ys that we can get the word out to to folks and i'm we can certainly um look for it also sorry i just say it feels a little to me at least like front porch firm is the community listserv yeah that's also you know we could be more proactive about putting the weekly report in full uh either linked or um in full on front porch forum and other means so yeah just to help keep people informed i think i think that would be useful i think a lot of folks don't know the the good work that we're doing and um that would be one uh just an additional way to help highlight um just either what's going on or um just help keep people informed um jack now i'm i think i'm confused i i heard bill and camera and say uh we don't have a listserv but is it possible for anyone to subscribe to the get on the mailing list for the weekly managers report probably i think so i i'd want to check double check that with jasmine i mean i do think we have a list of people that have requested and they do they're on the automatic mailing list yes so maybe those coveted things should go to that list too right uh well of course the coveted updates are in the weekly report each week okay yeah uh the one i the memo i create for y'all on these nights is sort of a uh combination of my weekly reports um plus things that i thought you may be interested in knowing so yeah okay so so people can get that okay good thanks that's what i thought okay all right great thanks for that sort of a brief aside there um any other questions or comments about this okay all right well thank you again um thanks kerman for keeping us all up to date on all this um it's helpful especially as things continue to evolve um all right so we have uh the last item on our agenda and it is not 10 o clock that's fabulous um so uh five home farm way uh so bill okay um i'll start with a little bit of background just uh for all that are watching and also to help frame everything uh five home farm ways you know property out near agway uh in a year ago the city declared it a public nuisance due to its condition it was considered to be dangerous building and the city actually fenced it and boarded it up and then requested a mitigation plan as per our public nuisance ordinance from the owner and while this wasn't news to us at that time it certainly brought a long-standing issue to its head which is that the owner of the property is food works which is a dissolved nonprofit so they're the owner doesn't exist uh there's a mortgage held on it by the vermont community loan fund for approximately a hundred thousand dollars there is a preservation easement on it held on by the preservation trust of vermont particularly pertaining to the house and the front two acres of the property that they will be used technically the house is supposed to be restored to sort of its period uh glory and then the uh and then the grounds are supposed to be used in a historically significant way there's a conservation easement on the back to all the 15 acres which is in the floodway anyway not really particularly developable and it's just supposed to be held in public conservation um and that's held by the vermont conservation board vermont housing and conservation board excuse me um adding to the complexity is the neighboring property connor brothers llc has a right of first refusal to purchase the property that had been granted to them by food works um and that um and again the food works doesn't exist the easement holders dispute the authority of food works to have granted that right of first refusal so uh at the time of the public nuisance ordinance our action to clarity a nuisance uh a consortium of people headed by a gentleman named jamey duggin k fourth and said we'd like to try to save this building we'd like to see if we can put together a fundraising campaign and bring you a plan and including and so the council said yes with the proviso that you give us an update every three months and they have been doing so uh the last couple of updates had said we're engaging an attorney we're trying to sort through these ownership and easement issues uh and uh and the most recent one was due a couple months ago and because of table and we're just getting to it now uh but the report which is in the packet from mr duggin basically said we think the legal issues are insurmountable and we don't have the wherewithal to move forward with this so at its simplest the question back before the council is we've have an enforcement order out there we asked for mitigation plan the the party that we authorized or granted permission to develop one has said that they're not going to do it so you know our options are to move forward and uh schedule it for demolition set a date do nothing uh we have so having said that we've been in conversations with these groups i think there's a little bit of uh waiting to see who's goes first i think some of the groups want to see what the city chooses to do and i think those of us from the city would just as soon see them resolve their differences and come up with a plan um and i certainly don't want to speak for any of those groups but that's been what i've heard we have engaged an attorney the attorney general's office has been engaged uh two things i can tell you since the last meeting that have changed that are of some substance one is that our the attorney general asked the city to look into the issue of declaring it abandoned and what that might mean for the various easements uh he wasn't sure what that would mean so he said you need to look at that and see if that's a way to go the second thing is our attorney uh asked me why he was new to this case asked me why we hadn't sort of put it up for tax sale or taken for taxes and my response was well it's a it's been it's a non it's a nonprofit it's owned by food works so it has been tax exempt and his response which was good advice says well the statute doesn't say who owns it it says is it being used for those public uh purposes for you know for which are tax exempt and the answer right now is no so we've recently listed it as a taxable property uh in hopes that that might also prod some people to taking extent i don't know that i mean it's still there's a period of time when we saw like will we take it for tax sale tomorrow we've got to go through a tax cycle so people i'm not paying and and who knows perhaps the the mortgage holder will pay the taxes so it's not to lose their interest but that is a change so that's happened um so i think the purpose of this conversation really is to ascertain what role the city wants to play in this um we've been trying to be a broker i think the attorney general is probably a better honest not honest but a better neutral broker than we are since we do stand to uh to have i don't know almost any scenario the back 12 to 15 acres would be coming to the city for public use sums for whether recreation park community garden dog park any number of public areas public things that could could benefit the community um i think the preservation trust might want to see the city take the front two acres and understanding that the building might need to come down uh as long as the rest of the property was uh sort of signed and used for public use and made clear that it had had some historic significance and that it would be a fully open park and i think you know i don't i don't know if we have interest in that i i think that um certainly the community loan fund would like to see themselves get paid off under those circumstances and again i think we might have a challenge um from conners that they have a right to first refusal i think from the city's perspective absent a clear directive from the council in that just because we haven't talked about it i have told i have stated regularly that the city is neutral on the house that we we um we'd be happy to see some sort of public use but we'd be equally happy to see additional taxable property additional jobs that both that we see a public benefit to either outcome and so we're not here to push for one or the other and we would support a solution that that that resulted in those and actually our parks director weighed in in favor of that as well so that's the nature of the the conversations i think the key questions is do we have strong feelings about the house property um are we wanting to move forward to address the the nuisance or are we wanting to sit tight and push the negotiations a little bit i i i do think some of the city's actions have prompted conversations that had not happened for four or five years this isn't a new scenario um so we i think we've simulated some discussion i don't know you know what each each group has to do in some regards i you know i can't overstate this the the real controlling factor here on the house portion is the easement the preservation trust easement because as it stands now a person acquire an entity acquiring that property is required to bring the property back to its its full you know former uh condition historically accurate condition and i think that has is what has prevented the um the bank the the community loan from foreclosing and i think it's certainly prevented others from wanting to just buy it from the community you know loan fund or you know and who can even sell it right because whoever at this point you're assuming that liability and i know that the preservation trust has been asked to remove that easement even asked has been offered to have it you know amount of the investment paid back to them um in exchange for removing it and thus far they have not done so the staff simply says it's up to our board we can't make that commitment they don't usually do that i don't know if it's ever been brought to their board um so those