i think it says that the city council calls for the adoption of policies procedures and any of all necessary measures to effectuate the policy of the city of burnington which is that officers who have been found to have used brittle and i want to add unnecessary brutal and unnecessary exercise force to be terminated because i think that makes a big distinction brittle force police officers have the right to do to do it sometimes but when it's not necessary i think that's what we're talking about here right i would like to add after brutal unnecessary and anybody who would like to second it so councillor jang you have uh did you your amendment is to delete no my amendment is to add line 31 after brutal at the word unnecessary after the word brutal in line 31 okay is there a second to that motion seconded by councillor hanson discussion on the motion hearing none all those in favor of that amendment please say aye any opposed no can we show use of hand please show of hands all those in favor of the amendment please raise your hands but one two three four five six seven eight those opposed looks like it passes eight three okay so that amendment has passed thank you and i'll set councillor jang all right thank you so i think we anybody councillor paul thank you very much president right um so i've tried to listen to what all of my colleagues have to say about this resolution and i i i just want to offer perhaps maybe in closing that um you know i don't think that voting no on this resolution means that you don't respect uh community members um and that you don't uh respect uh the recent events that have happened and responding to those events um i don't think that voting no on this resolution means that you don't respect the need to evaluate procedures um and as others have said to have the conversation in fact i think we need to have the conversation um but this resolution to me isn't really about asking for the conversation um i feel as though the resolve clauses are very broad and again not about having the conversation but they're more declaratory um and um uh i don't think that i think that some of the aspects of the of the resolution are um uh you know anti-union um and i don't think that they're indicative really of community building um and i don't think that that has to be the case um you know the resolution that we're going to be voting on after this one i think really is about collaboration and respectfulness and solving our challenges together um and i think that more so than maybe any other issue that we have faced that we have faced since i've been on the city council that we need a solution where all members of the community are being heard in a collaborative way and not in a uh uh not through a resolution that is very declaratory so um i can't support this resolution and i agree with a lot of what a lot of people have said tonight i won't repeat it um but uh i hope that we can move forward in a more collaborative way um and uh maybe also take some of the issues that have been mentioned in the resolve clauses in this resolution and work through them in in the committee that i hope we will pass in the resolution that we'll be voting on after so thank you very much thank you councillor paul my apologies councillor hanson i i missed you before councillor hanson that's okay thank you president right um so just a couple of things to respond to um in terms of the negotiations i sort of got this before but this is about it's not about preempting negotiations it's about directing our side meaning the city side of the negotiation so it's still a two-way negotiation as always but this is to direct our side of that negotiation um and again we vetted this thoroughly with with the attorney's office um to make sure that that was the case um but just to speak more broadly about this this is as has been mentioned is about responding from calls from our community there was a community meeting about a month ago where over probably over a hundred people packed into a church and discussed their extremely serious concerns and experiences i was the only councillor in attendance to be able to hear that and to be able to truly feel that energy in the room and in hear those stories and hear what people live with every day as people of color in this community interacting with the police department and this has been for my whole life i've i've been treated fine by police for my whole life but consistently from when i was a little kid all the way through till now the people of color in my life my friends and people that i know consistently consistently have raised their experiences and i've seen the way that we get treated differently uh by police officers and so this is responding to that real pain and hurt that exists for many people in our community who who came up together around these demands who which hundreds of people have signed um and in terms of the the shrinking of the force this is it's not in a vacuum it's a broader discussion first of all we're above the the national average for the ratio of police officers to citizens which folks are saying that we have a safe community for the most part i think we are safer than many other places and so i don't think we need to be above that national average but it's a broader cultural shift around how do we move towards a society that requires less police force and that's that requires a multifaceted approach creating opportunities uplifting people i've seen communities where there is virtually no police presence um they're typically communities where everyone is doing well economically strong community connections strong education systems so this is about thriving to reach that point over time and it's it and it's a broader shift in in the way we live as a community so that's what that this is about striving towards so the reason that i didn't second that amendment um by councillor jang is because i feel that that piece is fundamental but i do think it's it's very telling that folks who raised that concern didn't second that amendment what what does that what does that say that says that they're not interested in trying to respond and collaborate to these things and move this forward because otherwise i don't see why you wouldn't second something that you have already expressed support for so i just want to raise that and i i think it's it's very telling as we go into this vote point of order point of order councillor shannon what is your point of order i believe it's inappropriate to impugn the intentions of fellow city councillors and that's one of our council rules that is indeed uh and i would urge you should not be impugning other councillors motivations or you know for for any reason that they are voting so my apologies all right thank you councillor hansen else that council roof just on that last point um i did not second that motion because quite frankly i think it is the essence of what you're attempting to do here and i respect that i really do i disagree with it i think that the resolution is is is not no disrespect but not well thought out um and and so i didn't second it because i think that's what you're trying to do i don't agree with it but i'm not going to rip that from a resolution and then vote against it so i think if we if we move away from thinking about what our intentions are and just assume that we're all good faith actors here we can move along a little bit quickly thank you councillor mr mayor thank you president rate appreciate the opportunity to share if you thought um wait can i have a point of order please i'm sorry that that was the same thing that we discussed no a point of order is only about something being out of order it's not just to get the floor back what is your point of order exactly i mean this was the same thing that that we just discussed assuming the intentions you said you assumed that this was the intent that the intention was this was the essence that it was not well thought out i i'm sorry i'm going to have to rule your point of order out of order councillor hanson i don't believe councillor roof was impugning your motivations on your vote i i i'm going to rule that out of order mr mayor thanks president right i appreciate the opportunity to share share a few thoughts on this uh resolution which um i find highly problematic uh for for numerous reasons and i'm not going to repeat all the reasons that have been articulated by colleagues uh in detail i certainly share the uh belief that the resolution is as guided in its suggestion that the work of officers can be uh substituted by social workers i think it is redundant with many policies that already exist within the department um i think it is shows in numerous um parts the resolution a lack of understanding of the way in which policing works and the way in which uh certain technology the police work with works including body cameras the way in which that section is written um but really i just want to what the problem i i want to focus on which i don't think has been raised yet is that i think this resolution um by naming individual officers it is really highly problematic and um cuts against the uh really i think very important concept of due process for city employees who are doing the work of the people of burlington doing the work for this council and uh for the administration and have um an expectation uh that uh disciplinary matters are going to be handled in a fair and orderly way and you know in two of the cases we're talking about um uh officers who have had uh did their due process administered already and essentially this is being re-raised and in the third case you know the fact i find this section of the resolution pretty remarkable it says that whereas body camera footage calls into question uh officer corrie cambell's compliance with departmental directives how would the sponsors of this resolution know that the body camera footage calls into question um whether officer cambell complied with departmental directives when this very council uh refused to go into an executive session and actually view the body camera footage um being discussed here it is purely speculative um this assertion and i think really shows the uh uh sloppiness with which this has been constructed and you know if you're an officer sitting in this room what must you be thinking right now when you see a resolution like this come for before the council if any officer's good name can be dragged forward without due process you know what does that say about serving this city what what what must other city employees who would be concerned about being named uh because for some political reason um there uh you know they've come into the focus of the city council it's just not right it's not the way to treat our employees certainly not our officers men and women who put their lives on the line for this community day in and day out um we are fortunate here's the bottom line in this um we are very fortunate to have a great police department we have a great police department because of decades of strong leadership um uh we have uh i think clearly gotten even better in recent years under the leadership of uh chief del pozo specifically and demonstrably in the areas of concern that are being raised by this resolution we have better use of force policies and practices today than we did three years ago we have uh made substantial strides with respect to a wide variety of race and policing issues um this chief has been willing to impose discipline in circumstances where we would not have seen it happen before um we are fortunate to have a hundred sworn officers approximately committed men and women who are willing to put their lives on the line and do things to keep us safe that that few of us would be willing to do and they're willing to do that um uh in changing ways over time and do different things uh in their practicing of policing than officers of the past have have been asked to do we asked more of our police officers today than we have ever asked of sworn officers and they have been willing to to to respond to that now no one is suggesting certainly not me uh not our chief not our bpoa uh that everything is done perfectly and that no change is needed um you know when these when this discussion first began i came right out in that first