'm amy demetrovitz i'm with the shamblain housing trust uh and i want to say we uh support this ordinance as it relates to single family homes commercial buildings and small multifamily buildings especially single family homes i think the technology is very much tried and true including with domestic hot water and i think generally um per person single family homes absolutely use more energy than multifamily housing does we have issues with the technology as it relates to multifamily housing larger buildings we do own one of the buildings out at cambrian rise both there's two affordable housing buildings out at cambrian rise uh we have a 76 unit multifamily apartment building and cathedral square has a 70 unit uh senior housing both buildings are cooled with heat pumps but we both have um hydronic natural gas fired uh heating systems in those buildings um we ourselves shamblain housing trust we only have two buildings that have heat pumps it's the one out at cambrian rise and then we have one right there in city center garden apartments both of them are just used for cooling not for heating um because we have been nervous about taking that leap and using the systems for heating uh we have not heard good things frankly from other owners of multifamily buildings as to how they perform and we also know that the maintenance costs uh have been higher as well so um as we more and more are realizing because very much because of climate change that we will need to include cooling in our buildings i do anticipate that we are moving towards uh installing heat pumps in our buildings and will be heating and cooling with heat pumps but i but you need to understand that the technology um is very complicated and that the the technical and financial calculations as it relates to multifamily housing are much more complex um again with single family homes absolutely and and to include we support as well the inclusion of building inspectors who will be looking at single family homes the way that they already have been for for decades multifamily housing to make sure that they're complying with energy code um so we're we're a little mixed i can't say that we're necessarily completely in support of the ordinance we have concerns about how it relates to multifamily buildings and especially we have a concern would really hope that you would um remove the requirement for domestic hot water uh being fueled by electricity in multifamily housing buildings thanks thank you very much and next here in person i'm kala more i'm here to speak from the perspective of a resident and homeowner in south berlington who wants to get off natural gas uh i've been a resident of south berlington for more than 10 years uh we bought our initial home in um 2012 in the laurel hill orchard neighborhood it was a 1959 ranch house um we loved that house and we made several energy improvements to it while we lived there um yet it was never going to be highly efficient because of the way it was built in 1959 um even though i had um heard natural gas was clean i had no qualms about using natural gas at that time in my home i even upgraded my stove to get natural gas range because i liked cooking with gas um and we even swapped out our wood burning fireplace for a gas fireplace um in that first home uh a couple years ago as our family grew we decided we we needed a little bit of a larger living space and last summer we moved across town to a larger house um we built we bought a 2014 um 3600 square foot colonial house um although it's newer and is more energy efficient than our prior house um it does heat with natural gas and it has two natural gas fire places i was hoping because it was newer and more energy efficient that would be easier to scale down and get off in natural gas but having contacted several contractors um i've just i've realized that is actually very difficult even for a newer home built in 2014 to retrofit after the fact um so that's why i think this ordinance is important to adopt retrofitting um is very costly even newer homes that are built today um if a homeowner wants to get off natural gas in the future it's going to be very costly and very expensive and wasteful um because you're going to be swapping out newer systems um and so i think today with the design standards and the construction um and the uh technology that's available today to continue building um with uh natural gas systems is just irresponsible um i can tell you from my own perspective um based on the size of our home and the existing duct system we're told that um to add the the five ton compressor heat pump which will require plus an additional mini split it will cost us over 13 000 after rebates to retrofit and that is not going to provide us enough heating in the winter unfortunately and this is because of the way our home was built and designed in 2014 again if this ordinance was in place today houses would be built a little bit differently i'm confident maybe 3600 square foot homes would be a little less common and i think that's probably a good thing um so um unfortunately because of the way my home was built i may never be able to get off natural gas um which i find extremely unfortunate i'm hopeful that's not the case um but i think that there are countless examples of newer homes being built today that are more energy efficient all electric or using um high efficiency heat um uh pellets um and and other sources of renewable energy and i the solutions are certainly there today um our burlington neighbors are just one example i think if this ordinance is not adopted builders will certainly keep doing what they're doing because why change the routine if you don't have to and for every new home or building designed to heat with fossil fuels tomorrow the consequences of inaction today will only be compounded we are already facing an enormous challenge retrofitting buildings after the fact is exceedingly expensive at best and with the hundreds or thousands of new buildings in the pipeline i urge you not to make this mistake i'd like to think that the future holds some promise for reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and for my children who are facing down a future that is all but certain to