are those are the scenarios whereas i think the back portion the vhcb portion there's not much debate that that should ultimately come to the city for public use so we're really talking about the front portion and what our role is and how aggressive we want to be um with regard to the house and the condition of the house and mindful of the fact that we the city has declared it a public nuisance um just as a clarifying question bill could you describe uh a little bit about i mean i don't know that this is the direction we should go but if we were going to be collecting or basically billing for back taxes uh with as a you know and basically come to the point where it was a tax sale um could you just describe that process like what how long would that take i mean do we just say here's a bill for all the you know the back so first of all we can't bill for back taxes because we didn't list it as a taxable property we had listed it as a so it starts now um i am not a hundred percent conversant there maybe actually a couple of attorneys that know more about uh taxes uh tax sales that i do on our board but there's a period of time that has to go by with back taxes and after after that goes i want to say it's a year or two at least um then the city can say we want to redeem our taxes so someone can pay the off the taxes then they then there's a certain period of time where the owner has the right to redeem to pay them back and a lot of people do that for interest because the pay then they collect interest on that that payment if if then the owner never redea pays off the original tax sale then that person becomes the new owner of the property so sometimes and cities and many cities will themselves buy the properties at tax sale because they're on investment and they can either get paid back in the future by the owner or then then own the property um i have no reason to believe that we put this up for tax sale you know it's entirely possible conners would pay the taxes on it or the as i said or the the um bank because they want to protect their investments sir so having it go to a tax sale it doesn't necessarily mean that it would come to the city of just it could but someone else could also it would open the door for someone else to to claim ownership and actually be a real owner and i guess one of the you know the outstanding question that we're looking at is is under those conditions do those easements and restrictions carry forward or they extinguished when the property you know i don't know so it's still i mean the the number one reason no one no one wants to buy the property as is is because you you can't do anything with it without a giant investment of money and i think if someone were to go the route of if there was going to be a a fair and equitable solution where so everyone who's made whole it would seem that you know from a financial perspective i don't know if these groups agree with this but i would think that the bank would need to get paid off that's 100 and somewhat thousand the easement would need to be paid off which is 57 000 and then someone's got to pay for demolishing the building which is going to be at least 50 000 so you're talking 200 plus thousand just to get to a parcel that you know may or may not you know who knows how developable it is we don't know what other issues there are okay thank you um dan oh sorry i was just going to add um you know i i my general understanding at least in tax sales is that easements usually do go with the property leans mortgages they get they get discharged um but something that's an easement that runs with the land goes with the land even in a tax sale and you know the basic rule in a tax sale is you you have this accumulated back taxes that almost never amount to as much as the mortgage uh investment so it's you know it's going to be several hundred it's not going to be several hundred thousand it's going to be ten thousand um by the time it ever gets to a tax sale and it's an auction and then it's a year of redemption and you know it's it's not the fastest process um either um and a lot of stuff can happen within that so i just wanted to offer that yeah it's definitely not a golden solution but it is at least a minor change in status that's occurred since we last talked about this so i thought you all should know about that um um i i still feel like i have some questions like for example dan i'm not necessarily familiar with this process of redemption um can you just what is what does that mean that's okay no it's a wonderful process so what happens is um when you have back taxes and there's there's no real fine line to when you have to other than i think eight years is the limit you can't collect more than eight years back in back taxes so usually when properties accumulate a certain amount um bev hill for the city of montpellier does it um she'll list it for tax sale which means it goes to a public auction um and a lot of people do bid on it and they can bid in excess of what's owed on the taxes um and that money is then held by the city and they take the first amount of that money and they pay off the back taxes and the rest is held in sort of an escrow fund and uh it sits there and the owner has one year in which they still own the property they still control the property it's still theirs in which they can redeem the property by coming up with everything that's owed and that means the taxes that have been paid on their behalf um the interest on those amounts um usually any type of fees that the city has accumulated to a certain amount uh in doing the tax sale but that has a limit it's about 15 percent of the taxes owed um and then usually you have to come up with actually the other amount of money that the person is holding just because you you make the bitter hole to redeem the property so for example if it's 10 000 owed and the person bids 40 000 you're going to have to come up with that 40 000 and how that gets allocated is a little bit complicated but you've got to come up with that whole chunk of money and then you get the property back and you basically buy it back and you have a year and at the end of that year um that's when your right as the owner disappears and it's gone no longer yours it's now owned by whoever put in the winning bid as you can imagine there's all kinds of issues with that and every title insurance company in the state of Vermont despises tax sales because they can complicate title uh you know in unexpected ways and so um it's not a good way to go about transferring property I mean it may be a solution here because it it removes uh some of the loggerhead but um it is a complicated process and it has a number of pitfalls and you have due process and it's especially difficult here because the entity doesn't exist so who you know you could always have somebody come out of the woods at the last minute and go I'm the I'm the owner I've declared myself by you know filing something that I'm the new food works um better than the old and here's my money and give me my property back and there are stories like that um I actually just represented somebody who helped someone who was in a tax sale buy the property out from underneath the person who would want a tax sale so it was um these are you know you think tax sale you think plain vanilla ice cream but it's it's it's really rocky road thank you that's helpful um did I see some other hands uh okay yeah Elizabeth and then Jay um I think I'm going to defer to Jay first and then I'll speak okay fair enough thank you Jay go ahead thanks Elizabeth we might have share some similar thoughts here um I think it's important to point out with uh with with this property that there's a lot of local interest um particularly in the back you know 12 to 15 acres as um uh for public use particularly around agriculture um it is in like Bill said in the in the floodway and so it's got a high quality high quality soil um there's um there's also a great potential uh the the far end of the property is the confluence of the Stevens branch and the Winooski so there's a lot of great river access potential um throughout the property um and so I know that not only has the newly formed food security coalition um spent time there but also and talked about the potential future once you know once there's Gordy and not of the legal issues around the the building are are are unraveled um but they're uh you know there's just it's it's already being farmed on on a small scale so there is a lot of potential to increase the capacity um to the potential to potentially even repurpose the building and see this as something of a peculiar version of an intervail so something at a smaller scale is is very real um and I know that um uh one more thing I'll add and then I'll hand it over to Elizabeth but also is that you know the director of our parks department and other folks in parks have been working there and have a lot of interest in the potential of the property overall thanks go ahead Elizabeth so um so I just wanted to say that I don't know if we've found really made you all aware of the fact that there's a very vital food security coalition that has been needing uh four times they've met now and um there are a number of working groups uh one of which is around um a tourist farm is what we're calling it not five home way but anyway um I you know in in my history I don't know 35 years ago I lived in Marshfield and we took the uh Marshfield Village School and made it into a multi-purpose community center and um and so I was the chairman of the economic development committee in Marshfield you know how small that is but we raised then a half a million dollars to rehab the school and so I look at that building and see so many