meeting and said let's work together to um respond to these events that have happened recently in a way that makes our police department better that brings our community together that addresses um issues that need to be addressed that addresses policies that need to be addressed we do need different ways of managing um the release of information much of the it was too long that this footage was not released and we need we need and if we had protocols and something written down on that uh we would be uh in a um you know different place and that is one of a number of areas we can improve and that's why i've supported a new resolution and why i've said let's put resources behind it and and let's do a good job with this which is not the what's the next resolution does but this resolution is not the way to improve the department it is uh in fact maybe not intentionally would actually undermine the department were to pass and i strongly encourage the council to vote it down soundly thank you mr mayor um so we're going to have a brief comment from councillor tracy and councillor jane and then i think we're i'm going to make i'm going to make a brief comment because i wanted to pass the gavel and i was not able to because everyone wanted to speak so i'm going to make a couple comments then we're going to vote councillor tracy so i just want to say that that the whereas clause regarding the specific officers says that it calls into question so it doesn't actually make an accusation it calls into question and i think that that that it clearly does call these that that at least in the two cases that we've seen and then the one case that's currently invest that's being investigated that there are questions and therefore it that that one that we haven't seen but it is nevertheless under investigation has been called into question so i think that that either way that the resolution is written in a way that's very carefully worded again through our our consultant our consultation with the city attorney to make sure that we are respecting due process and that we are also under and are also you know recognizing that there is an ongoing investigation in that particular case but the fact that there's an ongoing investigation seems to be calling that into question so i think that that that's that's a fair resolve clause second i would also say that i think that this pot that the speech that we just heard reflects a defensive posture and one that does not necessarily take responsibility and accountability for the for the actions that were taken and more over i think that it's it's important that we recognize that we don't want to that that that we're trying to to deflect this while also saying that it's that it's and that it's not okay to call into question these things but it is okay to call into question a medical examiner's finding behind the scenes try to have that medical examiner find examiner's finding changed even though we may or we did not have necessarily a a professional qualification as a medical examiner to make such a determination and went be went to the state to actually have that done so i don't understand why doing something calling something into question in public is somehow worse than the private very untransparent and i think unethical actions taken by this administration when it comes to this this particular issue so i think that that the resolution is very much in bounds whereas the mayor's actions were not thank you council tracy brief comment from council very brief and i just wanted to echo what max tracy said i cannot sit here mr mayor and hearing you talking this way because if we got here debating whether or not we need more social worker than police officers whether or not the police officers need to wear their body cameras or whether or not we need to terminate some of them i think it's because of you because eight months point of order he's talking about point of order by councillor mason what is your point of order it appears the current speaker speaking directly to the mayor in response to his comments my understanding was comments were directed through the council president yes your point of order is well taken councillor mason councillor jane please do not direct comments at other councillors or the mayor but through the council president thank you and uh mr president if we are here debating this embarrassing ourselves i think it's because of the administration right and i cannot be here sitting here and hearing what people are saying without we without addressing it it is wrong we should not do it this way we embarrassing ourselves and six eight months ago i am pretty sure if this issue came to us forward we would not be here today we could have solved it and move on thank you thank you councillor jane and we councillor freeman for a very brief remark thank you president right i just wanted to say that briefly it's it's hard for me to speak on this topic so i apologize it feels emotionally charged in a lot of ways i i just in some ways some of the the conversation that we've heard the debate that we heard um as someone who has experienced violence in my personal life domestic violence um we know that the root causes of violence um come from things like sexism and patriarchy and racism and white supremacy um in a in a history of economics and social and political sorry it's hard for me to speak about this um generational oppression and i just fear that we continue to view this aspect and so many other aspects of violence um in our culture and in our community um with this mentality which we often have around a lot of issues um which is that we believe that we can change without changing um and i just don't think we can and i just really want and personal violence is different and domestic violence is different than state violence but i would i would say without really having experienced that personally and living in fear of that it it is an incredibly terrifying thing to experience um and i do appreciate um councillors bringing up the fact that these incidents has resulted in very serious harm um brain injuries so i appreciate it i appreciate the community's attention to this um it is it is complicated but i hope we can move forward with um with the idea of really thinking about what a culture of violence means and what what it would mean to actually change that and what it would mean to actually challenge um white supremacy and and and sexism and ableism and um so many toxic elements of violence um and discrimination in our culture thank you thank you councillor Freeman and now i'm going to conclude with a couple of remarks because i tried to pass the gavel and uh i wasn't able to because everybody wanted to speak understandably so i'm going to conclude with just a few a couple brief remarks i'm opposing this resolution i appreciate the intent of it i think the intentions were good but and i'm not going to go through all the points that have been made because everybody's made them but i do want to make clear um we heard from a social worker with the police department tonight jackie corbelie and she made clear as a social worker um that she is not equipped to deal with what brought to police officers have to deal with i and other councillors worked hard to actually add police officers to the police force over the last two or three or four years and those police officers are extremely important when we think about the issues that the bro and to police department deals with there was a shooting and a murder on on north willard street just recently there the incredible number of incidents that they have to deal with from small ones to huge ones a million of them as we heard over the last few years these incidents are serious they need to be addressed and reviewed and they will be but i'm not going to be part of an effort that ends up unintentionally but demoralizing the men and women of our police department i had police officers tonight before this meeting other venues who told me you have no idea what the bro and to police are thinking right now in regard to what they're hearing from some citizens and what they feel from some city councillors as well so i am going to i not even completely sold on the next resolution but i am certainly not going to go what i think is go backwards i think we need police on the street there are mistakes that are made there have been some mistakes that have been made they need to be reviewed but i think our police department doesn't do just a little bit better than some of the worst departments in this in the country they do a lot better and it's a it's a very good police department and the vast vast majority of the men and women of our bro and to police department are out there trying to do good work and i do not want them to feel demonized and demoralized by us with that with the clerk's office please call the roll councillor bushar no councillor hanson councillor jang no i'm sorry councillor paulino no councillor freeman councillor mason no councillor paul no councillor pine no councillor ruth no councillor shannon no councillor tracy yes did he council president right no three eyes nine nays that resolution fails by a vote of nine to three we'll move on now to item six point oh seven and that is a resolution uh another resolution on this issue sponsored by a number of councillors and i think councillor ruth is going to move this i will thank you president right i move that we waive the reading and adopt the resolution note that i'm moving the revised version that's on board docs i've had both a redlined and a clean version be posted for everyone's clarity and president right after a second i asked for the floor back for some brief comments seconded by councillor paul councillor ruth you have the floor back thank you president right um in recent months the brongton community bank became aware as we all know uh of several incidents that uh were uh that included bpd officers that use physical force in the course of conducting their duty these actions which resulted in both real bodily harm and community trauma became highly publicized and discussed and have understandably resulted in an erosion of trust between this community our community and this government this is a reality and we cannot forget this reality as we discuss and address this important issue also last year last year alone our brongton police officers had upward of 30 000 police interactions with the public that over 80 per day on average they these dedicated officers they responded to an unimaginable range of incidents including everything from basic quality of life calls for service to the stuff of nightmares including acts of violence sexual assault murder and more so and more so overdoses our police are also part of this community and day in and day out these community members are putting their lives at risk in name in the name of protecting us this much like i said before is also a reality and we should not forget this reality as we address and discuss this important issue resolution in front of us tonight president right recognizes both of these realities it's not a resolution that's anti-cop nor is it a resolution that uh with an effort to brush real issues under the rug instead this resolution is pro trust it offers a thoughtful inclusive excuse me sensible and well resource process that no fair minded member of our community should fear i say this a lot um and while things around this table do get heated and emotional that's okay it's part of our process it's how our democracy is designed no reason to get upset about it i remain confident even still that there is far more that unites us around this issue than divides us and a commitment to that unity is what will bring us forward now quickly on to the substance of the resolution president right without going line by line last meeting i issued a statement pledging a resolution to accomplish three goals the resolution that's in front of us tonight does the following first it creates a special working committee representative of the community it accomplishes accomplishes this by empowering a membership drawing from the city council administration the police commission are local communities of color various service providers the lgbt community the activist community the burlington