be filled with extreme weather events and the countless challenges that will inevitably come with that i'd like to think that we at least try to do our part and i urge you today to put to pass this ordinance thank you thank you and i believe that there are no other people online so we're going to be continuing here in person if there is still someone who'd like to speak online please put your name into the chat um my name is hailey shan i live in south burlington and i've been living here for four years and speaking as a private resident of this town we had two heat pumps installed one last year when the year before and one was in the basement that was the first one we installed and the basement was very cold before that and the other one was in the study and we found it very comfortable to have that situation because we could heat the room that we need and the distribution of the heat is much better that way when we have it installed in the end of the line of the heating source so we wish that we could install two more one in the upstairs bedrooms and one in the sunroom which is at the very end of the heating line the sunroom right now is pretty cold but we were told it's impossible to do that because we're living a duplex condo and the way that this layout is impossible unless we have very extensive duct work so i'm hoping that the new constructions will consider this and i'm pretty sure that with four one in the basement one upstairs and two in the main floor we will be very comfortable just living with the heat from the heat pumps and away from the gas totally and compared with the budget of electricity plus the gas of the past two years which is unfair to do a very short-term comparison but i i guarantee that it's going to be probably better if we can keep the same temperature we do find about five percent more of the total utility with the gas plus the heating from the electricity because we have increased the winter temperature by four degrees after we have installed the heat pumps because my husband likes to have warmer climate so it's it's difficult to do a fair comparison between the two but i'm sure that it will be very comparable just from the cost of keeping the house warm and comfortable with the two and i know that the gas prices is going to increase i don't know about the electricity will increase at the same rate but i think because everybody is going in the direction of putting more electricity and increasing solar and other source for the electricity generation so in the foreseeable future i think the nation is going in the direction that the gas price will increase faster than the electricity so i think that this is the right way to go thank you thank you hello hello for the record uh dylan jametista i'm with vgs from on gas and uh i'm here joined today with a colleague mike gifford mike is an expert who works with commercial customers at and vgs and he is an efficiency lead on that front so we certainly welcome an ongoing dialogue recognize this is just an opportunity to provide some feedback for the public um but certainly vgs you know we're right down the road on swift street we've had a presence here for many years and we're a large employer about 130 employees who work in the thermal energy space and that includes working with customers every day i'm sure many of you are customers here tonight but also working in our energy efficiency utility to try to provide services to folks help them improve the efficiency of their home it includes uh maintaining a safe system uh and working with folks on a policy front to ensure that as vermont makes its energy transformation we're part of that solution as well so just real quick um want to let you know that we have 55 000 customers across northwest vermont that comprises franklin county chitlin county and aniston county with regard to south berlington we provided some written comments where we gave an overview of our business profile and so forth but there's about 7500 premises here in south berlington that we serve and of those uh about i believe it was 83 percent as residential so a large residential footprint but 17 percent would be commercial or industrial customers uh just as a baseline uh vgs is fully committed to the state climate goals and we recognize that this is a very dynamic moment we have initiatives at the federal level of some have mentioned today certainly there's been a lively debate at the state policy level with regard to adoption of thermal sector policy because we know that thermal sector emissions account for 34 percent of vermont's total greenhouse gas emissions um and then at the local level there's an emerging conversation uh and last year we we had a long lengthy dialogue with uh the folks down the hill in berlington about their proposed renewable energy ordinance and the adoption that came after and now the implementation of that ordinance so we have a lot of experience here and we're certainly happy to share feedback uh just as a sort of a baseline what we do is we focus on three key ways to try to help our customers adjust to this energy transformation that's underway the first is really around efficiency as many have spoken to tonight it's critical that we weatherize homes and ensure that those shells are such that we are keeping the energy and reducing usage so that's in our future state we see that is the first piece of the puzzle the second is to really increase access to the latest in-home technology and believe it or not uh at vgs we actually are offering technology that we've talked about tonight electric heat pump water heaters for certain residential applications uh we're exploring a number of new technologies that we will see contribute to reducing emissions as well some of those might include say geothermal in which we are very excited about but also uh things like in-home technologies such as perhaps hybrid heating solutions which might involve heat pumps in the future so we are actively working on that and you'll be hearing from us soon if you are a customer on that front and then finally the other is just how do we displace for that remaining energy use in our system the fossil fuels that are there and that will require innovation and will