different components of where funding can come from and I have great hope that it can have a historic preservation part it could possibly have housing on the second floor for you know farmers who are having small plots in the back 40 or 17 or whatever it is and and then have meeting space and some processing and storage space in the in the barn and that there are multiple streams of grant money that can come in to to bring it back to its former glory uh so I know I sound like a dreamer but I have had some background in this and I am starting to look at the options we had a wonderful uh informational interview with Will Rapp about intervail and its its beginnings we've talked with Grow Food Northampton we're just starting to interview a lot of communities that have managed to raise significant amount of money and also have created a lot of jobs you know the goal would be food production job creation housing and energy from our perspective so anyway as more information becomes available from our end we'll definitely share it with you but we're we have yet to we're just starting to talk with the oh my gosh I have to get my nomenclature here I may have to put on my glasses uh Vermont oh yes the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board and we haven't talked with the AG's office yet Bill's got a lot more information I was interested in hearing it um but we're just starting to kind of understand the little Gordian knot that we have to deal with here to move forward so um that's my my update just to let you know that that's out there in the Aether's I'd advise you to also talk to preservation trust because even though they're yes they go through VHCB they're the ones who actually hold the easement on the house right it would seem to me that to do what you want to do affordably um they're still gonna have to relax their easement somehow because I don't yet I love your vision for this property um I've also heard for five years or so different people with this similar type vision who have been unable to put together any kind of funding to do it and that's that's not me I know so I'm just saying is that um you know I think from at this point you know the city has really only two two roles in this one is we are the potential owner of the back 15 which I think I need to speak for the council but I don't think anyone's objects to that I think that's a great you know thing and we have a public nuisance that we're dealing with and um other than that how other parties can sort this out is fine and um but someone has someone has to budge somehow there's got to be you know there are a lot of players that have a lot of stake and you know I know you can get things done Elizabeth I also know that I've sat around those tables with many of those same people for a long time and listened to a lot of that you know Paul Bruins of the world and the the folks that have moved a lot of mountains in Vermont and you know here we are the house is going to fall in and won't be of historic value to anybody because nobody will have done anything I appreciate your viewpoint though and I want you to succeed I'm just going to tell you I'm going to give it a go all right um other thoughts from council otherwise I have some trying to outline like what are our choices what are our options so that we can just be clear about potential options moving forward but go ahead Jack when this question of the public nuisance came up and and the the potential rescuers of the property came forward I was very very skeptical I thought it was probably unrealistic and nearly impossible that the the money would be and the ways would be found to bring this property back and and really make their vision happen but I was certainly willing to have the city seal off the property so that it didn't pose an immediate danger to public health and safety and and give the people who at the time seem to be the people in the community and in the area with the greatest degree of interest in making something of this property give it their try to come up with a plan and and come up with the financing to make something happen and it turns out that it was they determined that it wasn't possible for them to do that I don't know that it's not possible for anyone to do that but nothing's made me nothing in the interim has made me any less skeptical of the of the prospects for this property and I've been told at many of these meetings that this house is of great historical significance to the city of Montpelier but and maybe this is the site that it's always stood on as as long as the building's been in existence but it's hard to picture that property being becoming a vital part of the of the life of the community given where that property is and where the center of the community and the and the population of the community is now so I think it's important for the city to protect its interest especially protecting the public health and safety I'm not determined that we should go in and demolish the the house next week now that the people who thought they could save it have thrown in their hand but I don't want to wait forever even it seems though you know waiting forever is what's gotten the building to a place where it's where it's potentially where it's potentially falling down and and so I think we should we should be realistic about what can be done and what who's going to come up with the money what's a realistic timeline and and not wait around forever for it with regard to the you know we know that we have a real estate developer who has a crack record of developing good properties in Montpelier and providing economic benefit to the city who wants to do something with the property and I don't think that's nothing I see the value of a park and you know the mention of a dog park is is a good idea because that's something lacking in the city now also is worth keeping in mind though that the demands of adding parkland to the city aren't just finding the land and declaring it a park and you know do do does the parks department have the personnel to manage another 15 acres of parkland and I think that's another question that we would want to look into before we decided to turn into a park so I'm happy to give Elizabeth or anyone else who thinks they have a reasonable shot at doing a reasonable chance to try but I'm not interested in waiting forever for that to happen thank you um any other thoughts so I I've so I feel like I have three options um in front of us and if there are more if I've missed any please you know chime in but I mean option one is do nothing right now um which is I'm not sure I feel about that um option two is um move forward to initiate um collecting taxes on that do we need but would we even need to vote on that that's done that's done okay but that's still going to be years away before that really right all makes a difference right and so so then the third option and maybe there's a fourth option here but the the one third option anyway uh or I guess it's really a second since um we've already initiated um you know collecting taxes on it um is to pick a day um that we would choose to demolish well but then actually let me back up on that would we I guess in the absence of any other plan any other mitigation plan would we have the authority to go demolish it I think we would um we do we do under our ordinance and um we would then attach the cost of demolition to the the property now you know I don't know if the house is gone what that then means you know how how restrictive the easements are because now no one has to restore the house to its former condition um so I don't know how that plays out I'm not recommending this we necessarily do that but um but yes the city can this we're allowed to abate a public hazard yeah one thing we went good well I was gonna say I mean another potential choice we could make and this is not necessarily even precluding other you know that option um it feels like there could be an opportunity to do to have a group of people come together to do some visioning for the property even if it's just for the back part if the part of the you know vision collecting for that property includes something for the for the building then you know great uh but I actually kind of wonder if we shouldn't start thinking about that anyway knowing that seems likely that we would come like but that at least the back part of the property may come to us anyway um so thinking about you know do we want a dog park do you like how much of it should be ag how much of it should be park or and what are the implications for all of those things like that's not a question I feel like we here are going to resolve um but somebody should be having those conversations um Cameron well I just Alec isn't here so I do want to sort of um uh don't want to put words in his mouth but that is a space that he's um interested in a space that earlier is developing and working on um in an agricultural way right now so I would just advocate sorry I just don't want to be in the dark um I would just advocate for including them in that in that visioning and and let them lead that because they do have some really big ideas for that space in its entirety and they would be able to tell us that they do have the capacity um because it's in the floodplain I don't know how much it's um able like walking paths there's a whole host of environmental issues with that so it might need to be just a concert like an honest conservation space that is open to public the public um if I remember my conversations about that plot of land correctly but there is some visioning work already happening and I would urge you to um allow them to be the sort of lead that you asked to for that for that work so so Alec is