police officers association and a sworn police officer second this resolution charges the committee with clear directives while creating an environment that is open to the public and transparent in its work the special committee will lead a community wide review of burlington's policing policies and oversight practices which will result in policy change recommendations that come to this that comes to this council its purview will include reviewing citizen oversight structures the use of force policy officer training police information disclosure practices disciplinary processes officer wellness initiatives as well as data collection practices it will also be transparent and the committee will be subject to an operate under the vermont open meeting law lastly and importantly the resolution commits sufficient resources to empower this committee's work we're making up to fifty thousand dollars available to it to conduct its important goals to meet its important goals president right this this resolution from my perspective delivers on these pledges constructing this resolution was complex and laborious and it represents the collaboration of counselors across this table as well as stakeholders across the community i think everyone involved let's get to work thank you council roof discussion on the resolution council jeng i think we should have get to work eight months ago it's already too late to hear and also this resolution failed to bring the facts about why we're here and i also think that the and i also think that the the composition of the community special committee is too vague is too big there is no substance and president right if you don't mind i want it to if it's possible to call john murray and ask him a couple of questions if it's okay deputy john murray or who could you repeat who you want to call up john murray right sorry sure he wants to or the chief anybody can i have same question you can ask yeah we're not gonna whole series of questions but you can ask the question thank you sir thank you for being here and i just wanted to know if you looked at this resolution and also from your perspectives does this resolution has any legitimacy in looking into your policies i have looked at the resolution i think that a resolution that incorporates as much input as possible from both our neighbors experts who understand what policing entails and the ways in which officers are trained and the realities of the use of force and does not deal in issues of whether or not there are alternatives that have not necessarily been shown to work is a potential source of good policy i think that the department as the chief has said already trains in ways that are cutting edge and are ahead of the rest of the nation are professional leaders for both de-escalation and for use of force and the policy which was written under a previous chief and has not been updated as recently as the training regime has been updated could use a revisit incorporating neighbor input into that revisit incorporating city council input into that visit that revisit and seeking to make sure that it is in keeping with the the community's needs is is positive i think that's what council member roofs resolution entails as i read it okay so lastly council president is do you think this is necessary let me finish do you think it's necessary by the fact that it is your role as police officers to update those policies and procedures do you think it it's not even better for you the police officers the administration to update it first and bring it to a committee and say this is what we worked on and we want you to we want to know what you think but instead of doing it with them what approach do you think is better chief mirad doesn't speak to the policy decisions of the burlington police department the chief of police does chief did you have a response to council jane did you repeat the question please council dang my question deputy chief is clear it is about the process of this the process what i want to know is do you think it's better as your role as police officers to make those updates that you were supposed to do years ago and then bring it to this committee that the council would like to form and say what do you think or do you think it's better to just update those policies with them okay so the first answer to the let me finish yes please and if it that's in if it's the case do you think that those community members have the knowledge and expertise in working with you around implementing creating new policies so the first answer to that question is that there is no specific reason to think that there was some urgent need to redo these policies years ago there's sufficient policies that talk about de-escalation that talk about the use of verbal commands the respect for human life the need for minimum force and the constitutional standards of the use of force there's an opportunity here however because use of force involves the community and it's important to have community legitimacy to have the community participate in the formulation of a use of force policy that there can be a product of community work and police work so we can say that we created this together and we live under it together is it possible for us to make an excellent policy by ourselves yes it is we'd make one of the best policies in the united states if we did it ourselves but it would not be a policy that was a product of the people and part of legitimacy and trust is developing products with the help of the people and that's one of the reasons we propose to do this with the people counselor thank you president thank you councillor jane other city councillors councillor is anybody else before we go back to council roof councillor shannon thank you i i really want to thank councillor roof for all of his work on this and i disagree with the idea that this is somehow too late i think it's timely i think that it's never too late to try and improve on what we do in the city and what i really like about this is i think that it is truly reflective of the concept of community policing the idea that the police really cannot do this on their own it requires the trust and confidence and participation of the community and it is it is a large large committee i would acknowledge that and i would also say that i was initially concerned about the size of the committee but i think we all have some examples of committees like that right now that are working very very well for us by really trying to bring everybody to the table and i am particularly grateful that we have the kind of police force and the kind of police chief that is actually open to this kind of input from the community and takes that input seriously so thank you very much to the chief and also to our police officers and i just want to say that i am actually very proud of the police force that we have and very grateful every time that i call you when you come to my door with the professionalism you always have have shown in those situations and that's not to say that mistakes aren't made and that there's not room for improvement because we do know that there is but in that process i don't want our police department to feel that we do not appreciate the work that that you do the dangers that you face every day on our behalf and how much gratitude there is in the community for your services so thank you thank you councillor shan and councillor pine and then councillor busher thank you mr president the the process to get here where we are tonight has been a lengthy one and as councillor jang said we could have certainly addressed these issues earlier the truth is we are where we are today and we have to deal with where we are today not where we might wish we were today so i think we have to deal with our existing reality and i'd like to just request that we i think that the committee structure while it being large and it may be challenging to um work with such a large group i think there's there's one um selection here that i think i'd like to see change i'd like to offer an amendment councillor pine what is your amendment line 42 i would like to read two members from the city council community public safety committee to be appointed by the public safety committee chair so councillor pine you are proposing that the council president does not have a role in this to be done by the council the public safety committee chair that's the proposal councillor pine has proposed an amendment is there a second to that seconded by councillor hanson discussion to councillor shannon um with only three members of the public safety committee wouldn't that be a quorum of the public safety committee that would then be appointed to this committee to discuss issues that are you know under that committee i'm not sure that um i i'm interested to hear how the discussion goes but um i think i might be a little bit more open to appointing one member that way and maybe one from the general body just to suggest an idea at this point and see where the conversation goes thanks others on this on the amendment councillor jane yes um thank you and i think totally agree with your with your point councillor shannon because i think we already elected the members of public safety i think it's their role their responsibility and we here want to do something else to move forward they are the most fit to do it and also the other point about it is also the council president did create it bringing the balance of the party politics party and you look at that committee has democrats has progressive has independent and i think that slate itself need to be all of them they need to be here instead of just two member of them instead of just two people um maybe i'll make an amendment to bring those three but instead of just yeah thank you councillor shane any other councillors councillor roof i'll admit i'm biased on this because i'm the chair of the public safety committee and would make these these appointments um i think that any any of us around this table would would be would be well suited to serve in in this body we've all been uh doodly elected by our constituents and and care about the the work deeply um um i'll i'll speak freely here um if if there's if the intention here from from the maker and i'm asking about intention here so grab me if i go too far is that without support for this amendment uh support for the overall resolution would fall off uh that would greatly inform my vote on this and to the degree that which the the maker and maybe some others would would be comment would comment on that you know maybe a maybe a five-minute recess would help solve this up i'm requesting a five-minute i was looking to the president for recognition there to respond to those questions well councillor roof has requested a five-minute recess yeah let's clean this up in recess so we're going to five-minute recess and i'm and i'm serious that it's going to be five minutes yes we're going to be up against the councillors please take your seats the five minutes is up councillors okay we're moving forward and that means now uh councillor roof you have the floor back um i believe that there there's a motion on on the floor for an amendment and i believe that the maker may want to amend that okay so i will cede my time let me go back to councillor pine then councillor pine yeah with some there was a maybe a question there which i may have missed so if you could repeat it no councillor pine uh the understanding was that you were going to change your amendment okay the amendment is um two members from the city council public safety committee to be appointed by the council president in consultation with the chair of the public safety committee point of point of information um uh councillor roof what is your point of information i believe that then instead of selecting only from the pool of public safety committee i think that would be limiting uh and so a selection with the council president in consultation with committee chair uh with the entire council on the table to to select from i think um would be uh would be something that i would support no councillor pine has the floor uh if that's the i'm willing to go with that if that's a consensus my my approach was my idea was that the public safety committee this is their sort