require different types of alternative fuels put into our infrastructure but I just want to call out here that we have a lot of pipe buried underground in Vermont most of it is high density polypropylene pipe it's very safe we have one of the tightest systems in the country and those pipes can carry different types of fuel because the pipe itself does not care what flows through it to a customer's home so in the future we see different types of fuel coming online there's a lot of talk about renewable natural gas hydrogen and other technologies and in fact we're working right down the road at Global Foundries on a project to displace fossil gas in their production process by creating green hydrogen so these are the types of technologies that are underway I just want to say that recognizing this is a rapidly changing policy environment we stand ready to assist however we can and we generally support policy that is first aligned with our state policies and that would include the Global Warming Solutions Act we're on board we need to reduce emissions we're going to do it we also support policy that sets a clear performance standard and what that means is a percentage of renewable that we can aim for and try to adjust our practices to or in the case of a statewide clean heat standard for the thermal sector it would be setting a performance standard for all energy providers statewide in the space that's something that we can support we also will support policy that is technology or fuel neutral and as written the current proposal speaks to a renewability that is defined as multiple technologies and it sets that standard that we would have to meet so in general we're supportive of that concept but I will say that the last piece that's critically important and many folks have spoken to it tonight it's ensuring that Vermonters who are most energy burden for whom the cost is the greatest can partake in the change that is underway both statewide and in communities so as you way propose thermal energy changes at the local level we would encourage you to think about what the cost impact will be for individuals be it those who might be income qualified for housing but also for businesses manufacturers and others it's critically important to think about the cost folks ability to afford it in this environment and how we can work together to make this transformation work for everyone so with that I will conclude my remarks I don't want to take a lot of your time you have a lot of written remarks that we've already provided in your packet but certainly as the conversation unfolds I just want to commend all of the local stakeholders who have so far reached out to us or participated in this conversation we have felt that we've been accessed in terms of folks reaching out to get technical information to ask us about our services and we remain eager to be part of that conversation so thank you for having us tonight and just commend the community for coming out and showing up for this discussion thanks thank you and next please nobody yet that's Ziegmund 338 Golf Course Road I first want to say thank you to the council I'm very grateful to live in this community where this issue has been taken so seriously and your approach has been so thoughtful and I am so grateful that you're giving it the urgent attention that it deserves I strongly urge the council to vote in favor of this ordinance in fact the most robust ordinance possible I'd also like to express my strong support for the hiring of additional staff I know this is a little off the you know off the main topic which was suggested by Jesse Baker including administrative support building inspection capacity for single and multifamily homes which I think is long overdue and support for our local developers and property owners in adapting to the new ordinance I think that's an important request I'd also like to urge the council to consider the the fact that you know some of the testimony that we're hearing tonight is clearly very favorable in terms of the feasibility of multifamily construction with under this ordinance and we've heard some testimony that's against it and I would just urge the council to consider the fact that those who those who tend to speak against this sort of ordinance are those who don't have any experience doing this so you know we would not ask uh the the makers of horse and buggies to advise us on how to construct you know how to build electric vehicles for example so I you know I would just like to throw that out there as a little analogy you know we might want to give a little more credence to those who have actually got experience in in building this sort of stuff but anyway um specifically though I'm here I wanted to ask the council um we we heard some testimony in the previous meeting on this subject uh asking the council to provide a special exemption from the ordinance uh for multifamily housing if the exemption were added to the ordinance uh I have a question and a comment would it apply only to buildings that were 100 percent or majority affordable units or would it apply to all multifamily buildings I think this is an important distinction and maybe I'm just not um expert in this subject but it seems to me that um developers generally push as hard as they can to maximize the number of market rate units in those multifamily buildings so we set this uh you know this ordinance such that it would allow for an exemption in multifamily buildings we would be giving exemption to buildings that are primarily market rate units with a few affordable units thrown in only because the city council has basically forced the developers into including those affordable units um so that's my first point um my other concern is uh that allowing an exemption um that would that would amount to lower building building standards for affordable housing or multi-unit housing I think threatens to perpetuate inequities in the long run the reason I think that um is that today's construction is not just today's housing these are these are buildings that are going to be around for 60 to 100 years I've seen estimates that that's you know again I'm not an expert here on this but um you know any any you know reasonable