Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 02/01/2021CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 1 February 2021, at 6:00 p.m., via Go to Meeting remote participation. MEMBERS PRESENT: H. Riehle, Chair; M. Emery, T. Barritt, Sen. T. Chittenden, D. Kaufman ALSO PRESENT: K. Dorn, City Manager; T. Hubbard, Deputy City Manager; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; I. Blanchard, Project Manager; J. Rabidoux, Public Works Director; T. Leblanc, City Assessor; K. Horn, VLCT; Dr. T. Childs, D. Crawford, D. Bugbee, M. Cota, B. Britt, M. Mittag, C. McNeilL. Smith, W. Braff 1.Possible Executive Session related to contracts where premature disclosure would place the City of South Burlington at a competitive disadvantage and to discuss real estate transactions where premature disclosure would place the City of South Burlington at a competitive disadvantage: By a motion made and duly seconded, the Council entered executive session at 6:05 p.m. to discuss contracts and real estate transactions where premature disclosure would place the City of South Burlington at a competitive disadvantage. The Council returned to open session at 6:35 p.m. 2.Additions, deletions or changes in the order of Agenda items: Mr. Dorn asked to remove item 5C from the Consent Agenda and to remove from Item #13 the Professional Firefighters of America section. 3.Comments and Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were presented. 4.Announcements and City Manager’s Report: There were no announcements from Council members. Mr. Dorn: Reported on a shooting earlier in the evening at University Mall. One person was injured. The Police have secured the scene. CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 2 The Economic Development Committee will review the cannabis legislation prior to a public vote next March. Fire Station #2 on Holmes Road has been upgraded with funds from the CARES Act. The Community Outreach Group is planning to meet with Legislators later this month regarding issues raised by Police Chief Sean Burke about people with mental illnesses “falling through the cracks.” Mr. Hubbard has done a great budget video and will do another one on the TIF vote. A Councilor is needed to do the next City News report as soon as possible. Ms. Riehle suggested Mr. Barritt or Sen. Chittenden or both together. Mr. Rabidoux has said that his crew will be out plowing tonight as soon as the significant snowfall begins. 5.Consent Agenda: a.Approve and Sign Disbursements b.Consider and Approve FY22 Chittenden county Regional Planning Commission Unified Planning Work Program project requests c.Approve South Burlington Public Library request to apply for a “Better Places Grant” to create a Story Walk and lights at the “Goose Pond” stormwater facility on Market Street d.Grant authority to the City Manager to negotiate a contract with a consultant for the Underwood Phase 1.2 design work e.Approve Airport Drive Infiltration System Maintenance Agreement Ms. Riehle reminded members that Item “c” was previously deleted from the Consent Agenda. Mr. Kaufman moved to approve the Consent Agenda items a, b, d and e as presented. Sen. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously via a rollcall vote. 6.Presentation and Council discussion regarding “Dillon’s Rule” and proposed Charter amendments that provide additional authority to municipalities: CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 3 Ms. Horn of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns (VLCT) explained the Dillon Rule by which cities and towns can do only things that the State Legislature allows them to do. In non-Dillon Rule states, cities and towns can do what they want unless it is specifically prohibited by the State. Ms. Horn noted that in Vermont, the Legislature can approve, disapprove or ignore requests of municipalities or they can change the language of a request at will. If communities have governance charters, they can do what is allowed in those charters; however, only 60 communities in the State have governance charters. Ms. Horn also noted that last year, Williston adopted language at their Town Meeting that any change approved for any other municipality’s charter could be adopted by Williston without going to the Legislature again. Winooski adopted the same provision in November. Both provisions will be introduced in the State Legislature this year, but, Ms. Horn said, will probably not be dealt with. He added that the more towns that enact such provisions, the more likely the Legislature will pay attention. VLCT advocates on behalf of all cities and towns in Vermont. Ms. Horn noted that when it gets to issues of governance, communities are very unified, despite their size. There was a pilot program proposed a few years ago. A self-governance commission would decide what is “workable,” and that would remain in place for 10 years. If an ordinance got adopted in that time period, it would remain. This was passed in the State Senate but then “hit the wall.” Ms. Horn said it is an uphill climb even to get the conversation going, even though the Senate is very supportive. Ms. Horn said VLCT has