of jurisdiction if you will so the idea was that the committee that has jurisdiction over these issues would be the group that would be from whom the members would be selected but um if the full council then becomes um on the table i guess i'm okay with that i guess okay so councillor pine you are changing the amendment then to say that the president will appoint the two councillors in consultation with the public safety chair okay that amendment is on the floor and uh we have a second we have a we already have a second okay discussion on the amendment councillor jang and let's remember that we are approaching the bewitching hour of 10 30 and uh we should be starting to move forward here councillor jang so i wanted to know why the council president need to consult the public safety chair that is the motion it's on the table the motion on the table is that uh that i will consult with the public safety chair as to who is appointed it's a question about the the motion itself why that's not my motion so i'm not going to address that councillor jang but all the question need to come to you that's why i'm looking at you that's not that i'm not making the motion that's not a question for me council roof i just have a comment that happens to address a question that was made look i think that we're all trying to get to a a good result here and and part of my anxiety around limiting the selection to the public safety committee is that this is going to be a substantial workload and quite frankly with with my work schedule i'm not so sure right now whether or not i would be able to commit to a workload and i'm not sure that other members of the public safety committee may be able to do that i think that a process that involves more options of the full council um that can give an opportunity for folks to say hey look i am ready willing and prepared to serve on this uh and taking into account the the public safety committee um and and what we're what we're looking to to direct is is a fair compromise so i think that is part of why the why we're at where we're at it's a compromise that's what we do around this table or we strive to do and if this can get the majority support i think it's a reasonable course forward thank you council roof and i just want to make an editorial comment here do we do we really want to get bogged down here as we hit 10 30 at night on this one issue out of this resolution is that what we want to show to the public so i hope that we can vote on this and vote right away councillor hanson had his hand up first thank you um i think what's what's important with this and what i would really want to see because i am generally supportive of this uh resolution and i would like to support it um i think what is critical for me it's clear from the last discussion on the last resolution that there's quite a wide variety of perspectives around the city council table uh around issues of policing and i think it would be really important to have different perspectives represented um from from both parties no one else ever accused me of not being fair when i make appointments councillor hanson and that's what i would do if i'm making appointments to anything so and looking at all broad perspectives but we're not going to decide that tonight so well i yeah and i'm not accusing you of that either i guess what i would what i would want to change the amendment would be to just just lay that out um that you know including members of of both parties but if you're making a verbal commitment then that's fine too all right i i do trust you on that thank you councillor hanson councillor paul have your hand up next thank you i'd like to call the question please the question has been called can i just point of order it's 10 32 before we do that that's true it is a point it is the time for rule suspension councillor mason i would make a motion to suspend the rules to complete action on this item 6.07 also take up 608 609 and 610 which are all-time sensitive and and only those and only those matters so the motion has been made to complete the work on this item plus 0809 and 10 is there a second second by councillor shannon this requires a two-thirds vote all those in favor of the motion please say aye any opposed we have suspended the rules and we will go back now there now is a motion on the floor to suspend rule and excuse me there's a motion on the floor to call the question seconded by councillor shannon this i believe also requires a two-thirds vote all those in favor of calling the question please say aye aye any opposed with the question has been called and we will now vote all those in favor of the amendment please say aye aye any opposed no councillor shannon the vote is 11 to 1 and the resolution has been amended that the council president will make the appointments in consultation with the chair of public safety we are now moving back to the full resolution as it has been amended councillor freeman okay i just i had one other amendment which i've spoken about with a few people with many of you about the composition of the committee which was just to make sure that it was balanced in terms of representing members of the public and individuals with no ties to the institution of the city and then balanced with members who represent the city which includes commissioners the administration the members of the police department and city councillors and so my the amendment it's just to the idea i had was to um on line 14 strike the the two members of the administration and make it one member from the administration and then oh sorry did i do the wrong one oh i'm sorry 43 i'm sorry i was looking at the wrong one line 43 thank you sorry what what is your amendment councillor freeman to um sorry i was like i must have been looking at the wrong version um line 43 to strike two members from the administration to be appointed by the mayor replace that with one member from the administration and where it's online and also online um 59 where it says one member of the burlington community um just have that um be struck and say replace with two members of the burlington community i just i'm sorry councillor freeman i'm having trouble hearing you on that second part i got the first part what's the second part uh line 59 where it says one member of the burlington community with a personal and professional background that would enrich the work of the committee to be selected by a public application and selection process to strike one member and have it say two and that is just to achieve balance i think what we've heard tonight in the debate is um conflict over how much the council can weigh in on aspects of policing the administration i think we also arrive at issues where we find ourselves i don't want us to just it doesn't seem to fit to have the police police themselves and i think having members of the public who are specifically targeted by safe violence to be uh have an equal voice um and be equal stakeholders and have that be part of the composition of this committee that would be something yeah that's why i'm making this motion okay councillor freeman has a amendment on the floor which essentially reduces the administration down to one rather than two members and the community members to go up by one essentially with the lines that she's mentioned is there a second to this amendment councillor tracy seconds it councillor shannon um i don't think there's one right answer in terms of the makeup at this committee and i think we could spend all night making adjustments to it but councillor ruf has i believe contract contacted every member of the council made many concessions to each person who had suggestions was very open to suggestions in the process uh there has been a long long lead up to tonight in in developing something that it seemed that most people could support and for that reason and not because i really have a strong feeling one way or the other about the proposed amendment i will not be supporting this amendment and it will not be supporting other amendments that may come forward um changing the uh the makeup of this committee at this point because it's like i said there's not one right answer so we've had this discussion already we've kind of done the best we can and it's not time to make sausage on the floor of the city council 1040 tonight thank you councillor shannon others on the amendment any other councillor ruf uh of this of this state that um i actually wouldn't be object i wouldn't object to to make i don't mind making sausage on the floor um my my issue with this actually is just given the the gravity of of the topic that we've been talking about here um people beyond just this table have been involved in developing this process and you know 60 or 70 hours over the last month has gone into communicating with not just councillors but with many many others and uh well this may feel like a a small tweak that i'm not objectively against i think that a week where or more would have would have helped bring other people along who really do feel a sense of ownership over over this resolution which is intentional because we know that if this process is going to be successful we need to have more than just us around this table and in this room feeling ownership over this process and so it's with that uh that i'll be uh voting no on this amendment thank you thank you councillor ruf anyone else who needs to speak are we ready to vote we're ready to vote all those in favor of the amendment please say aye i think we're going to need to show our hands all please raise your hands if you support the amendment four and those opposed raise your hands the amendment fails by a vote of eight to four we are back to the resolution itself anyone else need to speak on the resolution councillor tracy so i will be supporting this resolution um i do think that we we need it to continue the conversation i'm disappointed that the other resolution failed as i did not think that it precluded us from having this conversation but i do think that there are a number of issues laid out in this resolution that that demand conversation and i see the task force as being part of that conversation uh one thing that i would like to say is that i want us to to really commit to and i what i would hope that we would commit to is that that we not see this resolution or this task force is the only thing that we do or the singular thing that we do i'm not looking at this right at this as an opportunity to sort of to sort of uh to to basically be done with the issue to check the box and say okay we dealt with this issue now we can move on we'll have the committee deal with it and then in november we'll deal with it again i think that there may be other steps that we need to take uh and i want us to be open to those and i hope that we don't use this task force as a way to prevent us from having other conversations around these issues um because we need to recognize the complexity of them and that while this wreck resolution deals with certain elements um of of uh race uh in anti-racism and the work that needs to take place as well as police accountability that there are other that there are other aspects that in our community that we need to address as well and so i hope that we can commit to doing that too and are open to thinking about ways that we might do that thank you councillor tracy any other councillor councillor jen yeah um so i think this resolution is problematic in many different facets and before i outline those i think to councillor shenan's point as to yes we've been working this adam roof since i've nine months ago or something there is not a city council at least myself that that i did not propose what i would want to see towards this but none of them almost are included none of them you know and i think it's also very problematic the fact that we're taking fifty thousand dollars to give to this committee for what to hire an extra party a third party to do this work sometimes i don't know how we think how we operate the police has their budget they need a third party they can go get one bring us policies we want to see and the public safety itself and the commission can work around and move forward right i will not be voting for this resolution thank you thank you councillor jane