um sort of and already sort of initiated the the visioning process around that property yeah he's part he's partnering with a lot of folks to make that that agricultural space a reality I'm sorry Bill I interrupt all I was going to say is I think the one thing as far as the back part that the council could do would be to affirmatively express an interest in in having that property come to the city you know we've talked about it and I've said yeah I think we are and I know the parks are but I don't think the city council has ever said yeah you know the back part we're happy to take on we don't that easement doesn't bother us we're you know and I think they're playing I think they're planning to give it to the city I think it's going to cost us money maybe more about that but um and we can do well let's hear from Elizabeth I know you had another comment here but then I want to kind of revisit um particularly just that question that feels like a discrete thing that we can talk about and maybe collectively have an opinion about um Elizabeth go ahead yeah so I like the idea of the visioning process um I actually just spent like a week writing a document about parties who might be interested in doing a visioning process for that property um and there are you know the food coalition they're now probably about 16 different entities that are part of the food network within the greater not clear area uh and John although we haven't had Alex on the committee we've had Jacqueline actively participating as the vote of as his voice uh so there's a pretty active group of people who were really excited about this right now so I'm excited to hear that you're thinking about including them thank you um I do not know this person you're referring to Jacqueline Jacqueline is our Vista and she will um be moving in with us full time for the parks department starting after we start bringing folks back from furlough um she's been an excellent member of our team for a while now and we're really excited to have her full time so okay great okay thanks um particularly about this question of um are we interested in being the owners of the back part of the property how many acres is it the back part we don't know okay somewhere in that range okay um any thoughts on that from the council uh jack I think the answer is maybe uh when I when I saw this on the agenda actually what I was thinking was very much like uh like your idea and have some kind of uh public process for people to uh come and bring whatever ideas they have in mind and come up with it with a plan and see if it's workable um and so I that's what I would suggest we do set some time for it for it to start and uh some time for them to have a product and proceed from there so are you suggesting that like we don't set effectively like an execution date um until this visioning process is over is that well like what you're thinking or is that not no that's that's totally what I'm thinking assuming that it's a reasonable timeline which I'm thinking is probably three to six months I don't know what uh how long it takes to do something like that but that just is what feels feels right to me seems that seems fair um any thoughts on either that or the idea of the count of the city uh owning the back part I'll just speak for myself and say that I'm I'm interested in having the city um own the back part whether that's for a park or any of the other ideas that have come up I think it has a lot of potential and particularly since it is um the floodway that there's there is limited um possibilities for it um but even the possibilities that exist I think are purposes that might serve the city so one suggestion we could do I see you know Bob still on the call is we could re-inspect the building we haven't been there I don't think since last year um and so uh and maybe I'm wrong about that but we could assess its condition you know has it worsened is it more dangerous um and that might also inform our decision making if it stayed relatively stable then that might say okay you know we can we can allow for longer it's it's because our again our issue is the public nuisance and making sure it's secure and making sure if someone you know homeless people who ever were to get in there uh that they're or just kids breaking in for the heck of it um that they're safe uh that there wouldn't be a calamity uh or disaster um so that might be one step we could take in terms of figuring out how how imminent the demolition ought to be and then maybe set a period of time whether it's for a visioning uh or just simply we'll accept proposals we'll give you you know set a date in the fall or something for people to come in and say here's our ideas for the the property and maybe you know maybe Elizabeth and her group will have organized a group and they've it will be a single proposal or maybe it'll be you know people with proposals for private loose but I think part of those proposals has to be how do we address these outstanding issues it can't just be we think this is what should happen to the property it needs to be here's how we're dealing with the easements here's how we're dealing with the mortgage holder here's how we're dealing with all of these other complications because if those if those aren't addressed I mean that's what's prevented all the other good ideas from going forward over the last several years it's not okay um I saw Jay then Donna I'll defer to Donna go ahead well it just this has been a long process and I got really excited with proposals and the reports that kept coming back and kept hoping something would happen I would like to see two groups one start dealing with legality and what really is the ownership and all of that and another group that does the visioning and just take three months and see what we can do in that period of time and then we may have to just cut bait and take the house down but I'd like to see it approach two separate ways I think they're different mindsets so I think two different groups are needed um Jay do you want to talk well you know I just um I agree uh with the mayor that I do think the property itself is would be a great asset to the city um you know particularly um with the extension of the bike path that leads to just about right across the street from it it could be a real community resource I do think that absolutely we need to go through an appropriate um visioning process to uh to determine what's the best use of you know of the land and what's feasible the fact that that you know we have to remember that it was in 2011 that the the two floods that happened in that year is ultimately what was the dissolved the nonprofit that was operating on the land so we you know we have to be very conscious about all the implications of um of what managing that property would look like but I don't enough I don't I'm not necessarily going to make a recommendation on substantive steps that we can take as a council right now but I do think Donna is right we need to approach this from you know from from two sides and it seems to me like the the the visioning could sort of move on its own making certain assumptions because like Bill said there is a good chance no matter what happens legally with the building that um even if it were to go to the Connors that the city would end up with the back the back acreage so I think that that you know can move forward with that assumption but having somebody having a group a working group that was focused on you know engaging with the AG's office and all the different players you know and I know that Bill you know has started that process and brought people together but that could be proactive and try to get some you know the board definitive course forward would be would be great um I do also want to express some support for re-inspecting the building um one of my concerns in all of this is that in all honestly my concern is that the building has bad bones so to speak right and so if that's the case like how much of it is is actually salvage salvageable um and I mean because I mean one possibility is that um it would literally be cheaper to tear it down and like build a new building that was on a solid foundation uh and maybe elevated even you know so it doesn't you know was not quite as flooded like that I don't I don't know if that would be cheaper than trying to repair the building that exists but it might um and Lena that's all that is a part of the question anyway and also if it's if it's about to fall down like if it really if it's so bad that um it is gonna be falling down you know eminently like any any you know day now then then that would that would just be really important to know because because then that's a different public health threat and that is sort of that is our responsibility um uh so you know knowing how close we are to structural failure I think is probably important um Dan go ahead sure and I want to disclose my my firm represents the preservation trust of Vermont we haven't been representing them in this particular case so far to my knowledge um but I do want to be careful about um that potential conflict but I I agree um with the with your comments about um the public not just the public nuisance but the public danger um you know because that is a uh structure you know the liability to the owner but also the danger presented by it may be enhanced and and if it hasn't been inspected in a year I think it's important to just understand are we dealing with a an immediate emergency and I think that would be regardless of who has what interest in this um you know that's something that's important to know and I think that's that's a critical first step to figure out what the public health above the immediate public danger