a list of the kinds of issues that could be appropriate for self-governance including on-street parking, speed limits (which aroused some ire), and going to an Australian ballot for the city’s/town’s annual meeting. The feeling is that towns could be more efficient if they didn’t have to keep running to the Legislature for permission to do things. Mr. Kaufman said not much has changed since he was in the Legislature. The House never is willing to give up the ability to review everything even though they could free up time for more important things. Mr. Kaufman added that South Burlington is in the middle of the speed limit issue which the community strongly supports. Ms. Horn noted that one bill being introduced would be to allow towns to act for “pedestrian safety.” CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 4 Sen. Chittenden asked why several Chittenden County State Senators opposed the local governance bill. Ms. Horn said Sen. Baruth’s concern may have been education. The other issue was a bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee that would prohibit carrying guns in municipal buildings. Mr. Dorn encouraged the City Council to engage the City Charter Committee on this issue. He felt that eventually the State Legislature will agree to it. He felt this would be a good step for the city to consider at next year’s March election. Ms. Horn said she would be willing to talk with the City Charter Committee. Ms. Riehle said it makes no sense to have to ask the Legislature to increase the number of people on the Planning Commission. Members agreed to consider convening the City Charter Committee. 7.Council Discussion and Possible Guidance regarding the schedule for completing the re-appraisal of South Burlington commercial and residential properties: Mr. Leblanc said there will be a notice posted as to where things stand with re-appraisal and what the schedule will be from here on. Mr. Barritt asked what the normal schedule is. Mr. Leblanc said there really isn’t a “normal” schedule. They send out change notices in June. They had planned to have notices out in January until COVID hit. Now they are planning on April, which will give a longer appeal period. Mr. Barritt asked if there is usually a large response to preliminary appraisals. Mr. Leblanc said there isn’t except in the residential market. Preliminary publishing of valuations can eliminate a lot of possible appeals if it is done before the notices go out. Mr. Leblanc said that in reality it doesn’t matter whether people question an assessment in the “informal” or “formal” notice. He did say that with rising property values, people get concerned their taxes will go up. Mr. Barritt asked how many appeals there were the last time there was re-appraisal. Mr. Leblanc estimated several hundred. He stressed that people don’t usually questions the value; their concern is taxes going up. He noted that if you question an assessment, you have to show why you think the assessment is wrong. An appeal has to be in the assessor’s office within 14 days after the reassessed value has gone out. Mr. Barritt asked how much the grand list has gone up. Mr. Leblanc estimated 25%. He didn’t expect commercial property to go up much, but housing rental will. CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 5 Mr. Leblanc said he hasn’t decided how they will do the reappraisal notice. They will try to do more to explain the process and where to find assessments for other properties. Mr. Dorn said the City will have a very robust public notification process. Mr. Barritt noted he was asked why reappraisals are done. He said it is important to explain the CLA process to people regarding the education tax formula. Mr. Leblanc said it is a very confusing concept. He said if they did a reappraisal every year, the CLA would stay the same. He felt the CLA “scare tactic” isn’t real. Mr. Barritt said his concern is house values are up 25%, and the CLA is at 85%. He saw a problem coming with taxes going up. Mr. Leblanc said he thought that was right. 8.Council discussion and guidance to staff on potential amendments to the South Burlington Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance: Mr. Conner said the last time the impact fees were updated was 2007. He asked what the Council’s comfort level was as to where fees wind up. Ms. Riehle said what is being proposed is $2596 per PM peak hour trip. Mr. Conner said that would by for a single home which usually produced one PM peak hour trip. The fee for commercial properties would depend on the type of use. Mr. Rabidoux said the total amount of additional fees would be about $1000 if you add this to the Recreation fee. Mr. Barritt asked if a 40-unit apartment building would be close to that for each unit. Mr. Conner said it would be about 40 times 2/3 of $2596. There would also be a credit if the apartment building replaced a single family residence. Mr. Rabidoux added that the fee for senior housing facilities would be smaller. Ms. Riehle asked how this would affect the need for affordable housing. Mr. Conner said there would be credit for building adjacent to infrastructure. The city can