councillor roof one of the most foundational points of agreement around this process was that the police should not be the one steering the ship alone and so it was intentional to not have the police on their own develop policies and issue them to committee it was not um it was not a matter of agreement of asking the budget of the police department to be used to go select their third party uh consultant so no you're you're you're the there are some comments that are correct not every request to make the resolution was added that's the nature of building policy if every single request was included we would have an unwieldy and unsensible resolution in front of us i just want to also note that we are looking at the revised version which does have 30 or so lines of whereas clauses to give the context i heard that late in the game here lost 24 hours that people wanted to see whereas clauses from my perspective the context was self-evident we've been talking about this for a month around this table and through our community i was intentional on my part to get right to business right to the resolve clauses so we could like i said before get to work but there was a request that came in to have whereas clauses and context added it's been added in hope to to earn additional support thanks thank you councillor ruff are we ready to vote i think we are would the clerk please call the roll councillor bushor yes councillor hanson yes councillor jang no councillor paulino yes yes councillor freeman councillor mason yes councillor paul yes councillor pine yes councillor ruff yes councillor shannon yes councillor tracy yes city council president right yes 11 eyes one resolution passes by a vote of 11 to 1 i would also like to thank everybody for their work on this but i also would like to note we have a number of police commissioners here in the audience and i'd like to thank you for your service on the police commission and thank you for sitting here through this long evening on this important issue but we appreciate very much your service along with every man and woman in the police department with that we will move back to item 6.08 um and this is was item consent agenda item 5.18 it's communication from chapelle spencer director uh dpw and norm baldwin good evening thank you for the time we will give you the speed round presentation chapelle spencer director of public works joined by norm baldwin city engineer we have susan malzen senior engineer and also jonathan rose with uh dunke hill saunders so we're here to talk about the champlain parkway the cooperative agreement amendment this item and the contract amendment the next item uh i gave you all a update on the champlain parkway project in your last packet in may of may 20th so i will skip over all those updates and hit two new milestones that we have progressed since that last update number one this project has cleared right of way clearance on may 23rd 2019 and last week we cleared all utility agreements two weeks ago uh cleared all utility agreements on this project uh for those who don't know uh you can get more information on the champlain parkway at champlain parkway dot com i'm going to turn it over to norm to discuss the two approvals that we are seeking tonight and we have some additional slides should questions pertain uh to uh more information so the so there's two pieces to what we've asked for this evening one is the amendment to the cooper agreement which basically is accepting norm pulled sorry thank you two pieces of this puzzle the cooperative agreement that uh that captures the authorizations to accept the state cooperative agreement mending the cooperative agreement to add thirty one million eight hundred twenty thousand dollars to the cooperative agreement itself bringing us to forty four million five hundred and seventy thousand dollars of that will bring us to the end of the completion of the project itself so that's the first piece and the second piece is there is continuing work to design and permit the project to our consultants cha and the exact dollar amounts are in the uh request uh adding four and fifty thousand nine hundred seventy six dollars and eleven cents to their contract as well we are at very close to the end of both the cooperative agreement balance and also the contract itself would cha as a designer so we're asking to those two elements for us to continue in our timely efforts to complete this project president right has sort of removed so i'm temporarily taking over um are there any questions for either mr spencer um counselor shan and then counselor tracy um thank you one of the questions which is not directly related to um your specific request but related to the parkway um and something that i have been hearing from constituents about is can you just review for us what the um bike and pedestrian access will be on the parkway i think that that's been an improvement that has been made but there's some confusion about that so if you can highlight that for members of the public i'd appreciate it sure happy to uh this is the southern end of the parkway here this is shelburn road and it curls around home avenue flint avenue and then this is lakeside avenue so along the parkway there will be a shared use path here that connects uh to pine street in addition there's a shared use path on the south side of the parkway that follows the parkway here and then from home avenue there's a shared use path that stretches all the way up here and up to uh kilburn street in downtown where it will be connected with bike lanes to maple street so uh there's over a mile and a half of shared use path there are new sidewalks installed new crosswalks new pedestrian signal crossings uh along the project corridor we are doing elevated raised intersections brick pavers uh this will be uh a big step forward for bike and pedestrian accommodation as well as vehicle accommodation yes go ahead council chair you say there are new it's a shared use path and i think the shared use path is on the maltex building side of the um parkway correct that is correct in that section of the project yes and there are new sidewalks does that mean that across the street there will be new sidewalks there that is correct um and can you tell us why um why you decided on a shared use path rather than sidewalk and bike lanes or something like that a configuration like that did it have to do with the space in the right of way or i'm looking over at uh city engineer bald one is uh ultimately the shared use path design uh predated my tenure at public works much of the city has predated my involvement direct involvement as well but my understanding is closer closer okay so um without question there's a lot of pedestrian and bike facilities some of which need to be separated from the roadway itself and the intent of the time was to accommodate both in this one facility it's a tight space all right thank you councilor tracy so one issue that was raised in the public uh forum tonight was about the eis and the age of the eis um and so can you speak to that piece of the the this this particular request and why another and i'm going to say eis environmental impact study why that was done then and then if you feel that it's still valid even though it was done i think this i'm getting different oh i think o6 or o7 that's what it was so there's been considerable amount of review of the project itself and redesign where where possible without affecting its permitting and so it's had considerable amount of review in the last two to three years there's also it's gone through a significant environmental review through NEPA and federal highway and we've reached the milestone where our consultants have prepared that those documents working with federal highway they're comfortable with where this project's at in those requirements and reviewing all the resource protections needed for a project like this so we're we feel we're prepared and ready to go forward okay and one of the things that's been coming up pretty regularly when we talk about contaminated soils specifically um has been sort of discovering more of them having that contribute to increased cost increased amount of time for projects given that we don't have a more recent uh environmental impact study how are we really going to know know that the figure that we've proposed is enough money to deal with the amount of contamination and that we're actually going to get all of the contamination that's that's present that's a great question we've been spending a significant amount of time and money really characterizing the soils along the corridor itself and we have it down to just segments and blocks of soil conditions within that corridor and where we're impacting for excavation what the soils will look like and how we'll have to manage those we have those characterized in three or four different categories and we actually have volumes and quantities we went further in our analysis supplemental work um along brick street itself in flin avenue when we identified that there were significant environmental issues at the city market site so the state has been working very closely with us to to spend the time spend the money to know precisely you know precisely as you can be where we're at with soil remediation and um I think I think in the end we'll be best served by that so it there's there's one two pieces of that puzzle in terms of risk one is of course delayed to the project in the middle of a project identifying their soils a different amount of soils that you didn't anticipate being managed that then have to be stockpiled or decided upon in this case because we've done a considerable amount of environmental assessment I think we're in good shape there but also just knowing what the city's liability risks are and uh moving forward we've we I think we've attempted to identify those costs in our participating non-participating costs within the project budget and it's reflected in the FY20 budget itself we anticipate total costs will be 3.1 million total with both non-participating in and uh local match obligations which is favorable to the city and that this project is only 2% of the total cost so okay all right um I guess what I would say is that as I've said before I I appreciate all the work that you've done on this this is by no means a questioning of of what your the hard work that you've put into this but what I do feel is that um as I said before when we talked about the eminent domain hearing and the bus trip and all that that we took down there is that I do feel like we're building a road to previous road standards meaning that we're not building it to the most current road standards that really take into account what we're doing elsewhere in the city which is on-road bike facility uh with cycle track and so I think that if we have an opportunity to build a new road or if we're going to be building new roads that we need to do so in a way that builds them to the standards that are really current for 2019 and I don't think that we're building a road that is current to 2019 so for that reason um I'm not going to vote yes but I certainly value both of you and all the work that you do understand um how hard that is um and how much you know how how challenging this process has been I would just thank you just know in that explaining further that we are at great risk of if we pull if we just impact our permitting that we will lose this project in its entirety and and frankly no can you pull the microphone in close everybody use pull the microphone in so and in the balance of things we've we've gained a project that's really going to separate traffic out of neighborhoods and and limit that impact that currently exists today and also provide some real development opportunities that wouldn't be present without the parkway itself so there's a lot of positives to this product there are things that aren't obviously perfect but I think there's an opportunity once this is built to really kind of re-evaluate what we can do to address some of your concerns thank you thank you councillor tracy councillor mason thank you president right norm sort of just stole my speech I mean I I had to sort of follow up I've actually heard through the course of this project there are three impediments and I