posed by this building is or might be um and whether it could be used for some of the additional information I don't know and I'm I'm not going to necessarily comment on it but um you know it strikes me that that beyond that um Bill did you get a sense of whether the parties were kind of at the table or whether they had sort of uh reached a stalemate as far as the various interest groups in this case I think there was some discussion um they were at the table I'm not sure all the cards have been played um and um and I think there are you know there are some solutions that are more sticky than others and so I you know it's hard to say um I think there seemed to be some desire to find out what the city was going to do uh and you know I've pushed back and said well there's a whole host of options here some of which you are all participants um but I think they want to know if we're just going to tear the building down or if we're going to set a date because I'm not that creates a different set of contingencies for them it sets you know a decision from us you know I think things the city can do in terms of decisions one is just set a date to take the building down two is to say we prefer it be private development or we prefer to be publicly held or we prefer to have time for a group like Elizabeth's to see if if the the spirit of these easements can be uh you know maintained so but even some preference from us right now I've just said any of it sounds great we don't prioritize one over the other we are interested in the back in theory um but we we don't want to continue a public hazard of the building but that's been my statement something I think the pushback to us has been well then what are you guys going to do well I mean it seems like a couple of different things I mean I think there's the immediate threat whether this is a you know a danger the the stick house that's about to fall over which is something that's just slowly decaying um but something you said earlier is that the city's not likely to get its money back that it invests in tearing out and tearing it down in other words if we just if we if well I I say that I mean right if we I could be wrong about this but we're we're we're third on the line of creditors right you know right um and so so we would be doing that as a mitigation method it would be a cost of enforcing it would be the cost of mitigating public danger it wouldn't be part of a project cost right which I think makes sense if there's an imminent danger as opposed to simply saying you know I mean in some ways tearing it down makes it an easier first for everyone and saves a couple of costs so um you know I guess that's that's the one thing I guess I would question sure and you know Bob has been in that building so he you know last year he's probably the most knowledgeable to tell us you know obviously it's years we're old but you know how imminent at least whatever his take of the condition of the building is yeah the last time we were in it um that the entire building was not in imminent danger of falling down the porches there's a two-story porches on the front of the building that are in bad shape they could collapse um food works has done it did a lot a lot of work in that building including putting a new foundation under about half of it so the foundation the cement foundation under about half of it is not that old what we will do those um we'll get back in there we can get back in there in the next week or so and take another look at it and we'll I'll also bring um division of fire safety has a structural engineer who we have access to so we'll um I'll reach out to him or have Chris Lumber reach out to him tomorrow and we'll get Chris now get back up there with the structural engineer and take another look that would be great um that's relevant going forward is knowing exactly what what the state of the building is that we're dealing with because it's one thing to have a wonderful vision and it's another I'm I'm a pragmatist of the highest order so I look forward to your report Bob you know so we could maybe conclude that you know at least theoretically it's not going to fall down tomorrow the porches might but the rest of it won't Lauren I was just going to I think that's great to get a reassessment of the state of the house um and then I was just going to go back to Donna's idea which I liked of having you know one group that's really focused on the legal questions and one group on the vision um for the property and the back property and maybe writ large um so I and like with this a real timeline thinking to Jack's comment of you know not dragging things out forever so maybe the three months was a good you know give us some time to really put something down on paper for the visioning and and answer some of the legal questions or if they're still just as much of a morass is there right now then that would be good to know too and um so I'm just going to relift that up and see if there was interest in that approach sounds like there there is some interest in that I there I have a few questions about that but I just want to make sure I we revisit this one topic does anybody particularly not interested in the back uh acreage yeah because maybe everyone else is like I'm taking your your silence is like the oh yeah straw pole like do you do you want the back acreage this could be like maybe or I don't know okay okay so okay so we have like two maybes and I think we had more yeses um I don't think we need a vote on that I just wanted to see where we're at yeah um okay so that's that's one thing um in terms of you know having these two groups um do visioning at least in terms of like visioning for the property whether that's the back or it's the whole thing um I mean it sounds like Elizabeth's group is meeting and it has some representation from the parks department um there um through Jacqueline um but I've been involved with those meetings as well sorry oh you have been okay okay well so I mean just zooming out for a second like one of my concerns there is that if that is a desire of this council that we have a visioning group that um I mean one possibility is that those meetings should be open to the public um if it's like a council group um like so so one question is like is that a council group or could it be a private group and then you know y'all are just doing your own thing and really under the auspices of a different organization and so that's fine um I just think that that it would be good to be clear about that um and or are are we sort of letting the you know are we endorsing the work of this group or you know or even like you know delay things for the sake of a private group or is it our own group um that's really my question before you go Elizabeth any thoughts from council on that yeah Jack I said that I thought it was should be a private process or public process the more I think of it the more I think maybe it doesn't have to be because you know we know of a group of people that is already thinking about or working on ideas for what could happen to the real estate but there could be other people who also have ideas who who might if if we say okay we want to have somebody come to the council by whatever date October 15 or whatever date it is um it could be that someone else could could take that as a signal to put together their own idea and also present to the council and so and that's fine if they do yeah um Lauren I think I generally agree with that the the only thing I am I am feeling cautious about with that approach is just knowing how challenging this property is and there's so much context like I would hate for someone to waste their time doing a vision without you know necessarily having the opportunity to speak to all the players and understand all the complexities of it and and maybe a more formal process that ensures that all the right you know voices and legal entanglements and everything are known understood and that something's being put forward that would actually be feasible um and work that's just one consideration um thing is also too if it's a city group then I think we actually probably have to make an appointment to it as like a working group which would take a lot of time potentially it's almost just easier to have it be a private group but um Elizabeth go ahead so I just wanted to say that on you know this visiting that's happening is not under the auspices of any one group this is a coalition of people and and I I'm you know kind of in the my thing as an organizer is to involve people and I certainly would be happy to make the process more public and you know basically I don't know have some design stress or you know whatever it is that would be part of the visioning in order to make it very public and get as many people in to walk the property and you know I do think it'd be great to put together some sort of um uh written description of the of the legal conundrum uh so that people could know that um in general uh and I don't know whether the city can take you know Donna's idea of having the legal avenue figured out or or someone going down that road um but yeah go ahead Donna I'm just putting my hand up for my turn after you don't let me interrupt okay well I thought you had a brilliant idea I was going to do absolutely that's always but um yeah so I just think that you know some of these things do need to be put together and I'm just happy to help facilitate that in whatever way I can uh Donna go ahead well I was really feeling they don't need to know all the legal entanglement they should just vision the property I mean again and I think vision the property particularly without the house and even maybe a real light drawing of something totally