reasonably trustworthy uh source says that you know these are buildings that are going to be around for many many decades so um I think the arguments we've heard about affordability need to be seen in that context the primary reason is that the future owners of these buildings that potentially could still be using fossil fuels if they're you know still putting in gas furnaces um are going to be subject to the ongoing historic volatility of fossil fuels for heating and cooling and cooking um sorry I just have to ground myself again um for example remote gas increased the cost of natural gas 27 percent between July and August of this year that's an enormous burden uh for for low-income people the bird's eye view of this issue clearly indicates that the upward that there will be upward pressure on fossil fuels into the future why because as the climate crisis intensifies global pressure is going to increase the prices of fossil fuels due to a variety of forces including international carbon pricing mechanisms federal and state policies growing recognition of potentially massive financial risks associated with fossil fuel investments etc as well as local actions like these therefore by allowing special exemptions from the ordinance for multifamily buildings or you know other considerations we'd essentially be saddling future generations of owners and I mean you know 10 20 30 years down the line with having to do retrofits um because the costs of fossil fuel or they're they're going to be stuck with fossil fuels and the costs are certain to remain wildly unpredictable and escalate relative to renewables which have done nothing but come down in price in recent decades uh the developers and builders I want to mention will bear none of these future costs zero once these buildings are built they walk away and they pay none of the costs for the retrofits the other point I'd like to raise is that retrofits are expensive obviously we've heard testimony on this already um by allowing exemptions presumably to save on construction costs today and in the near term which is a point that's you know been debated by some of the other testimony tonight we would commit future owners to expensive retrofits to use my own home and as an example and we heard we heard a little bit about this from um uh from Kayla we are trying to get our house off gas as well um but the cost is exorbitant well over ten thousand dollars um and we also live in a fairly leaky house we've already had it weatherized to the tune of you know uh I can't remember but it was it was not inexpensive um and then I want to add one more point I know my my comments are going on and on but I want to add one more comment it's minor but I think it's worth mentioning um I'm a physician as some of you know over at the hospital and I'm a uh uh a lung specialist and I I'm also involved in various sustainability projects one of which is a weatherization health initiative which is funded by the Department of Public Services um it's still in a very early phase and it's focused on the health benefits of upgrading houses for a cohort of about 50 non-smoking households who have children who suffer from poorly controlled asthma which is known to be exacerbated by certain housing conditions one of the upgrades to be made for the participating families is a conversion to electric cooktops there's a small but growing body of evidence that gas stoves during cooking and also uh it's thought to be to a greater extent from fugitive emissions from the the gas valves or pipes um which results in indoor air pollution in the form of a variety of toxins including volatile organic compounds and a recent very strong study out of stanford showed uh that also there are some dangerous carcinogens like toluene and benzene um that are part of that mixture um which you probably already know have been shown to cause uh cancer and also um exacerbate lung disease existing lung diseases interestingly these effects are believed to be more severe in smaller kitchens and somewhat paradoxically in units that are more heavily weatherized and less leaky like the ones that are currently being built um so I don't want to overstate the existing evidence on this and probably no one in this room really believes that our gas stoves are making us sick um but this is an emerging field of study and the reason I'm bringing this up is that I think anytime that we allow for a differential standard between things that are built for people who have money and people a lot of money and people who don't have as much money then we risk perpetuating or even creating inequities in the future um so again I think that we need to look very far into the future not just next year or five years or 10 years but we need to look at the impact of these buildings 20 30 40 50 60 100 years from now um so in conclusion um again thank you for for all the effort and time and passion you put into this and um I urge you to vote in favor of the ordinance thank you thank you and we do have someone online thank you again Keith Epstein hello I'm Keith Epstein I live in South Burlington in a home that I upgraded to net zero energy a few years ago and I got off natural gas I'm also a member of the South Burlington energy committee and I appreciate you taking this public comment heard a lot of really good things tonight and I encourage you to vote yes and if you're thinking of voting no then I ask you to think about how else will South Burlington meet our climate commitments that we've made and we have a draft climate action plan um and so yeah if you're thinking of voting no then you know what what else are we going to propose uh to meet our our goals and our commitments and I see this as a large step forward towards meeting those goals and encourage you to support it thank you thank you very much next to your up in person thank you very much my name is Chris Snyder and I'm with Snyder homes we're a home builder and also a multi-family builder of homes within South Burlington so thank you for your time um and I do have a lot of experience associated with construction construction techniques and also heating and cooling and hot water within uh different types of homes with uh both within