you know in public forum tonight there were those who still continue to come forward telling us we need to change the design what I've heard repeatedly is there were three no's you know to this project you can't change the design we can't increase the cost and we can't delay the project so my understanding is those are still in existence which I think is important for the public to understand why it is that we are insistent on moving forward with this design and not being responsive to councillor or public demands to modify the design I guess my simple request and I don't it's late the hour's late I don't know that I need it now but it would be beneficial to maybe get a breakdown of the 2.5 million dollars of costs that are being borne I didn't see it in the numbers maybe it's buried somewhere but if you could sort of just I don't know how much of that is contaminated soil versus you know undergrounding the utilities but I think at least for those my constituents in Ward 5 it'd be nice to sort of know get that breakdown so maybe you know tomorrow or at some point thank you great we have that here if you want it but the other piece to your first point about flexibility and fixing things yes we were given those constraints about time cost and quality but we have a future flexibility commitment from v-trans that as the neighborhood changes we can change this project we can add on street parking we can adjust the lanes we can move curb that is in the city's prerogative thank you councillor shannon then councillor pine and councillor jane thank you I just want to note that I think that councilor tracy is right that this road is not being built to 2019 standards but I disagree I don't I don't think it's being built to 2006 standards either and in 2006 we had a real opportunity to make changes and unfortunately at that time there wasn't a lot of interest from the council or the administration to make the changes that I think would have made this project better but from 2006 to to that when it takes you um you know 15 years from your EIS to get to construction there isn't any way that you actually could possibly ever build a road that is of the standard of the current day because it takes you 15 to 20 years from each EIS to get anything done because there have been a few EISs at this point what do we have four maybe three EISs since this project started each one probably having at least a decade of its own to uh you know simmer so I'm not particularly a fan of this road and I never have been but I do appreciate the changes that you have made more recently to really push on the FHA and the other I can't even name all of the different sources of the alphabet that make the decisions about this project but I think that you have really pushed them to the limit to get the changes that will benefit the community today and also as you just said to allow us to make changes after it's built to further enhance this this project and at this point in time I know there are some people coming forward and saying that we can make all of these changes but I think it's very important to note that one of those people is the very person who back in 2006 said we could make no changes so it's time to move forward thank you thank you councillor shannon before I go to the next two in the queue I would like to get this motion on the table councillor mason can you make that motion thank you president right I'd like to make a motion to authorize director of public works or as designee to execute amendment number seven to the cooperative agreement for the shamplain parkway project for final design bidding and construction by increasing the maximum limiting amount by thirty one million eight hundred and twenty dollars and the local match obligation by six hundred and thirty six thousand four hundred dollars subject to the prior review and approval of the city attorney's office do not need the floor back after a second moved by councillor mason seconded by councillor busher and now back to councillor pine then councillor jane it may be in the material but I may have missed it the three point two million that's our local match total that will be our local match total moving forward to completion of the project through completion okay that that includes the two percent local match and also the non-participating costs okay which non-participating costs includes soil remediation and addressing those issues great and that soil remediation number is um is a is an actual it's not an estimate it's an actual we have a contract for that it's an estimate oh it is it's an estimate based on all the volumes that we've assessed in terms of along that corridor all that testing that we've done characterization that's it thank you thank you councillor pine councillor jane it will be very short but I think um to max trace his point again I think if we are a progressive city a city striving for environmental justice I think using standards of the 21st century the most recent should be something that we need to run toward to I have that I think just maybe projects down the road the most recent EIS is would be perfect but my question is this if the Champlain Parkway is completed as it is would there be are there possibilities to connect to the Champlain Parkway and battery park and what will it take what will it require to get there you know what I mean you know battery battery street battery street yes how do you connect battery street to Champlain Parkway for people who live in the new north end I think it will be very beneficial to us yes thanks councillor jane the city thanks to the mayor's leadership back in 2012 initiated the rail yard enterprise project in partnership with the state of Vermont we have done significant planning on that looking at a connection from pine street to battery street that would generally thread the needle between the rail yard and the independent block and we have developed cost estimates will be coming to the council in the coming months to present the findings of that planning effort that project will not be on the same timeline as the parkway it has its own challenges but we are committed to continuing to advance that project as well I am just glad to hear that thank you thank you councillor jane any other councillors we have two more big items left here it's 11 o'clock after 11 councillor busher thank you I just wanted to point out to everyone that you know Riverside Avenue when I got elected was supposed to be done like in the next year and it took 20 years beyond that I've sat as a member of regional planning for projects that are part of Burlington they get fully vetted you think you've got something you're going to move forward remember the slide bridge I told you about and Winooski you know that's probably I don't know how many years out so I think that unfortunately the collective minds come together and then the project takes quite a while before it's accomplished and I think unless there's a different way of doing it we're going to have to live with that reality so that's all thank you thank you councillor busher any other councillors ready to vote all those in favor please say aye aye any opposed no please raise your hands the no votes that passes by a vote of nine to three thank you and next item is 5.09 just I'll let you guys it was introduced before president right I don't think there's anything to add so I'd like to make a motion to authorize the direct republic works or his designee to execute contract amendment number 14 to the club I don't know club harbor and associates contract for engineering design services for the Champlain Parkway project which will increase the total contract amount by 450,976 dollars and 11 cents and the local match obligation by 9,019 dollars 52 cents subject to review and approval by the city attorney's office moved by councillor mason seconded by councillor busher discussion councillor busher yes can you just excuse me can you just give us a brief update on you know there's a laundry list of things and I I did get a chance to talk about that laundry list at the board of finance I was somewhat surprised to see all the items that still needed to be accomplished but then DPW set me straight as to why why these still are a lot of them are in process in progress and some of them were completed all those bulleted items but as far as the appeal process are there any appeals that are outstanding still you're talking about legal challenges to the project yes yes how many could you tell me again speak to that yeah and and in response to that all of these have to be closed and completed before we move forward or no to respond to your first question councillor busher there are two appeals out currently outstanding and both of those have to do with very limited issues related to environmental permits that the project has secured as of now the project holds valid permits for those two issues and can go forward while the appeals are pending and and we're managing risks accordingly as the project proceeds but those those those appeals don't don't affect the project timeline okay thank you very much I appreciate that thank you councillor busher any other councillor hearing none all those in favor of this one number 14 please say aye any opposed that's councillor Tracy any councillor Freeman are you also a no vote so that was two votes uh so it's actually nine to two so that passes by a vote of councillor Hans is not here right now gets by a vote of nine to two uh thank you last item on our agenda five point one zero um trekkler spencer with six point one six point one zero oh six yeah what six point one zero it's after eleven we can take up five point ten that's okay let's not right I have with me uh Rob Goulding public information manager and Nicole Loesch senior transportation planner and Bob Dale representing gotcha we also have Brian and I'm just going to just interject here yep it's almost 10 after 11 right I'm expecting this to move through quickly absolutely so we've responded to concerns we've heard from you all we have a proposal tonight that uh responds to many of the issues we've heard and in your packet is a draft contract I think the most important message here is we've heard substantially more concerns around the e scooters than the e bikes so what you have in front of you is a proposed agreement with gotcha that allows the e bike uh share program to move ahead and uh has the e scooter share program to have to come back to the council for an additional authorization to proceed and the contract allows for us to add additional conditions for any e scooter pilot that the council uh votes to authorize in the future so really this contract has uh an element of advancing the e bike uh share program now and an option for you all to authorize a scooter share in the future thank you director spencer and thank you to some of our regional partners and uh bender from gotcha who is here we're going to be very quick just want to give you a quick overview thank you to the council thank you to chairman tracy of the tuc current members of the tuc and the prior members of the tuc certainly advancing this proposal to be an even better proposal that keeps the interests i think of berlingtonians at heart this is a regional proposal um spelled out i think in more detail in the memo and certainly in the contract that you should have available to you some of the key tenants of the proposal that we have uh brought forward to you essentially at its heart as we are asking to transition the current regional bike share system from 105 manual powered bikes to 200 electric bikes these are no uh no throttle included pedal assist bikes only uh we're looking to expand the number of fixed locations there are currently 17 locations throughout the regional network about a dozen in berlington right now and within about 90 days if this contract were to be approved we would be looking at being able to make this transition built directly into the contract built directly into the heart of the outreach we did and what we heard from you and residents throughout the npa tours and some other opportunities we have for engagement was we need a direct municipal control so there is a one year contract that we are proposing to bring forward for e-bikes with a city option to renew um