different on stilts whatever but that they just deal with the property and a vision and then that's why I separated them because the legal stuff we know this other group has gone on what five years trying to untangle it um so I wanted that to be separate purposefully I don't think you need to know the legal stuff to look at the land and decide what you'd like to do with it that's all yeah Bill um so a couple things about the legal thing one um right we certainly understand the legal situation I think the question is how do you move forward past it and to some extent you know one of the reasons there's been a legal stalemate is that each I think each group that's been involved uh today excluding the city well we've been involved from the public safety aspect but in terms of the use of the property has been involved from the point of view of asserting their legal rights for the outcome that they would like to see so to some extent us you know if we're interested in a particular outcome then we would probably pursue how do you get that legally does that mean uh you know so let's just say for the sake argument that we really wanted this to be developed privately whether it was a con or somebody else you know we might be then looking at how do we extinguish these easements what what you know do it does what is the role the city can play taking it by having a domain or whatever you know or declaring an abandon to somehow take these restrictions away to open it up for other things if our goal is that we want the whole thing to be in the public's you know we want whether we own it or it's open to the public then our role might be hey preservation trust how can we work out something you know maybe you pay for the building to come down but we keep it you know we'll help we'll you know so I think I think there's right now there's just a lot of people have competing visions for the property and our we've said we just want it to be safe um so if we want to become a player then then you know we're that's a different role than we've had I think we can you know I could picture a group like Elizabeth's uh partnering with VHCB in the preservation trust and saying this is what we want to further our interests with this easement and then that party would have to figure out okay what does that mean for the bank getting paid off what does that mean for for Connors right first refusal and then they'll have to negotiate those out somehow so so a lot of the legal is um what are people interested in and what do we want to come out from so as you know there's no there's no specific legal outcome here until we figure out the path so you know it's like how do we want to where are we going and how do we get there so so perhaps the legal questions almost have to wait until we know what what we want right and what maybe what other people you know it may be what we the city want or it may be what the easement holders want I mean they invested money to to have an outcome on these properties so they have a lot of say so you know maybe it's they say fine if if you can raise the money to build this you know we'll let you tear it down if you're going to rebuild it in this new way you got to pay off the bank and we'll go to court with you if Conor tries to force us right to first refusal you know who knows I mean there's any number of outcomes that could happen and we can't speak for any of those agencies but you know Elizabeth and her pals should certainly reach out and see where you know what they're open to and doing I think what we could communicate to folks is we're interested in seeing something happen we certainly would be interested in the back property and we're going to inspect the property you know we're just going to sit tight and keep assuring that the property is safe and let the rest of you sort it out yeah yeah that's an option um you know that so that that makes sense to me just in terms of um as a as a process you know giving kind of as Jack was suggesting perhaps like three to six months somewhere in there um for some visioning to happen and then you know hopefully with some public aspects to the process hopefully in partnership with BHCB and the Preservation Trust and and hopefully with those partnerships and some maybe some public design charrette opportunities that we can have these to have a vision for what might be good for that property and particularly like you know with that building um you know because gosh like it could it could be it could be very expensive and but the thing is like if there's a clear articulated vision then it's something that people can rally around or even if it's something like well we got to tear the building down to rebuild something or you know or we say you know we're going to hold this building in our hearts on this sign and you know evaluate it for what it was and have a historic marker and that's you know all that we can really accomplish and then like that's fine but um just so that we have um a clear picture of what where we'd like to go and I guess I'd like just wait quickly yeah I think that's I think that's right and I think given all that the city has going I'm not sure we should be the leader of that process um I think we can help we can stimulate things our our role right now is is protecting you know dealing with the public in a new sense we can help facilitate but you know VHCB at least their money comes from the public I know Preservation Trust comes from donations I mean there's no reason that there couldn't be a public process whether it's you know Elizabeth's group and those they're the easement holders they're the ones that acquired an easement for desired outcome why can't they you know are they just going to sit passively and wait for someone else to figure it out while the building deteriorates or are they going to take or at least partner with someone who's going to take a more active role in addressing these problems I mean that's been the frustration is that everyone's dug in and said well these are my rights but nobody's doing anything to actually address the problem and so I I like this I'd say you know here's a period of time come back to us in six months with what the rest of you have come up with as long as the we're satisfied the building's safe we won't do anything in the meantime yeah how about Donna did you have something just feel the previous partnership tried to do that and people and the groups didn't come forward with ideas and I'd like to see the land looked out without the house the house and the historic preservation is a huge price tag and I really like to see about what the land is how do we want to use the land which doesn't have this huge price tag so anyway that's all it's fair Jack I was just thinking about the timeline a little bit I threw out three to six months as an idea now that I think about that if people come back to us in six months that's right as we're getting into budget season and this is not going to be an uncomplicated thing so maybe something more in the four to five months than six months line would be more practical Donna's saying three and I'm certainly fine with three if people think that that's enough time and I don't know I'm looking at Elizabeth here yeah Elizabeth doesn't seem like very much time especially when people are not voting you're not meeting a person yeah I mean it's it's complicated isn't it um you know that when I did the project 35 years ago in Marshfield and brought a half a million dollars to rehab an old school it was a kind of a miracle and people say to me now what how did that happen and the way it happened was because there was a lot of public involvement because we got a lot of people really asking the question of what should be done and there were all sorts of possibilities in the beginning and then we just kept moving forward and and as one possibility dropped out people rallied around the you know the possibility that that went forward it's it's hard to organize in the summer I'm going to say that I appreciate your budget concerns it's hard to organize during COVID-19 you all know that from the work we've done we can however it's not impossible however much as I understand Donna's pragmatic three months I would ask for the the four to five month option um you know I'm I'm pretty much of a straight shooter and if things you know are I think there should be two visionings I think there should be visioning for the back property I think there should be visioning for the house and the property and um if nothing is coming forward then I would be the first to tell you that I don't need to wait until the last minute if it's not working uh done I guess again thinking of everything else if you think four months I'm thinking like October November but once you miss November then you get into December in January and you know so then you're into spring so I think it's either November which maybe it happens but doesn't but I think it'd be good to have a goal like November and that doesn't happen then you move it to the spring of next year here's an idea how about this again I'm trying to try to put keep us in our lane so the city is maybe the city takes a position that the building's not in imminent collapse but it needs to be monitored so we're going to inspect we'll inspect it again in four to five months we'll inspect it now we'll expect it again and we're willing to allow an indeterminate period of time for people to work on this as long as the building can still stand and in the meantime if the solution involves taking the back of the property we're willing to entertain that you know we're generally favorable rule to that and we'd like to see what that use might be and then they can come back with their plan whenever