Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Board of Civil Authority - 10/28/2021BOARD OF CIVIL AUTHORITY 28 OCTOBER 2021 The South Burlington Board of Civil Authority held a meeting on Thursday, 28 October 2021, in the Kevin Dorn Senior Center, 180 Market Street. Members Present: C. Shaw, Chair; D. Kinville, C. Trombly, L. Vera, B. Nowak, M. Emery, M. Mahoney, P. Mahoney, H. Riehle, A. Gross, B. Gross, M. St. Germain, C. Santorello, T. Barritt, K. Nugent, C. Watner, Sen. T. Chittenden Also Present: Rep. M. Lalonde, Rep. A. Pugh, Rep. M. Townsend, Rep. J. Kilacky, P. Taylor, E. Krasnow 1. Emergency evacuation plans: Ms. Kinville provided emergency evacuation instructions. Mr. Shaw reminded attendees that the wearing of masks is strongly encouraged in City Hall. 2. Comments from the public not related to the agenda: There were no public comments. 3. Any change in the order of the agenda: No changes were made to the agenda. 4. Approve minutes from 21 October 2021: Mr. Gross and Mr. Barritt noted that in the report of the Kirkpatrick inspection, there was a recommendation for the City Assessor to do a reevaluation of that street. Mr. St. Germain then moved to approve the minutes of 21 October 2021 with the above addition. Mr. Barritt seconded. Motion passed with all present voting in favor. 5. Hear Appeal: a. Adis & Emina Sefaragic 7 Floral Drive Ms. Kinville advised that Adis Sefaragic is under COVID protocol and cannot attend. They have asked to continue. Mr. Barritt moved to continue the appeal of Adis & Emna Sefaragic to 9 December 2021 at 6 p.m. Mr. Gross seconded. Motion passed with all present voting in favor. 6. Reapportionment discussion and response to LAB: Mr. Shaw noted that the Board asked the city’s 4 legislative representatives to explain the reapportionment process. He stressed that this is one of the only chances the city will have to BOARD OF CIVIL AUTHORITY 28 OCTOBER 2021 PAGE 2 get its opinions to the Legislative Apportionment Board (LAB). There is a 15 November deadline to submit comments. Rep. Lalonde then explained that Chapter II, Section 73 of the Vermont Constitution states that the General Assembly establishes a legislative apportionment Board to advise and assist them. In 1974, the LAB was created with 7 members and Tom Little as Chair. Other members were appointed by the Governor for 10-year terms. The Secretary of State provides support but has no vote. The LAB functions in an advisory capacity, and the General Assembly can accept their report or substitute another plan. Rep. Lalonde noted that the LAB plan has never been completely accepted. Rep. Lalonde then explained the standards for reapportionment. The overall goal is equality of representation. There are 150 Representatives, one or two from each district, with a goal of maintaining “geographical compactness.” Reapportionment is based on population as defined by the latest census, which, in this case, would be 2020. The Board of Civil Authority can provide commentary to the LAB which will then prepare a final proposal by 29 November. There will then be public hearings in November and December. Discussion in the Legislature will begin in January. Rep. Lalonde noted that the process is behind schedule, so people who want to run for offices will have to “scramble.” The 2020 census said that Vermont’s total population is 643,077, which results in one Congressional district. Rep. Lalonde then showed a slide of the current South Burlington districts. He noted that the LAB initial maps significantly modify the district boundaries within South Burlington. One proposal has South Burlington sharing districts with Williston and Essex. Rep. Lalonde then enumerated the questions resulting from the initial LAB maps: 1. How do the district lines match reapportionment standards? 2. Is there preservation of existing political subdivision lines? 3. Does the proposal recognize and maintain patterns of geography, social interest, trade, etc. 4. Is there use of compact and contiguous territory? Mr. Patrick Mahoney asked if South Burlington has enough population to have a 5th district. Ms. Kinville said it does. BOARD OF CIVIL AUTHORITY 28 OCTOBER 2021 PAGE 3 Mr. Gross asked if there is any explanation of the rationale the LAB used to draw its map. Rep. Lalonde said there is a document with an explanation and rationale for the proposal. A survey was done as to whether this should be a one or two person district. Rep. Lalonde believed that 10 years ago the recommendation was for single member districts. Mr. Gross asked if the same criteria were used 10 years ago. Rep. Lalonde said they were. Ms. Kinville then reported that she has been “digging into the data.” She explained how the proposed new districts were created and noted that this involves shifting a lot of voters from one district to another. The LAB appeared not to have paid any