Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 09/04/2012CITY COUNCIL 4 SEPTEMBER 2012 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 4 September 2012, at 4:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present: R. Greco, Chair; S. Dooley, P. Engels, P. Mackenzie, H. Riehle Also Present: S. Miller, City Manager; R. Rusten, Deputy City Manager; D. Kinville, City Clerk; S. Stitzel, City Attorney; K. Murray, Development Coordinator; M. Lyons, Assessor's Office; P. Taylor, B. Cimonetti, Board of Civil Authority; L. Murphy, Librarian; N. Simson, J. Pasackow, Library Board of Trustees; J. & F. Kochman, B. Bull, G. Haggerty, M. Picard, D. Bell, M. Young 1. Agenda Review: Mr. Miller asked to postpone item #8 (relating to Holmes Road). There will be a meeting on 12 September relating to this issue. Mr. Miller will report back to the Council on the 18th. Mr. Miller also noted that in item #9, the Council will be asked to decide how to word the ballot item. Mr. Miller advised that the Planning Commission prefers 5 p.m. for the joint meeting with the Council on 12 September. Council members were OK with this. 2. Comments & Questions from the Audience, not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements and City Manager's Report: Mr. Miller: The Airport Planning Committee had its first meeting. Mr. Miller was present ex officio as were representatives from the City of Winooski. The Committee has been appointed by the Burlington City Council and will meet on alternate Thursday evenings. Meetings are open to the public. The next meeting is on 13 September. At the meeting, there was discussion as to whether ex officio members will be voting members. This will be discussed with Burlington Mayor Weinberger and legal counsel Ms. Greco noted she received a call from Gene Palumbo, South Burlington's representative on the Airport Commission. The members of that Commission can attend the Planning Committee's meetings as observers. Mr. Miller also noted that after the City Council approved the TIF submission to the Economic Council, the city learned that Barre was making a similar application for the last remaining TIF opportunity. Both cities logged in their applications at the same time on the same day. At the Governor's press conference this morning, Governor Shumlin said he felt that to be fair this situation should go to the Legislature to ask that both applications, if they are found to be in order, be permitted. Mr. Miller expressed appreciation for this. Ms. Dooley: The Affordable Housing Subcommittee held another meeting. It was noted that an additional 404 housing units are anticipated in South Burlington by 2012. Ms. Dooley noted that South Burlington is definitely "aging," and the most predominate (34%) type of household in the city is the one person household. RFPs for a consultant are due on Friday. Ms. Greco: Attended the Planning Commission and the Sustainable Agriculture Subcommittee meetings. Mr. Engels: The Form Based Codes Subcommittee is meeting every other Thursday. RFPs for a consultant are out. This week, the group will walk the City Center area Two members of the group live in the neighborhood. 4. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of 16 July, 6, 15, and 20 August 2012 B. Sign Disbursements C. Review July 2012 Financials D. Consider approval of the Governor's Highway Safety Equipment Incentive Grant E. Consider approval of the ECOS Implementation Grant Program F. Consider approval of the 2013 Vermont Municipal Planning Grant G. Consider Approval of Refinancing of City's existing fire truck note from Northfield Savings Bank to Merchants Bank so as to get a lower interest rate and thereby reduce three years of interest payments H. Consider approval of the following Entertainment/Special Event Permits: 1. Healthy Living Wine Tasting, 29 September 2012 2. Healthy Living Farming Event, 30 September 2012 3. Nightmare/S. Burlington Rotary Haunted House, Picard Circle, October 19, 20, 25-28, 2012 4. Magic Hat Brewing Octoberfest, 20 October 2012 5. Magic Hat Brewing Skiing/Snowboard Demos, 10 November 2012 Ms. Dooley asked to remove the 16 July, and 15 and 20 August Minutes and the Disbursements from the Consent Agenda. Mr. Engels moved to approve the Consent Agenda minus the Minutes of 16 July, 15 and 20 August, and the Disbursements, Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Dooley noted that the 20 August minutes indicate the 16 July minutes have been approved. She noted that in the 16 July minutes, the first sentence on p. 3 gives the impression that the City Manager's authority to hire, discipline and fire employees is new. She suggested rewording the sentence to say the City Manager would "continue to have the authority..." In the minutes of 15 August, the meeting schedule was amended. Ms. Greco noted that in those minutes, under other business, the meeting is with the "staff of" Vermont's legislators, not the legislators themselves. Ms. Dooley noted that in the minutes of 20 August, p. 3, paragraph 3, she asked if the fee should be "changed" not "charged." On p. 7, 6th paragraph, the sentence was amended to read "...will bring bikes closer to the road." Ms. Mackenzie moved to approve the Minutes of 16 July, 15 and 20 August as amended. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regarding disbursements, Mr. Dooley asked about the item related to the Rural Development Farm Service. Mr. Rusten explained that this was in connection with stormwater. Ms. Dooley moved to approve the disbursements as presented. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Liquor Control Board: Ms. Riehle moved that the Council meet as Liquor Control Board. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed unanimously. First Class Liquor License applications were presented from the Grand Buffet II, Inc., 1303 Williston Road, and Osaka Hana, 150 Dorset Street. Ms. Mackenzie moved to approve the First Class Liquor License applications of Grand Buffet II, Inc., and Osaka Hana as presented. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Mackenzie moved to reconvene as City Council. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Consider Appointing a Voting Delegate for the Annual VLCT Business Meeting on 4 October 2012: Mr. Miller noted that each town gets one vote. He suggested that if no Council member wishes to serve as voting delegate, they designate Mr. Rusten who will be attending the meeting. Mr. Engels moved to appoint Bob Rusten as voting delegate for the Annual VLCT Business Meeting. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Update on City's Financial Statements for FY2012: Mr. Rusten noted that FY2011 ended with a $200,000.00 deficit. FY2012 $250,000.00 in the hold. In addition, there was authority to hire 2 unanticipated employees. Mr. Rusten said they are anticipating a surplus at the end of FY2012 of about $405,000.00. He stressed that these are unaudited figures. The final audit is expected in December. Mr. Rusten pointed out some overexpenditures in various categories that are offset by additional revenues. He then outlined some areas of concern including: 1. Overtime for fire and ambulance (there are discussion with the union as to how to alleviate this) 2. Sick Bank ($100,000 was put in a special account for 2013) 3. Advertising (involved hiring which is not anticipated in 2013) 4. Pension administration (There will be an RFP going to the Pension Committee to see if the current administrator is doing the best job at the best price. Mr. Rusten said an overage is not anticipated in FY2012). 5. Sewer (a surplus of $552,000 had been budgeted for; the estimate is a surplus of $849,000. This is mainly due to connection fees. Mr. Miller cautioned against anticipating this would continue to be the case in future years.) Council members were encouraged not to consider spending the surplus in one place. Mr. Rusten stressed that they still have to address the "due to" and "due from" issues. There is also work to be done on the building, which has not been budgeted. And there is only $50,000.00 in the "rainy day fund," and this is not enough. Mr. Engels asked if the city will be able to lower or maintain existing fees. Mr. Rusten said they have only one year's experience with the existing fees. They will look at that in the FY2014 budget process. He added that "one year of good financial news does not make a good financial package." He also noted the need to look long term at such concerns as City Center and Market Street. Ms. Dooley asked if the city got a payment from AOT for stormwater. Mr. Rusten said they did. Ms. Dooley said the City Center will be expensive, but it is an investment in the city's future. Mr. Engels agreed. Ms. Greco questioned why the estimates were so far off. Mr. Rusten noted that the local option tax payment of $800,000 was much better than was anticipated, and there were other revenues in August. He added that it is not a concern when estimates are so far off. Ms. Dooley expressed appreciation to all of those who have rewritten notes, etc., to get lower interest rates and save the taxpayers money. 8. (Postponed). 9. Public Hearings: A. Second Public Hearing on City Council's Proposed City Charter Amendment regarding the South Burlington Community Library: Ms. Mackenzie moved to open the public hearing. Ms. Riehle seconded. Ms. Kochman requested a change to the language that says the Library Board "may seek and obtain input from the Trustees..." She felt "may" should be changed to "shall" as the city's version strips the Library Board of all authority under state law. She felt this "demotes the Board." Mr. Kochman felt the direction of this amendment was wrong, and the city should not be consolidating power. He said the city does not have an adequate library for a city of this size. He felt it is short-sighed to consolidate power and cited the fact that money that was supposed to go to the Library was misplaced by a previous administration. He understood that this money will be replaced, but the point is it happened. Mr. Engels noted the court decision resulting in this amendment is a controversial one. He felt the amendment is "correcting a wrong." Mr. Kochman said the city has been acting illegally for