South Burlington and other areas in Burlington uh in Williston uh I think there is a um piece that we are all need to focus on and that is efficiency of buildings and efficiency of new buildings and that is really the ultimate goal of all of the code changes that have taken place over the last 10 years uh that we've seen both from the state and also from the local municipalities and I think that uh and I'm going to use in a quick example about a building in which we constructed recently here uh within the city center and that is called Dover Place and in that particular building uh there are 43 apartments uh located in that building and the air changes per hour was 0.08 which is extremely low for a um multi-family building of that size and so what that does and proves is that we're already building extremely efficient homes and apartment buildings within the city uh based upon the existing code and so we haven't seen all of the positive results of all of that work that is already transpired and that we've changed to and so I do think that we need to be focused on efficiency of the um exterior wall sample uh as our primary focus of how to utilize uh our resources uh so that's number one uh the uh I think in terms of multi-family buildings in particular uh the uh goal to electrify you know multiple systems within the building I certainly understand and do you think that it is possible to electrify the heating system within the buildings there are costs associated with it not only in initial costs but also long-term maintenance costs that people are uh not discussing uh one of them um is that the heat pumps typically last about 10 years and uh in terms of they start losing some efficiencies um but they do tend to need to be replaced more often than a natural gas boiler does um now that will improve over time and I realize that that will change but people do need to understand that there is a cost associated with uh using the many splits in terms of the ventilation and domestic hot water within the multi-family buildings uh there are products available very limited that have been used in a very limited uh amount within our marketplace and that doesn't mean we shouldn't go out and pursue other places that are using these for both ventilation and domestic hot water but I do think that we are pushing the envelope uh further than what the technology is going to allow for within the multi-family buildings and as a side note within Dover Place here in South Burlington uh we do use natural gas uh to both produce the heat and domestic hot water within the building and there are a total of three boilers associated with that building for the entire 43 units and there are two water storage tanks that is it the water storage tanks I believe are 80 gallons so there are two 80 gallon tanks and that store the hot water and then a boiler that essentially works um and creates the hot water throughout the building that's for 43 apartments and so that is extremely efficient use of whatever type of product is creating the heat or the domestic hot water so I just wanted to point out that there are already we're already doing a lot of the efficiency things and that the focus should be in and with the current systems that are available the heat pumps are capable of being used for the heating system more uh transferably or more easily and then but in terms of the ventilation and domestic hot water that is not the same so I would recommend that you uh if you do choose to adopt the new ordinance that you do follow the Burlington exemptions in which uh both ventilation and hot water were not included based upon the existing technologies in place I would also recommend that you hire some consultants I realize that uh this is a big change um both for the uh for the city council but also for residents and also for people who build within uh South Burlington and that you hire a consultant who's really going to follow through and formalize you know some of the details that need to be incorporated into a potential ordinance that I feel yes the city of Burlington did their own study but maybe you know it maybe is time for the city of Burlington to do some study as well the other um uh one point that I think is a valid point as well is you know in terms of projects that are already permitted and the question is when is this going to take become an effect and uh in what type of projects that it becomes uh effective to is you know a very interesting discussion because it's if there's projects that are already approved and actually have Act 250 approvals and some of municipality approvals and also agreements in which they provided natural gas to the neighborhood or extended lines or in terms of power needs none of the power needs associated with going all electric probably have been considered in some of these pieces in terms of the infrastructure so my recommendation is to uh you know really uh think about what types of projects or what projects that um are fall under this new ordinance so thank you very much for your time appreciate it thank you we're still here in person hello my name is Steve Cordell I'm an architect here in Vermont with GBA architecture and planning up in Montpelier and so I'm here in support of the ordinance and we have I think advancing this move away from fossil fuels is commendable and something we have to do in the current climate where we are in my firm has recently finished and is currently working on a number of different commercial and multi-family buildings where we are have gone all electric for heating and we've done that with using heat pumps and we've done it in a variety of different ways so there really is there's not a one size fits all for these but we've been pushing for god the last decade or so to go all electric and as sort of the push and as more products come online the systems just keep getting better and better and better and so I think as the demand for electric increases and the demand to get off the fossil fuels increases that the systems that are available to us just make it that much more possible I think Nick had mentioned the energy standards for the residential residential and commercial building energy standards that Vermont has