also exempt certain things. The catch is that the credit can’t be assigned to other impact fees; it would have to come from the general funds. Sen. Chittenden asked whether this would be city-wide or in the transit overlay district where the city wants development. Mr. Conner said it would be a city-wide number; however, there are opportunities to reduce trips (e.g., along a transit line), and this encourages people to work together creatively. Mr. Rabidoux noted this is what is happening with the new Holiday Inn development. CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 6 Ms. Emery asked why multi-unit buildings are cheaper. Mr. Conner said it comes down to demographics. Typically, there are fewer people per unit in multi-family residences than in single family. That translates to one peak hour fewer per unit. Mr. Rabidoux added that multi- unit buildings are also closer to services and people can walk there. Mr. Conner said the formula is based on many studies. Ms. Emery asked how to respond to the fact that other communities are cheaper. Mr. Rabidoux said a Burlington update will probably generate a similar response. He also noted that South Burlington has a robust CIP; if communities have fewer projects, they need less money to fund them. In South Burlington, the impact fee helps “shoulder” the burden that the taxpayer would have to pay. Mr. Conner explained that with commercial development, a “destination” use would pay a full share while a “pass by” use would get a substantial credit. Mr. Conner also noted that impact fees help to spread the cost for additional development across a number of developers instead of just one. Mr. Rabidoux said that without impact fees, the first few developments wouldn’t have to pay anything, but the developer that put the need for improved infrastructure over the top would have to pay the full cost. Ms. Emery asked if this would be considered a “smart growth thing.” Mr. Conner said it would. It pushes trips away from car need and helps support the CIP which is in itself smart growth. Mr. Barritt didn’t think the amount was a big deal for homes that cost $500,000. He had no problem raising the impact fee as proposed. Sen. Chittenden said he was more comfortable with the Williston range ($1950), not with 30% more. Mr. Barritt said he would be comfortable bringing it down a little. Mr. Kaufman said the city has a well-crafted CIP, and he had faith that the numbers have been well vetted. He felt other communities would catch up in a few years, so he was comfortable with the numbers. Mr. Britt said the proposed fee would never pay for all the projects; it’s just a contribution. Mr. Conner said that is correct. Impact fees are a component of the 10-year CIP along with such things as “Penny for Paths,” grants, etc. Ms. Riehle said she was happy to go forward with the proposed number, and if the Council hears issues from people, the number can be modified. Members were OK with that. CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 7 9.Council Discussion regarding potential adjustments to the boundaries of the South Burlington Tax Incremental Financing District: Mr. Dorn showed a map including the current 106 acres of the TIF District. He noted that he has been meeting with UMall owners who are looking to sell the Mall and are trying to increase its value in order to do that. Talks are centering on a partnership with the city that would lead to redevelopment of that property to make it a vital part of City Center. In order to achieve the amenities and needed infrastructure, the property’s 55 acres would have to be part of the TIF District. This would require Council approval and a Master Plan from UMall. Mr. Dorn noted he has seen an early plan that features mixes uses and “destination amenities.” Mr. Dorn asked for Council input regarding expanding the TIF District and possibly taking away some part of the existing TIF District. Ms. Blanchard said the City would have to work closely with VEPC staff to be sure they understand what is happening. This has been discussed with State people in the past. Mr. Barritt asked how much time is left to do this. He felt the city is running out of time with the TIF District. Mr. Dorn said that is a very good question. The City has till March of 2023 to incur debt, and the public would have to make a decision on this by August of 2022. Mr. Dorn said staff is pushing the Mall hard to make a decision. The Mall would be adding additional square feet of housing and retail. They may tear down the parking garage. Sears owns their building and the Auto Center. Redevelopment would increase the appraised value of the property. Mr. Dorn said part of the discussion has to be about the garage and whether it is needed for City Center. He felt the City should be part of that discussion. Ms. Emery asked what kind of projects there would be on the Mall property. Mr. Dorn said some road, stormwater, parking, community settings (e.g., skating rink), splash pond for children, etc. It would augment City Center. Mr. Kaufman felt the UMall property is essential to be complementary to the City’s “downtown.” He felt it was essential to