a long time. He said he is using the past to illustrate a potential problem for the future. Ms. Simson, Chair of the Library Board, said the Board worked closely with the City Council and City Manager to come into compliance with the court decision. She felt the amendment will allow the Board to be advisors to the City Council and City Manager. She also noted that in addition to the Charter change, there is a Memorandum of Understanding which, among other things, said the City Manager shall advise the Board of actions prior to taking them. Ms. Simson said the Trustees unanimously adopted the current language. Mr. Pasackow, a Library Board Trustee, supported the Charter change and was comfortable with it, especially with the Memorandum of Understanding. He looked forward to the future of a stand alone Library. Ms. Murphy, Librarian for 12 years, fully supported the Charter change. She felt the Library gets a great deal of support from the city and didn't know how she would manage without the support of the City. Manager, Mr. Rusten, Human Services, etc. She believed the Library should be a city department and also values the Board of Trustees. She felt the Trustees will be able to oversee policies and be advocates for the Library. As there was no further public comment, Ms. Riehle moved to close the public hearing. Ms. Mackenzie seconded. Motion passed unanimously. B. Second Public Hearing on City Council's Proposed City Charter Amendment regarding the City Clerk Position: Ms. Mackenzie moved to open the public hearing. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Greco noted that after the last public hearing, the Council has taken into consideration a residency requirement and also the section of the amendment dealing with the Board of Civil Authority. She also noted there was a mediation session on Friday with the City Clerk which was attended by Ms. Riehle and Ms. Mackenzie. Ms. Riehle said the mediation was the result of the Board of Civil Authority requesting to see if mediation could resolve the two different proposals. Each side had lawyers present, and the session lasted 6 hours. Confidentiality was waived. The City Council proposed that to make the transition happen, after the current City Clerk's term expires, there would be 3 one-year elected terms. Then in 2017, the City Clerk position would become an appointed position. From then on, the City Clerk's office would have the same supervision as other departments, including hiring, reprimanding and firing of employees. Security of the City Clerk's office would remain the same as other offices, except for the vault which would remain under the control of the City Clerk. This proposal was not accepted, and the meeting ended without a resolution. Public comment was then solicited. Ms. Bull: A 60+ year resident did not understand the issue of "transparency." She said the city has a well liked City Clerk and she saw no reason to change that. Ms. Mackenzie said this is not a referendum on the current City Clerk. It is a question of oversight where there are significant amounts of money that come over the counter. Ms. Kinville: Responded to a comment that there have been 8 hires in the City Clerk's office in recent years. She noted that 2 of her staff were promoted within the city, one person left to work in the School office for significantly more money, one person is still working in the office, one person was told that she would be reimbursed for education expenses and when she presented this for payment was told the city wouldn't reimburse these expenses. Two people who were dismissed were not Ms. Kinville's first, second or third choices. The City Manager would not hire her first choices. Ms. Kinville also responded to the statement that $17,000,000 in tax money is collected in the Clerk's office. She said the figure is closer to $11,000,000 of which only about $56,000 is in cash during the full year. She also noted that by statute, the Clerk does not have to collect taxes. She noted that only about 6% of other fees and payments are made in cash. Ms. Kinville stressed that she hoped all parties could act professionally in coming months. Mr. Engels asked what percentage of time is spent collecting taxes. Ms. Kinville said she couldn't really say because each day they get questions which they have to refer to the Assessor's office. This happens 5 to 20 times a day. Mr. Cimonetti: A resident since 1963, he has served as both an appointed and elected official in South Burlington and the State of Vermont. He felt there is a much different perspective between being appointed and elected. Appointed officials are bureaucrats. Elected officials ask and receive support from the populace and owe their allegiance to those who elect them. Appointed officials owe their allegiances to those who appointed them. Mr. Cimonetti noted the City Clerk is a member of the Board of Civil Authority which has defined responsibilities: elections, tax appeals, tax abatement, etc. He implored the Council to leave the City Charter alone and not to take away the voice of the people. Mr. Taylor: A member of the Board of