adopted they're incredibly robust and they have made it so that the demands of our energy for heating and cooling systems is actually much less than it was much longer ago with much leaker much leaker buildings and so with the tight envelopes that we have it's much easier to satisfy with heat pumps and compressors and so we're looking at different ways in some of our buildings where and we've done this with multi-family buildings that are new and we've also done it with some renovations so 49 unit new multi-family building we have all the units with fan coil units on the roof and they serve each unit and then we also have been doing this with some commercial buildings and we've done it with renovation as well as new so we've done it with a banking institution where we just removed all their fossil fuels and just pulled out the propane tank which is kind of a big a big move to make and and then we've also done it with a homeless shelter that we just finished where we've gotten off all of the fossil fuels there too and gone all electric now we are just starting a new building that we're just beginning it is or it's in construction and it's 19 units and that is going to be the first building that we're doing where we're completely confident that we can meet the the heating and cooling needs as well as the hot water domestic hot water needs and and partly that is a hot water definitely it gets trickier the domestic hot water and it's partly because of the peak load the demands like if everyone gets up between six and seven has to get a shower or bathe it's going to take a long time for the hot water tank to recover and so there's different solutions for that too and for some of the new multifamily that we're looking at we're looking at using small inexpensive individual hot water tanks in each unit so that's one way of doing it we looked at looking at commercial hot water systems and they just they're out of whack in terms of the cost but again i think with ordinances such as this and pushing this forward i think all those costs are going to just continue to come down because the improvements we've seen over the last decade are amazing so i i truly support this and hope you vote yes for it thank you thank you very much still continuing in person hi i'm paul engels south brungton resident also a planning commissioner and i just wanted to share the latest information from the inflation reduction act about heat pumps heat pumps for heating if your household income is 80 percent below your area areas medium income medium income you receive the maximum rebate covering your new heat pump at a hundred percent up to eight thousand dollars if your household income is 81 to 150 percent of your area's median income you'll receive up to 50 percent of the heat pumps cost if your household income exceeds 150 percent of your area's median median income you receive a 30 tax increase up to two thousand dollars a new heat pumps the rebates are significant for low income homeowners according to home advisor heat pumps cost an average of five thousand seven hundred ninety two dollars in most cases low income households will get a new heat pump for free heat pumps for hot water the act also provides a rebate of up to seven one thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars for heat pump water heaters induction stoves dryers there's also a rebate of up to eight hundred and forty dollars to offset the cost of heat pump clothes dryers or an electric stove including induction ranges how to get a heat pump rebate state governments will execute their rebates the department of energy will likely issue guidelines to the states in late 2022 the heat pump rebates will apply to equipment purchased after january 1st 2023 thanks thank you and we are still in person is there one more person here hi my name is james do for i'm del developer in uh bernoynton and it's the first time i've ever talked at a city council meeting ever welcome uh do for d u f where you are so i've heard a lot of pro uh heat pump and pro legislation comments and i agree with almost all of them the only things i hear negative are from developers who think that uh electrification costs money um and uh i i think if i look at my pro farms i live in all those spreadsheets i don't look they've been a world of anecdotal data so i i tell the historians not to i want to just prevent slideshows and things like that but if you can develop in a world where lumber prices go from 300 to 1400 dollars to square like a hundred linear feet and we're interested in three percent to six percent the challenge of electrification isn't that big i mean it takes more time it takes more effort but there's a lot of support in the community there's a lot of support from energy monitors from developers uh i mean it's real it takes time it takes more effort but it's not something that is something we should avoid i mean there's a lot of challenges developing in vermont there's act 250 there's permits there's zoning approvals etc etc but this seems like something that's really worth it um and part of what we're really talking right now because i skipped uh putting my kid to bed to come here to this meeting and we pay for things now but we can have a better future and that's what this legislation is it's uh it's making these a little more challenging right now so that in 40 years from now we have slightly less extreme weather events but hopefully pioneering the way in vermont thank you thank you all right i think that draws to a close our public comments and i wish to really thank everyone who came out this was a really uh very informative um um hearing and i i especially appreciate um the the specifics that were brought forward very very helpful in terms of people's experience both as residents and as professionals in in the industry so i am just very grateful to you all um i think we need to have a motion to come out of the public hearing so moved second and all in favor i that's unanimous and again just to reiterate what our city manager said before um we will continue we now have a time for us to actually ask our staff to follow up on some things um so that's the next agenda item and so just for all of you who have come out um