they want understanding that if the building gets dangerous we're going to get down and we're going to deal with the hazard so then there's no real I mean their timing coming to us is really going to matter if they're looking for money from the city then it's going to tie in with budget anyway and if they're not looking for money from the city they're just looking for the city say yeah we'll sign off on this plan or we'll take this property they can do that anytime keeps us the enforcer rule yeah that makes sense to me Dan just gonna say I think that makes sense and keeps us in our lane as a city um because we don't want to put ourselves too deep into the middle of this gordy and not um so I'm I'm supportive of that Connor's giving us a thumbs up oh more thumbs up okay nope more thumbs up great uh jack I'll just remind people you know Jay mentioned the gordy unraveling the gordy and not eventually and I'll just remind people that what happened to the gordy and not it did not get unraveled Alexander the great slashed through with his sword uh more reason not to be at the middle of that not remade demolish the building I always say the word yet okay there are a bunch of thumbs up on that building you need a motion to that effect I'm not sure that we do no because we're not taking any real action other than continuing to monitor the property yeah and I can report this to that group okay continue to work with them great uh okay well I actually feel like we made so a few decisions around this topic which is helpful um you know in terms of continuing to re-inspect the building you know looking forward to this visioning process that's not that's not a city process necessarily um and uh just not to say we won't participate and be active are cracks people and everyone else will be you know yeah and and sounds like most folks serve feeling thumbs up or at least middle about the back property so um so that that feels like some decisions which is good I'm also conscious of the time we're better I didn't want to cut off that conversation because I felt like we were actually making some progress so but I think we're I think we're relatively done any other comments on on this topic okay awesome thank you all for hanging in there this topic uh okay so I think we're basically just about at the end here um so gosh uh council reports we'll start with Donna we'll go around as if we were in person yeah okay well I'm sorry that Donna Casey is gone but I wanted to thank DPW oops I cut myself off I wanted to thank DPW for coming and we had a water break each out here in my neighborhood that took them all day they did it um didn't even have a water uh boil order so very appreciative but also just to wish everybody a half each July 4th and sorry we're not having a third parade but get outside but be smart be safe that's all um great Connor I've got a couple things actually um first off the legislative subcommittee met yesterday it was uh Bill, Lauren, Dan and myself only lasts about 45 minutes I think it was a good meeting we were saying Mike if we could shed the other four of you we could take this out every day like record time but I think we're on the same page you know we wanted to start uh slow and um the thought was we've got a legislative agenda a lot of it's like kind of a mood point at this point uh the big fish to fry are you know we'd love to shake some trees see where the money is as far as this covid stuff is uh see if there are any opportunities to pull down grants from the state so you know Dan was saying like maybe merge our legislative agenda with that we still have an obligation to get our charter changes over the finish line and uh we still have our non-citizen us non-us citizen voting uh charter change in the senate they have a lot of downtime so is there maybe a possibility that we could get that over the finish line um in the next few weeks here it's worth looking at but uh bill bill give really good historical perspective on this and um there was a time when the delegation would come in and meet with the council and have a good conversation where maybe sometimes they'd say ah you're not going after this you know or yeah that's a good idea I can like I can look at that and then I think where we came out was sort of revamped the legislative agenda with the uh you know sort of covid items there and invite the uh five members of our delegation to the July meeting to go over with them and just have a bit of a conversation there so you know as we get into the future um I think we could look at expanding the committee we have a lot of lobbyists in town we have people who like you know work in state government would be able to see these opportunities give us a heads up uh but for the moment it seems very practical just to invite the the gang in in July go over this with them uh keep monitoring the committee hearings as they go on and uh I think that's a great first step so if the council was okay with it I think bill was going to draft a letter tomorrow morning uh just giving that formal invite so I don't know if we need a vote or just like a nod in the heads that'd be great there awesome um the other thing I just wanted to say was a week ago Saturday I thought was a beautiful day um you know I know it was messy again there I know we probably colored outside the lines which is a bad analogy for a painting thing uh at times but it was really good to see between two and three hundred members of our community and all over the state of Vermont come and uh I think we thought this would take like hours and hours but it could have been done in half an hour for everything but new Americans came and I think as we're entering really difficult conversations it was really nice just to have like an affirmation of the most basic values that like okay Black Lives Matter and within 24 hours I think we saw sort of the best and worst of humanity you know the best in everybody just coming together and doing this and a good celebratory feeling uh the worst obviously with the vandalism um but then again like the next night I went down at nine o'clock at night and I'll tell this really briefly there was a group of teenagers right and they were kind of sizing me up and they came up to me and I was wondering what they were doing and they were wondering what I was doing and we looked at each other and uh I said wait a minute are you guys standing guard and they nodded there was a young woman probably like five feet tall and she goes yeah we're gonna mess them up if they try that again and I thought what a beautiful thing in our town you know like okay this horrible thing happened but that's like stepping up to the place um so I really just want to thank everybody on council who made this happen I want to thank the city employees and especially like the part of public works and the fire department that were out there I want to thank the community who we had like five people at the next day just on their hands and knees scraping the pavement getting every bit out of there um and I most of all want to thank Noel who's you know uh raised in our community went through our school system was a champion with the Black Lives Matter flag and my god did she get this over the finish line in record time and she's just an inspiration and I think somebody we can all look up to there so uh again thanks a lot that was that was a beautiful day and um you know even the even the graffiti on the sidewalk I think sends an important message that there is racism and hate in our community and in Vermont uh but we're up to the task of having these hard conversations and trying to address it so that's great thanks a lot thank you um Jay all I'll say is is uh thank you Connor for for all of your efforts with this um and it was it was incredible it was an incredible day was an incredible uh event to be a part of um and to to not only from a government a governance but also the way the city rallied and how the community rallied to make it happen uh I like you said it just spoke to to the um to who are what our community stands for um and how we face challenges so that's all thanks I could just like Jay flew a drone and took that picture of the Black Lives Matter thing on the streets and that was so cool it's like we have people calling saying they saw it on CNN so thanks a lot for that Jay awesome uh Dan um the uh rather than plow already furred ground um I've got a call from a constituent asking about graffiti on the bike path apparently there's uh you know new canvas spawns new creative endeavors but uh I know that there was uh some profanity out there um that's causing some concern uh at least one constituent so I know Department of Public Works really does that a great job of covering that up but uh I'll simply raise it I got the call today someone fairly concerned so I think we have to just be be careful about that um did she did sorry did they tell you uh where it was specifically so we can note that I think it was in the new section um out towards um uh uh Gallison Hill but um I didn't ask them for the specific location um okay thank you I know I know there was a new piece down by at the end of the um parking lot by the uh behind the garage where the the bridge abutment there for the uh bridge over the river but you know we we still um you know that's the beauty of local government is that um there are no republicans democrats progressives there are members of the community um and just as we celebrate these really big moments of coming together we always have these little small moments too of trying to keep our community livable and and pleasant for everyone so it's plowing the streets as well as painting the streets yeah uh jack uh just one very quick thing and maybe bill