include that land in the TIF. Ms. Emery agreed. Ms. Riehle also agreed and felt Dorset Street would become the City’s Main Street, and that might make the pedestrian bridge possible. Mr. Dorn said the Mall is very interested in that bridge as it would come into Mall property. He felt that if a partner could help fund the bridge along with TIF money, it could become a reality. CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 8 10.Certification of Increment and Presentation of the 2020 Tax Increment Financing District Annual Report: Ms. Blanchard explained that each year the city presents a report to the Economic Council on the TIF progress for the previous year, specifically what happened to that property and to the Grand List. The city has to certify as to taxable value. In the past year, the city added $4,000,000 in taxable value over the previous year. The increment on that value was $159,969. Next year, the increment will be more than the indebtedness. Ms. Blanchard noted that each time a property subdivides, it increases in value. Projects that have advanced in the TIF District include: Market Street, the design for Garden Street, the Williston Road streetscape, the I-89 pedestrian/bike bridge, and the Library/City Hall/Senior Center. Ms. Blanchard noted that the city also has to report on employment and surveyed area businesses to do this. Twenty-one responses were received. They indicated some changes in retail and restaurant uses. The largest change was in groceries, which showed an increase in employment. The bulk of the city’s expenditures in the TIF District went to Vermont companies. As part of this year’s report, the city had to indicate the impact of COVID on projects. Ms. Blanchard then showed a chart with the prior year and estimated figures for next year. 11.Council Discussion and Guidance related to the role of the Council relative to the Burton Corp./Higher Ground application under Act 250, the State’s land use law: Ms. Riehle reviewed the history and said the city needs to clarify its role and decide how much further it will go. Ms. Riehle noted that 2 new concerns have been raised: well water pollution and noise. Mr. McNeil said he sent out a pre-conference order regarding witnesses the city wants to provide. There is some anticipation that the city will provide testimony; if not, he would ask the Commission to consider Ms. Emery’s memo of concern. CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 9 Mr. Smith said the CRZ Group is hiring expert witnesses, and they will make that information available to South Burlington as well. Mr. McNeil said that may be helpful, depending on what the city wants to do. Ms. Braff said the neighbors are coming to this with their own funds and would like the city to invest to support the city’s park, Police Department, and the residents. She felt it would be “penny wise and pound foolish” not to give this the attention it deserves. Ms. Braff added that 500 cars is the low estimate, and there is no infrastructure to support this. Ms. Riehle said she understood the neighbors’ passion and concern. She stressed the city hasn’t abandoned the 88 homes in this area. The question is how to give support without spending tons of money. Members agreed to continue this discussion in Executive Session. 12.December Financials: Mr. Hubbard said the city has received 61% of anticipated revenue and has expended 43% of projected expenses. The concern is with revenue as expenses can be controlled. The local option tax should be received in mid-February. Fire Department revenue is at only 23%, ambulance billing at 33%. Planning & Zoning revenue is also down. Enterprise funds are doing well. 13.Consider and possibly approve a one-year collective bargaining agreement with the South Burlington chapter of AFSCME Local 1343/City Hall/Public Works Association and Professional Firefighters of America: Mr. Dorn reminded member that the Firefighters of America has been deleted from this item. Mr. Dorn then explained that the one-year extension will run through 30 June 2022. The only changes are in the compensation rate (1.5% step increase) and cost of living increase (1.1% increase in the COLA). Mr. Dorn expressed appreciation to the Union for having done this. Mr. Kaufman then moved to approve the collective bargaining agreement with AFSCME Local 1343 as presented. Sen. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously via a rollcall vote. 14.Councilors’ Reports from Committee Assignments: Ms. Riehle: The Outreach Committee for a City Manager has reduced the 11 applications CITY COUNCIL 1 FEBRUARY 2021 PAGE 10 down to 4. On Friday, they will interview the first two choices. 15.Other Business: No other business was presented. 16.Executive Session: Mr. Barritt moved that the Council meet in executive session to discuss personnel and litigation and to invite Messrs. Dorn, Hubbard, Conner, and McNeil to the session. Sen. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The Council entered Executive Session at 9:05 p.m. Following the Executive Session, Mr. Barritt moved to adjourn. Mr. Kaufman seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.