also included our permitted fixed locations for all devices in a fleet these are not going to be an unpredictable model which you may have read about uh for bikes for scooters throughout uh the country these are going to be continue to be fixed permitted locations any future scooter pilot will only happen if state conditions allow and only if city council approves a notification uh notice to proceed future pilot conditions we're proposing to bring continuously to the tube to help define and formulate that program should it be approved should state conditions allow and should you issue or decide to issue a uh approval for a notice to proceed uh also we think the proposal itself stands on its own but a modest benefit to the proposal is the fact that there's a bit of a financial incentive with this program we currently commit or have committed forty two thousand dollars to the first year of implementation for the manual bike fleet the industry is changing pretty greatly and so no municipal funds would need to be expended for this transition so it is a modest benefit to this new proposal and I'll just quickly go through this slide it is an evolving transportation model that we are witness to around the country and the demand certainly is growing the system goals continue to be a first mile and last mile transportation option for residents and for commuters we certainly see the potential for a sustainable and certainly an affordable transfer transportation choice for those residents and commuters who may choose choose to use a uh an electric bike or potentially in the future an electric scooter rather than jump in an automobile and certainly help make that link from public transportation to places of work things like that uh there is a growing importance of this kind of model in uh in the country uh there were five million bike share trips in 2010 that expanded thought to five fold uh in 2016 to 25 million trips shared mobility what we talk about when we talk about bikes and scooters has expanded to 84 million trips nationally in 2018 uh you can see there 36.5 million by bike 38.5 by scooter so there's a kind of a growing interest in desire here um one of the questions we get a lot is why transition fully to electric uh we can touch on a lot of those reasons but one of them is e-bikes have been demonstrated to use to be used about twice as frequently when both bikes are present in other systems around the country so why transition now there was a rfp issued by our partner Katma a few years ago to look at um you know viable models to introduce to the community and viable businesses who could provide the model that they were looking for at the time early implementation that rfp really already started looking at the idea of having some level of electric uh ability in the fleet so this was kind of a natural evolution of the system we also know we have a hilly topography users of different abilities predictability of fleet is key you don't want to have a whole bunch of manual bikes at the top of the hill wind up at the bottom of the hill and not wind up back when uh people would really prefer to use electric bikes to get around especially the more challenging areas and as we've already mentioned there's certainly been a growing demand nationally I'll leave our presentation there what I will say is we do have highlighted some of the key concerns we've heard in the community and how that's been addressed in the contract um we are certainly happy to keep going through this but perhaps it it's a good use of everybody's time if we answer those questions as they arise there are three slides here for that lastly uh bob dale do you have any final comments yeah just a few quick comments um like rob uh pointed to earlier um we really are looking at this revolution of the system to be a complete game changer um for chitenden county switching over to the electric assist bikes really increase our ability to make this a local transportation option um in markets where e-bikes have taken over for the pedal assist both the number have trips of trips have increased exponentially but also the ways that systems are used um one of our goals of this system is to have this as a viable commuter option for locals um so with about the past three to four months of studies that we've been doing with our partners at the CCRPC we're looking to expand um our hub locations out into residential areas um areas where locals are actually currently doing commutes to try and get people out of cars um so that's something to really emphasis and the focus on um I think another really big point to sort of highlight here as we're continuing this discussion as it goes to vote here is that with this contract we're essentially handing over the power to the municipalities to make the decision on whether or not the municipalities want to go forward with any sort of scooter pilots um I know there's been a few concerns about safety uh just to answer that question right off the bat before we get to it we are very very committed to safety all of our assets in the field um have our safety briefings both on the assets in the app um that users um used to uh unlock any of these assets as well as online um we do educational events at the launch of any system which we would be talking about doing if we're converting the fleet over huge community events in all three municipalities as well as the universities um to educate users on use of the assets as well as um safety sides of things we um offer free helmets at any of these sign up events that people sign up for monthly or annual memberships they can be issued a uh a free helmet at any of those events um and that's about all I have for now but we'll open oh excuse me yes so um one thing that also came up relatively recently which we are um talking about adding to the contract is uh we from the got to side are open to adding language in the contract about abiding by um the city of Burlington's livable wage livable wage ordinance okay thank you we have councillor busher then tracy then pine then hanson thank you um thank you um I you've you've accomplished quite a bit in this communication and addressed a lot of the issues I was a member of the two committee but one thing that I'm I still have concerns about um is the speed that on the well I have concerns about e-bikes on shared use paths period I'm a pedestrian we heard tonight some people talking about um this and um bicycling bicycle etiquette etiquette and I um I am concerned who's going to enforce that 10 miles I can see people flying by um and so I think the pedestrians at risk here I think you have on the shared use paths you have children you have mums with strollers you have older people sometimes getting out with their walkers I'm talking about neighbor what I see in my neighborhood um and what I would see down um with people trying to recreate and go down by the water path so I'm a water the waterfront so I'm a little worried about this um so I so I don't support that and I would like to see the e-bikes not be on shared use paths that's my two cents I have a couple of questions does each community get 200 e-bikes or is it 200 for the whole region it is two correct 200 for the entire system 200 200 bikes total for the entire system South Burlington Wenuski and Burlington we all share 200 bikes okay that I wasn't clear on that one um and um as far as let me make sure that I understand my concerns have more to do with the e-scooters and there was initially a statement that 200 bikes 200 scooters no wiggle room the way I read and I did read your your contract here the way I read that that the municipality did have some opportunity to negotiate with you and what we had talked about was a pilot for the e-scooters um and so is is that true that it could be less than 200 e-scooters it could be yes okay um and then uh as far as safety um I understand you're doing training but would there be something that someone could look at with their iPhone to understand the use of of the e-bike or the e-scooter depending on what we're talking about and understand first of all how to use it and then the safety requirements for use yes so in app before any uh users unlock either the bike or scooter it is required that that user goes through a safety briefing on their smartphone um any of the safety briefings that we have can be very specific and catered to all of the municipalities um we can add language in there about specific areas um bike and scooter etiquette um and all of that needs to be approved with our partners before we roll out any systems so thank you my last comment is I don't feel our community is ready for for scooters because I don't feel like we've really solved the issues regarding safety regarding helmets what we as a community will require and I know sometimes we are more restrictive than the state and then that brings up controversy so I believe that we have a lot of work to do um we're a college community and I can see people really enjoying this as a means of transportation um but I also see some risk and I'm talking about the e scooters um the e-bikes um I'm I'm on board with that thank you thank you Councillor Busher um so having the queue Councillor Tracy Pine Hansen I just want to remind everybody the late hour it's 20 after 11 I'm just asking everybody to I want you to get your comments and questions in but let's try to make them as concise and to the point as possible Councillor Tracy thank you and thank you uh to DPW and uh Gotcha for being here um one of the things that has been really important to me throughout this process has been the questions around safety um and specifically around e scooters I don't know if you saw the the April 2019 CDC study about Austin and what's been happening there but there was um some you know some uh I think some some issues having to do with head injuries specifically having to do with alcohol use so how do you propose how do you think that this contract speaks to what we're seeing around head injuries with regards to e scooters no I'll I'll start to say at least one of the I think things we would have an interest in in defining a scooter pilot would be you gotta pull the mic and please everybody stay on the microphone one of the uh one of the key considerations we would want to make with advancing any scooter pilot going forward if conditions are going to allow that um would be defining the times that scooters are operable continuing to look at the data we did read the CDC study closely uh the CDC study in Austin Public Health Commission study closely uh looked at you know the the 80 serious injuries out of the 190 injuries none of which is uh should be minimized trying to understand the times these are happening and try to figure out how that gets built into a scooter pilot to also address potential safety concerns what about head injuries in particular um so we're aware of the Portland study itself which has Oregon has a state law for helmet use uh at least 90 percent of riders were not riding their helmets so both the CDC study um and the Portland study have come down on the firm recommendations that more education is needed uh more outreach is needed um gotchas obviously providing free helmets for mobility users who request those showing proof of course that they're mobility users so we're aware helmet usage is going to be an important consideration going forward we want to make sure we educate we want to continue working with gotcha to provide these potential working with local shops to see if we can distribute helmets in a in a broad way we're absolutely aware that um both studies even though both cities are moving forward with scooter pilots again both studies are clear that we need to continue educating people about helmet usage okay i think that's imperative uh the other piece is around alcohol usage uh and about a third of people in that that experience injuries and that CDC study were reported having drink having been drinking alcohol prior to that how do we deal with that in a in a town where you know that's been known to happen um you know where people drink um how do you make sure that they're not riding under the influence so um to that point in all of our scooter markets all of our scooters are brought in at a specific hour um in usually kind of