was planning on mentioning this too but uh a couple of years ago it seems we set up a committee for a working group to revise the tax stabilization policy and bill and I just met the other day to put the finishing touches on it and so probably in our july meeting we will be coming back to council with the with our proposed changes to the tax stabilization policy and then we will be able to check one more item off our to-do list fair enough um Lauren yeah just a couple quick things um one I also wanted to acknowledge the great juneteenth celebration that we had I don't know who was able to make it out for that but on really short notice and you know jack has taken the initiative the last couple years to put forward a resolution and for the city but there was great speeches music poetry really great turnout and it was just a beautiful event for our community and again noelle was a leader in that and just edge early walsh former city councilor and so just some acknowledgement there for a great event on pretty short notice and and that was really wonderful to see and you know we're not having our july third celebration so having that freedom day celebrated was was pretty great um just wanted to mention it came up a little bit before in the meeting um but just for you all the social and environment and economic justice advisory committee um is continuing to meet and thank you to cameron for um keeping those meetings going because we are trying to get um the contract out that we've been talking about for a while um and do some of these uh our equity work that we've been committed to so that is moving on and when we have um progress to report I'll do that but just letting you know that we're going to be touching base with the people who'd put in proposals earlier in the year that we put on hold and seeing if we can can get that process going um and then the last thing I just wanted to mention I brought it up a few weeks ago but um with elections so when john speaks I don't know if we need to it might be good to put on the agenda um just a quick check-in on what's happening knowing there's different procedures this year we might want to do you know I know that volunteers in in our community like many communities are a lot of older people we might want to do a call out for a volunteer pool for the in-person voting and get some young people and um so just wanted to to get some attention on on that and what the city might need to do especially if it's going to take some time to recruit people for um for the in-person I know we're going to encourage lots of people to vote by mail um request your absentee ballot but um anyway just just wanted to raise that again to see how we can help support that and raise the profile of any any changes that are happening due to covid that's it thanks great um so thank you all for um for your comments already I mean you we've covered uh gosh it's been an intense few weeks right like um beyond even just the national news I was thinking about um uh gosh all the emails that we have been getting about police reform about racial issues uh and uh you know from uh you know navigating the the Black Lives Matter to then the vandalism um and then the great effort of people afterwards to to clean it up as well as a standing watch that's just amazing and the Juneteenth celebration was I was fabulous people I thought did a really great job staying socially distanced to that and also it felt like a festival without also feeling dangerous somehow which was great and I just wanted to note about that particularly so it came up to me you know could we make Juneteenth a bigger deal in future years perhaps somehow more on par with um with the July 3rd celebration and I think that um is is worth talking about now to be fair that's really mob healer lives domain but uh but I did talk with Dan Groberg about that and I just want to make you all aware that they have grants for for events and so you thought that might be potentially like you know making Juneteenth a bigger event in the future it could be a good candidate for a grant of theirs but of course that would have to be led by someone else so anyway I just wanted to say that out loud but not just necessarily for Juneteenth if there are other events that people are interested in in fostering in Montpelier there's potentially some money to do that um and you know even besides that I I'm just I'm so grateful for for you all um and for the city staff to particularly in in holding um tension between you know having a deep respect for our police department and also believing that we um can be better um and that is um you know sometimes a tough place to be but I'm I'm thankful for all of the deep breathing that you all are doing and um and working through all of this and I know it uh it's uh it's been it's been some intense times um and I'm I'm grateful to have you all to um be thinking critically and um and honestly about all these these tough issues in a way that honors all all the folks in our community so um and at the same time you know so thankful for our for our staff working hard on on these topics and and also just doing a great job so um anyway that's uh so that's all I've got for now um and so I guess I will turn it over to uh John look I got the crazy hair here um nothing to report it well no what am I saying ballots are pretty are in I'm just waiting for envelopes so overseas um ballots will be going out start going out Friday and that should also be when I start sending out the requests the early voting requests we've got so it's going to be a little more complicated with the office closed there's a big push from the secretary of state they're mailing to everybody um everybody everywhere to encourage them to vote early um I expect it to impact my workflow dramatically we'll have scaled down election day we I don't think it's practical for us to do outside or drive up voting so we'll just work on a really managed traffic process of one side of the front of city hall and down the other with social distancing so I mean we'll make that work I think I think we're pretty uniquely set up to be able to manage that pretty well so that's what I'm thinking with all that I just the Lauren was asking I do have a very deep well of volunteers I usually get 50 to 60 folks you know of all age groups out there and I know there's potentially more so but if you you know touch base with me about that if you want um I've got a lot more potentially I could pull from too that I don't have emails for so good crowd mobiliar folks oh my god did they turn out for the elections for for volunteering it's it's crazy I'm so fortunate to be doing this work here um bill uh first of all I think um this may have been the first time that alexander the great was cited in a council meeting so I just like to recognize that as a momentous occasion uh I forgot to note earlier um when we were honoring chief fakers that yesterday he was presented with the Vermont police officer of the year by the American Legion and honored in front of the police station and a small gathering but kind words said and again well deserved can't can't say enough about them um we're you know as we mentioned we're in this weird time where things that you would normally want to have big big huge events we have to be cautious but that said I'd also like to note that next Wednesday July 1st at 9 a.m. we will be swearing in chief p who I see is lurking in the background here in front of city hall and well of course be assuming the weather's good I'll be opening to the open to the public but we urge people to be distant I'm hoping that the mayor will say a few words and um it won't be a lengthy thing but it will definitely be important it's a big change for our community so we thank Tony for his great work and our department and I'd also note I know I see Konstantinos is still on and for the group that uh that has expressed opinions and perhaps feeling frustrated they haven't heard responses the mayor and I are meeting with chief Pete on the second to start talking about the processes by which we would evaluate these questions and the public outreach and so this is being taken seriously and we have tentatively allocating some time I think for the second meeting in August to be on our agenda so hopefully have had some community outreach before that so all interesting challenges and I think that's all I've got for tonight unless do I have more Cameron are my good great okay then so that is it so without objection all right so late everybody um here we are so I'm gonna um without objection declare the meeting adjourned thanks everyone have an excellent rest of your night thanks everyone thanks


When you think of Army transportation, you might think of this, this, or even this. But how about this? For over 100 years, the United States Army has operated and maintained its own railway service. U.S. Army railway operators, like Specialist Paul Tafani, have kept the trains running on time. Full day of work on the Army Railroad consists of classifying and organizing ammunition trains, freight trains, tank trains, whatever we need to move across country. Classifying them, organizing them, and sending them out to the civilian railroads for shipping. I specifically chose this MOS. Railroading has always been a passion of mine. And because of that, my training here actually at Fort Eustis, I was able to secure a civilian railroad job and I have the career I have today because of it. There's no greater feeling than hitting the horn when you go by a crossing and having everyone smile and look up and give you a good wave. It's a very good feeling. Reporting for the 209th Broadcast Operations Detachment, I'm Army Private Christian Higgins.