this will lead to a second hearing and then we will have a final decision at that point but let us move on to the next agenda item where we could provide staff some direction based on our preparation for tonight's meeting as well as the comments that we just heard so um in linked to the previous agenda item on the public hearing is our revised draft ordinance with language that at a minimum we are recommending based on our conversations prior to this public hearing um i know uh counselor really also wanted to have the opportunity to watch this public hearing and be part of the discussion so if there's additional comments um the council would like us to integrate into the next draft to bring back to you we certainly can hear those tonight we can also put this on your agenda for your next meeting to have a more full conversation if you wish council member yes councillor chitin and senator chitin in the interest in the interest of time and how late it is and since you're really just looking for general thoughts i just wanted to state the following in a small request of staff similar to how it was warned here and just to start off i want to state clearly i support enacting the same regulation that burlington put in place requiring renewable primary heating sources for new construction it makes a lot of sense and i'm very close to supporting the language on hot water heaters i the testimony tonight from amy dimetritz from champlain housing trust eric snider with snider properties was compelling for me and i hope for us to consider a temporary time limited waiver for hot water heaters for just multifamily housing units the written testimony from bgs also spoke to the same concern raised by those both for large commercial buildings with multifamily housing units the other written testimony from ever north eric hotra redstone and cindy reed from cathedral scale also raised enough concern for me on the availability today a current electric hot water solutions electric hot water solutions that will work for large commercial buildings and multifamily buildings and john basonja's very thoughtful testimony already highlighted how cambrian rise of other new net zero buildings still have natural gas water heaters because the technology just isn't there yet hasn't been for large-scale hot water heating but i'm optimistic that the technology will get there i just don't want to delay or fort sensible development with relatively new relatively very efficient hot water heating using gas lines that could be used in the future for more renewable sources so for those reasons this is my ask to the uh to staff and since helens not here i'd love to have language that could be considered as either an amendment or as something that could be added to this ordinance for our next discussion to see language that would have a time limited limited a sunsetted waiver so we would add a waiver for hot water heaters just hot water heaters for two years from new multifamily complexes and large complex buildings at the end of two years that waiver would go away that would give enough time i think for the shampoam housing trust as well as developers as well as for the technology to get to where it needs to be and that matches with the amount of time why burlington din adopted when it was and i think that would also give enough flexibility so my ask of staff and i don't i don't know if we need a vote on it and if you want me to draft it myself jesse i will uh but i'd love for the future meeting to just consider language that would allow for a waiver that would expire after two years on just hot water heaters for large commercial complexes and multifamily units that'll be done yeah i think that's a reasonable request and i i share your sentiments i i would say that i'm very much where you are tom if people could just not all take showers at the same time in the morning that'd be great maybe we need a phone app to schedule showers for everybody mine says mine's at seven oh two you have to be in and out when i'm just kidding i take nighttime shower i'm not going to get into people's personal shower schedules right now but i share a counselor chitin and council memories concerns about the effects of the hot water part of the ordinance this is separate ordinance right and i would like to explore that further and i'd like to get more information about the cost differences you know on new construction for a domestic gas fired water hot water system versus um what i would assume is a technology that's not quite there for the whole building but as we heard from somebody in the public hearing you know there there it is possible to put in a small hybrid heat pump water heater for every unit that would then you know give its own hot water so i think there are alternatives but i i have no doubt that um non-profit um you know organizations are have a greater challenge right in in terms of financing and the costs regarding uh heat you know hybrid heat pumps and and how it would service the building because i mean it's one thing to say you could do it is another thing is what the service would actually be for everybody taking a shower at the same time and i know that from my discussions with eric ferrell on the camry and rise that they of course they they used gas for the hot water system but they also used gas to preheat the air in the heat exchange system as well because they they didn't have an alternative at that time when they built so maybe that exists now i'd just like to know what those technologies are and and and how how viable or ready they are for implementation on new construction that we might see in the next you know year or two and some it might be a good source of information because at their um in their testimony at one of our last meetings um it was stated that the new structure that they're building here in south brillington that it's all electric for the heating and cooling for heating and cooling but i don't remember what they said for hot water not for hot water for heating and cooling and for stoves yeah and they said it was all split systems on the roof yes yeah so that would anything else from councillor chitin i guess okay yeah no i i really think that tom hit it on the head