mid to early evening um and then brought back out in the morning so they are not actually out there on the ground rentable during the peak times when people are coming out of the bars intoxicated so that's one thing to take into consideration um those specific times in which we pull the scooters in the evening and bring them back out will be defined by the municipalities um so that will be up to the municipalities to specify what those times that they would like to see the scooters come out of the field and brought back out in the morning are so I think that you know takes a pretty big step in the way of trying to minimize the the time frame that people are out there during those peak times when people are riding these things under the influence so you're saying we get to define when they come off the street correct okay next piece has to do with the um the contract why do we I feel like we're all pretty comfortable from the conversations I've been having from the two I feel like we're all pretty comfortable with the e-bikes why are you forcing us to keep to include the the the e-scooters in it because it really feels like God just kind of forcing us to do this like we've asked you to say to say look we're comfortable with this one thing we'll consider the other thing but why do we have to have both in the same contract like why can't we just have a contract that says e-bikes now and then we'll we'll keep having the conversation but why does it have to specifically be in the contract so the main um argument for keeping them in the contract at the moment is that this has been a close to a seven seven month process to get to this point in the contract negotiations so scrapping things right now and then trying to go back to the drawing board later on down the road may be kind of reinventing the wheel a little bit and really pushing this a lot further down the road so from a standpoint of sort of expediting the process I think it's also to really be you know keep in mind that all of all this contract is really saying is that you're open to the idea of having the discussion about scooters there's nowhere in there that requires a scooter pilot program to hit the ground when this contract is executed we're handing the power over to the municipalities to make the decision on whether or not they even would like to you have the ability to to not not go forward with any notice to proceed which would you know essentially we're we're legally obligated to only launch a scooter pilot after all the municipalities have put forward a notice to proceed um and we cannot and will not go forward with anything until that has happened so sorry to do it I would just add um you know this this has been a regional discussion and there has been I think pretty broad interest regionally from our partners to seeing you know based on some of the statistics we're looking at from uh transportation policy and trying to understand is this a best practice for moving forward you know we want the ability to study at first which we're going to have at least a period of time to continue looking at scooters should this be approved or even if even if it weren't of course but there's pretty broad interest by our by the regional partnership by the universities um everybody wants to get this right um everybody wants to have this period of continued evaluation I I think there's just been a lot of interest demonstrated from the partners and looking at this as a viable transportation option and they see and I think we all see some utility in keeping this assuming all the conditions are met in the future okay one thank you and one so well so if we decide to pull this if we say no to scooters will you pull the e-bikes so it it's we're still kind of trying to figure what basically I I I don't really think that's an important thing to focus on right now I think the important it's important to me can you please answer the question so we still would continue going forward with bikes even if the municipalities decide not to go forward with the scooter so you fully commit to that and right now that you would that you would keep the e-bikes even if we say no scooters are for us yes that's huge okay and then finally the livable wage provision this was something that I raised at committee this is really important to me that we have a livable wages because I think that with the gig economy we've seen a real raise to the bottom for working people and I want to make sure that we take care of the folks that are working for this company so I really want to make sure that we're not just paying minimum wage we had a real disaster at the state house around wages this year I think we can do we can lead the way in Burlington are you willing to commit to following the the city's livable wage provision and if so how do we get that into the contract and have a degree of certainty that if we vote to allow director Spencer to execute this contract that it will actually end up in that contract because I don't want to just have we're open to exploring I want it in the in the contract now if I'm going to support this I need to have a livable wage provision in the contract specifically there so if we can get there that's that that's really important for me because the the you've answered a number of key questions and provided additional information that we didn't have at the committee on safety and the livable wage provision was another piece for me where it was a real sticking point so I really want to get that memorialized in the contract based on Councillor Tracy your leadership and leadership of the two we've been working on the language we pulled up some draft language we're working on right now to put into the contract it's there now we can provide that language to you tonight and then we would try to work that into the contract for final signature okay is there a way that we would suggest that we can actually get that into the motion that would be effective because I appreciate this language I think that this is this is this is good language but I want to make sure that we actually have a motion that's reflective of not the contract that we're seeing as the draft on board docs right now but that is respective of this language City Attorney Blackwood I think our office hasn't quite reviewed that language yet and we'd be looking for some fairly standardized language that we normally do I think if you just say that you want livable wage language that is acceptable to our office that ought to that ought to meet it so in essence you would say that to execute a one-year contract with annual renewal options that that complies with the Burlington level that includes a livable wage provision I mean okay we have a commitment to put that language in to that language can be put in yeah okay I mean they they aren't subject to it but they absolutely voluntarily can fly and that's what we're hearing great thank you Councillor Tracy I'll set uh yeah thank you thank you um we well do we need a motion on the floor we are going to have to have a motion would you like to make that um yes so given that I will um given that change I will make the motion on this so I will move to authorize director public works to execute a one-year contract with annual renewal options for two additional years with gotcha camera as representatives of UVM and Champlain College it's municipal partners and municipal partners including a livable wage including compliance with the Burlington livable wage ordinance thank you Councillor Tracy I'm the motion still has more to it well let's I'm just reading the language off okay go ahead I think that that's all there though I think you have to read every word so subject to approval by the city attorney's office which allows gotcha to launch an e-bike program in Burlington and explore the possibility of a future e-scooter pilot program to be approved by the city council at a future date and authorize the director public works to work with you to define the scope and conditions of an e-scooter pilot program for future consideration by the city council thank you Councillor Tracy second second by Councillor Busher okay it's on the floor Councillor Pine I think most of my questions were answered almost that all right all set Councillor Hanson I just want to say I think this is a really exciting opportunity I think we've been caught up in in a lot of the debate and a lot of the emotions surrounding that but I still remain very excited about this I see this as a really positive step forward and really the first big step that this council here is is taking on climate change and I'm excited to support this and and be a part of this and I think this in my mind is is just the beginning I think there's going to be a lot more to come with with the group around this table and and working with DPW and others to really get serious about moving our transportation system off of fossil fuels and doing it as as rapidly as possible and really leading the way for the rest of the country so I'm really excited to support this and then to continue to work really hard on trans sustainable transportation solutions thank you Councillor Hanson Councillor Jang yeah it will be very brief but Mr. Gotcha what's your name again sorry Bob Dale Bob Dylan Bob Dylan Dale Dale or just refer to him as Mr. Gotcha Mr. Gotcha you don't want me to start singing Dylan songs yeah I mean personally I mean I feel so relieved with his presentation today that has been conversation Facebook Twitter bum you know and personally I mean I thought that the scooters are coming very concerned but basically we if I vote yesterday I am not voting to bring scooters with the bikes today correct perfect and now I live here and I we are always in the street but I don't see a lot of your current bike being used right but do you have any data around how they're being used currently we do have data yes so we within the first year so we just hit the one year mark this past April we did around 9000 trips we had a little over sort of the mid 500 active members as well as you know with the addition of all the pay as you go first time users we are really looking with the expansion of the system for those numbers to skyrocket it's been proven time and time again that the conversion to e-bikes really can be revolutionary for a bike share system for many reasons and and can really increase increase ridership and the way that people use the systems as well so we are hoping that with the increase of hubs and the and the conversion to e-bikes and increase in bikes will really help those numbers wonderful and the expand expand the fixed locations you know it was part of your presentation today and I was promised that these current bike we have here will be coming in the new north end and was just wondering if expanding this fixed location will include the new north end yes that's one of our number one spots that we are looking to expand as we expand out into residential areas yeah I think the other questions have been answered and yeah thank you so much great thank you councillor jane councillor freeman councillor freeman passes mr mayor thank you president right I just want to say quickly I'm relieved with the way this conversation has gone in the last few minutes here this was a priority called out in the beginning of the session and my state of the city address and I was concerned we might not get there tonight I want I'm really appreciative that gotcha has been flexible and working through four seven months the details of this contract thank you to councillor hanson for for your leadership pushing this forward thank you dpw for working so hard to get the details right and I'm I am excited with this is something that we are doing with broad consensus thank you mr mayor are we ready for vote looks like we are all those in favor please say I hi any opposed no so the vote is 11 to 1 in favor did anyone was there any other no votes but I'm sorry I think that's right yes thank you councillor tracy yes thank you pay attention councillor tracy pay attention I know it's 1135 but it's I said it pretty clearly no I'll say it one more time no okay the vote is 11 to 1 in favor I need a motion to adjourn move by councillor ruff second by councillor busher all those in favor aye any opposed we're adjourned