attention to existing districts. Ms. Kinville noted that according to the 2020 census, South Burlington has a population of 20,292. The district limitation is 4,287 people. Districts can range from 4,075 to 4,501 and still be OK by applying the 10% variance allowed by the LAB. Ms. Kinville then reviewed possible scenarios: a. Four districts, all from South Burlington with districts going as high as 5,073, which would never be approved. b. Five districts, one shared with no allowance for future population growth. Ms. Kinville noted that neither Williston not Essex wants to share a district with South Burlington. c. Five districts, all South Burlington. The average per district would be 4,058, which almost meets the requirement. This allows for growth, and the city can identify areas where that growth is expected. Ms. Kinville noted that the LAB can’t work on “anticipated growth,” but it can use recent growth with evidence to document that growth. Ms. Kinville also noted that sharing a district with 2 other towns increases expenses, specifically 2 additional polling places, staffing an election, new voting machines and voting booths, and etc. Ms. Kinville said she is working on calculating how much growth there has been since the last census, including what is now “shovel ready.” There are 1,393 units ready to either already in process, are shovel ready or have already been permitted. The City Manager has suggested that they do some calculations regarding yearly growth and the 13% growth in 10 years. This is not an anomaly. Ms. Kinville said she is working on those numbers in addition to numbers over 20 BOARD OF CIVIL AUTHORITY 28 OCTOBER 2021 PAGE 4 years to show that the 2020 number is not a fluke. Ms. Kinville said that within 5 years, South Burlington will be over the recommended number per district. Ms. Kinville then showed a map of the city with the location of the 1,393 housing units that are ready to go. She also referred to possible options of numbers within each of 5 potential South Burlington districts. All are within the 5% deviation below and above the 4,287. Ms. Kinville said the city can send a map to the LAB, but it will still not be set until the Legislature approves the 5 districts. Then South Burlington can set the lines for the districts. Ms. Kinville then presented two options for created a 5th South Burlington district, indicating number with and without growth. Rep. Lalonde said the earlier the city presents what it wants to the LAB, the better. Sen. Chittenden asked what arguments were used to get away from sharing with the City of Burlington from the last census. Ms. Kinville said they tried to meet with Burlington, but Burlington didn’t show up. Mr. Taylor said South Burlington won its case in the Legislature, but it didn’t come easy. He agreed with 5 South Burlington districts. A straw poll showed that BCA members were unanimously opposed to sharing a district and are in line with 5 South Burlington districts. Mr. Shaw asked what should be sent to the LAB. Rep. Lalonde said to send both options for 5 full South Burlington districts in addition to figures on population growth since the census. Mr. Shaw said they will need to show that the LAB proposal fails the “bullet point test” and that the city’s proposal meets that test. Maurice Mahoney moved that the Board of Civil Authority pursue a 5 South Burlington district reapportionment. Ms. Riehle seconded. The motion passed with all present voting in favor. Ms. Riehle suggested that Ms. Kinville get together with the Representatives to help draw the lines. Rep. Kilacky felt the city has a very good case for 5 South Burlington districts. Mr. Taylor asked what disadvantage will Williston and Essex have if South Burlington gets 5 districts. Mr. Shaw said the numbers have gone up in both of those towns. Essex might want to share with Westford and Williston with Richmond. BOARD OF CIVIL AUTHORITY 28 OCTOBER 2021 PAGE 5 Ms. Kinville asked whether the Board will want to meet to review the letter she prepares. Ms. Nugent was OK with Ms. Kinville writing the letter and having it reviewed by a few BCA members. Mr. Taylor suggested having a subcommittee work on the letter. Mr. Shaw suggested the Chair, Vice Chair and Ms. Kinville. Maurice Mahoney moved that a committee of Mr. Shaw, Mr. Trombly and Ms. Kinville draft the letter to LAB. Ms. Riehle seconded. The motion passed with all present voting in favor. Ms. Vera urged the Board not to segregate the city’s neighborhoods any more than they are now (i.e., economically, racially, etc.). 7. Other Business: No other business was presented. As there was no further business to come before the Board, Maurice Mahoney moved to adjourn. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed with all present voting in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 7:46 p.m. ____________________________ Clerk