Civil Authority since 1987, has worked closely with the City Clerk. It is one of the few elected positions in the city. He felt that any protection of money can be handled through audits. He also felt that all administrative issues can be resolved with an elected clerk. Ms. Dooley raised the question of employees having collective bargaining rights regarding hiring, firing and discipline. She didn't see how the Clerk's employees could be members of the collective bargaining unit without those rights. Mr. Taylor said he believed that if the Council had been successful in mediating with the City Clerk, there could have been a resolution that the Clerk could have supported. Ms. Riehle asked if Mr. Taylor would support the status quo. Mr. Taylor felt it is not very functional now. Mr. Taylor also stated that having an elected Clerk running elections is far better than having an appointed clerk. He said the Council seems to be saying the public can't elect a good City Clerk. He said he has seen appointed people do bad things in a city. He would put his trust with the voters. Ms. Greco asked the City Attorney to address the hiring and firing issue. Mr. Stitzel said he understood the language to mean that the City Clerk would have sole authority to hire, discipline and fire her employees. In the bargaining unit, there are procedures for hiring, disciplining and firing (e.g., discrimination provision; review of termination by the City Council, etc.). Mr. Stitzel said his interpretation of the Clerk's amendment would be that the City Clerk would not be subject to anti-discrimination or review of her actions by the City Council in the instance of firing an employee. He added that the City Council proposal would have provided that employees would have been subject to the same policies as other department employees. This proposal was not accepted. Ms. Haggerty asked when the language of the amendment has to be set. Mr. Miller said in all likelihood it will be set on Thursday, after the second public hearing on the Clerk's proposed amendment. Ms. Greco noted the Council's amendment language can be changed; the Clerk's cannot. Ms. Picard: A resident since 1953 and City Clerk for 25 years, she enumerated some things the Clerk does for the citizens: she recalled a groom calling on a Saturday morning of the wedding to get a wedding license, which she came into the office and did for him; she recalled attorneys calling after hours for acreage on a piece of property, and the Clerk coming in to get it for them, etc. She stressed that the Clerk is a personal representative of the people and the people are the Clerk's responsibility. She noted that the Council could hire a Clerk who may live in Milton and wouldn't want to come in on a Saturday or evening. The elected Clerk lives in the city. Ms. Mackenzie said this is not a referendum about the current clerk. It is about moving forward and having measurements for handling of checks, etc. Ms. Dooley said the City Council did not bring this up. The City Clerk did. She went to the City Charter Committee. That Committee made a recommendation that the Council did not accept. Ms. Dooley said there are 8 towns in Vermont with appointed clerks, including Burlington and Essex. It is a different way of doing things. She noted that Assistant Clerks have had full bargaining rights for over 20 years and she saw no reason to take that away from them. She also noted that she was not saying there is no merit for having an elected City Clerk. Ms. Riehle said the Council was forced to think about changes to city government as a result of the City Clerk's petition. She added that if she had a choice, neither amendment would be on the ballot. She didn't feel that the keys to the office were a Charter change issue. She also felt that taking away collective bargaining rights is a wrong step for the city. She added that "the issues are too personalized at this point." Mr. Engels said he feels positive about this amendment for a city this size. He felt an elected Clerk is never subject to supervision. He understood the tradition for that but felt there has to be a chain of command. He said the Clerk functions as a department head but does not have to function as other department heads do. Ms. Greco said this is clearly an emotional issue, but she sees it as a very pragmatic issue. She noted that under state law, there are 19 different responsibilities for selectboards/city councils and 7 for the city clerks. The clerks' responsibilities are administrative. She was concerned with oversight in the handling of money and with collective bargaining rights. Ms. Picard asked what the City Charter Committee's recommendation was. Ms. Dooley said they recommended an elected City Clerk and giving the Clerk the right to hire, discipline and fire her employees. A member of the audience felt the language of the Council's amendment is misleading because it says the Clerk would continue to be elected until 2014, and this might lead people to think the position will be an elected one. Ms. Riehle suggested flipping the two sentences for clarity. As there was no further public comment, Ms. Mackenzie moved to close the public hearing. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. C. First Public Hearing on the City Clerk's Proposed City Charter Amendment regarding the City Clerk position, staff, and office access: Ms. Mackenzie moved to open the public hearing. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Kinville read her petition. She noted this petition got started when the City Clerk decided to go opposite the recommendation of the City Charter Committee. She said the problem is the sides have not worked together. She has never been asked to look at the processes in the Clerk's office. Ms. Kinville said she still believes her employees can be members of the union; she would only ask to eliminate the section that says she has to go to the City Manager for hiring, disciplining and firing employees. She stressed that she wants her employees to feel safe and secure and have a chance to do their jobs. Ms. Greco felt those were the key elements of the contract. Ms. Kinville said all she wants is not to have to go to the City Manager. She felt the Legislature can make a change to the language (which she now cannot do), and she had no problem having someone review her actions to see all legal processes have been met. Ms. Lyons, President of the City Hall Employees Association cited the case of a previous employee who chose not to file a grievance when dismissed. She noted that all employees get a copy of the city rules and regulations and a copy of the union contract which sets forth the grievance process. Members can consult with the union's attorney. Ms. Lyons felt all employees should have the same rights and protections. She understood that the City Clerk is now the supervisor of the two assistant clerk's in her office. As there was no further public comment, Ms. Mackenzie moved to close the public hearing. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Members then agreed to make no changes to the wording of the Library amendment. The agreed to reverse the first two lines of Section 13, Subsection 301 of the Council's City Clerk amendment, to drop the BCA piece of the proposed amendment, and to add a residency requirement with the possibility of a waiver by the City Council. 10. Interim Zoning - Public Hearings: A. Public Hearing for Interim Zoning Application #IZ-12-11, Larkin Realty, amendment to existing PUD, demolish existing two story, 89 unit hotel replace with four story, 89 unit hotel, 5 Dorset Street: Ms. Murray said this application must be continued as the applicant did not do adequate public notice. Ms. Mackenzie moved to continue IZ-12-11 until 1 October 2012. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. B. Public Hearing Interim Zoning Application #IZ-12-12, Benson Development Company, amendment to PUD from a two lot subdivision to three lots, 5-9 Executive Drive: Ms. Bell showed the location of the property off Patchen Road. This proposal is for financial purposes and there is no building proposed. They would subdivide the multi-unit residential houses from the overall property. This would now be known as lot #2. She showed the road that would serve lots 2 and 3. Ms. Dooley asked if lot #2 creates a non-conforming use. Ms. Bell said it does not. They also meet the setback requirements. Ms. Dooley asked if 16 units are allowed on less than an acre. Ms. Murray said she will have to check on that. Ms. Dooley said there seems to be a lot of parking on lot #3. Ms. Bell said all residential parking will be on lot #2. There will be an easement to cross lot #3. She stressed that their only intent is to refinance. Ms. Dooley noted this is some of the most affordable housing in the city. Ms. Murray noted a proposed road through the City Center would go near this property, but its route is not yet determined. Ms. Bell noted these units are already in place, and the issue here is financing. Ms. Mackenzie moved to close the public hearing and to have a deliberative session on the application. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Other Business: A. Any items held from Consent Agenda: No issues were raised. B. Any items Council may wish to place on a future agenda: Ms. Dooley noted a resident who is concerned that there is no signage to identify the location of the Police Department. There is a question as to whether off- premises signage is allowed. Mr. Miller said he will have information on this from staff in a few days. Ms. Greco noted receipt of an anonymous letter asking that the Council request that the Air Force have a comparison flyover. The Air Force has said no to this. It would cost $35,000 an hour to fly the F-35. Ms. Greco also noted receipt of a thank you note regarding the F-35s from a resident of Milton. It was noted that 29 October has been tentatively set for addressing priorities. Mr. Miller felt that if the 22 October agenda is light, this could be added then. October meetings are on 1, 22 and 29 October. Executive Session: Ms. Dooley moved the Council meet in Executive Session and Deliberative Session. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.