[0:12] Good evening everyone and
[0:13] welcome to the
[0:14] regular meeting of the
[0:17] Berlin City Council on September 28th.
[0:19] I'm Jared Felch. To
[0:20] my right are
[0:21] Brian D'Amico and Carl
[0:22] Weisel. To
[0:24] my left are Chris Gaywood and
[0:25] Flo Smith. Also with us is
[0:26] our City
[0:27] Administrator Vince
[0:28] Conti. I declare
[0:29] the meeting open. Are
[0:32] there any additions
[0:33] or changes to the
[0:35] agenda?
[0:35] Yes.
[0:36] sir.
[0:40] We are crossing out
[0:41] the protocols.
[0:42] Good.
[0:49] And there will be no
[0:50] decisions regarding the position of
[0:51] CFO today. Just
[0:54] a few updates.
[0:55] Good. Of course. Are there any
[1:01] comments from the
[1:02] public?
[1:07] OK. Discussion of the "
[1:08] Good Samaritan".
[1:11] If you want to come
[1:12] here, please, we
[1:13] would be happy to. It's
[1:18] nice
[1:19] to see you too. It's
[1:20] nice to see you too. We
[1:22] need to find a new
[1:23] chair. It looks like a
[1:24] child's.
[1:25] It's perfect for my height
[1:26] . Sorry.
[1:29] What is your name?
[1:30] Hatch. Hatch.
[1:31] Sorry.
[1:32] Luke Jackson.
[1:33] Welcome back. Yes, welcome back
[1:34] . Thank you
[1:36] for coming.
[1:59] You provided great
[2:00] information last
[2:01] time. Thank you for
[2:02] coming again. I'm
[2:03] sure there will be more
[2:06] Lukes here to
[2:06] talk about
[2:08] tax exemption. You
[2:11] all received a package of
[2:12] documents.
[2:14] Questions arose about whether
[2:15] they paid
[2:16] taxes. This
[2:16] information about what
[2:18] they paid was
[2:19] sent out. What would you
[2:23] like to add? I think
[2:24] we're at that
[2:25] stage, right? This is an issue that is
[2:26] currently on the
[2:27] agenda. Yes,
[2:29] do you have any more
[2:30] questions or
[2:31] information?
[2:31] Yes, the process from
[2:32] last month,
[2:33] I think, yes. Is there
[2:36] an answer?
[2:37] And they, you know, they
[2:40] pay their taxes on time now. The
[2:42] last bill was
[2:43] in mid-August, and
[2:45] based on the decision, we
[2:49] are determining the next
[2:50] steps for everyone at this
[2:52] point.
[2:54] You know, long
[2:56] story short. Yes. Um, if
[2:57] everyone remembers the
[2:58] story, right? Um,
[2:59] before
[3:00] the changes there, they
[3:02] came to talk
[3:03] about a potential
[3:03] pilot program to
[3:05] meet every year
[3:06] to discuss. Um,
[3:07] they didn't know
[3:08] about some of this
[3:09] information at the
[3:10] last meeting either.
[3:13] But again,
[3:14] there are protocols.
[3:15] Yes. If anyone
[3:16] wants to
[3:17] view them, they
[3:18] have been sent as well. Here, in
[3:20] short, is where
[3:21] we are now
[3:22] .
[3:23] Yes.
[3:30] I guess my question is
[3:31] : is this something that
[3:35] would interest
[3:35] the organization—
[3:36] implementing a pilot
[3:37] program instead of a
[3:38] full
[3:39] tax exemption?
[3:42] Make some
[3:43] payments in lieu of
[3:44] taxes.
[3:46] Hmm, I'm not sure
[3:47] exactly how this
[3:49] process works. But, you know
[3:53] , we are of course ready for
[3:54] any discussions
[3:55] and needs. I, you know,
[3:59] our main goal in all of
[4:00] this is to
[4:01] make sure that we
[4:02] can keep the
[4:03] property in good
[4:04] condition and address the
[4:05] maintenance issues
[4:06] that
[4:13] arise, including the
[4:15] facility improvements that the
[4:17] city of Berlin has asked us to make. We
[4:21] met with
[4:22] Mike, I think it
[4:23] was Mike and Joe,
[4:24] a few weeks ago to
[4:25] talk about,
[4:26] for example, our
[4:27] code snippet. This is one
[4:28] example of
[4:30] property improvements, which is important
[4:31] to us, but is nearly
[4:32] impossible when you are
[4:33] running an
[4:35] emergency shelter and doing
[4:36] constant repairs and
[4:38] maintenance.
[4:39] Given
[4:39] the use of the building
[4:41] , it is difficult to undertake
[4:42] such projects
[4:43] while paying
[4:44] full
[4:45] property tax.
[4:46] So, keep going.
[4:48] continue.
[4:49] So, just to
[4:49] answer your
[4:50] first question: what
[4:51] is our pilot
[4:52] project? I brought our
[4:53] pilot agreement,
[4:54] a copy of which I take and
[4:56] review whenever I
[4:57] can. And just
[5:01] a reminder for the council
[5:02] while he's here. In
[5:06] the past, previous
[5:07] boards agreed
[5:08] to meet
[5:09] with them annually and
[5:10] discuss their
[5:11] status and
[5:11] solvency.
[5:15] Yes.
[5:16] So, it was
[5:17] agreed upon then. This is
[5:18] recorded in
[5:19] the protocols. So
[5:20] theoretically it's still
[5:22] relevant for
[5:22] discussion today
[5:24] .
[5:24] Yes.
[5:25] And how many
[5:26] real estate properties are there?
[5:28] We now own
[5:29] shelters.
[5:31] And where exactly, because I'm
[5:32] trying to remember.
[5:34] Montpelier, Berlin,
[5:36] Barre City, and Barre in
[5:37] New England. We
[5:40] own properties in
[5:41] Berlin, Montpelier, and
[5:42] Barre City, and rent in
[5:43] South
[5:44] Burlington
[5:45] .
[5:52] Have
[5:53] other cities offered you programs?
[5:55] Regarding taxes.
[5:57] Any other cities?
[5:58] We have been enjoying the
[5:59] exemption in Barre
[6:01] City for decades. I do
[6:02] n't...I would assume.
[6:03] Last year, our tax exemption
[6:05] was also renewed in Barre City
[6:07] . So, as
[6:09] part of our
[6:10] process of sending these
[6:11] forms to cities, Barre
[6:12] City was on the list, and
[6:14] Montpellier was on the list, too, because it's a
[6:15] recently acquired
[6:16] property.
[6:18] Right.
[6:19] Yes.
[6:19] So, in Barre Town, do you
[6:20] pay taxes?
[6:21] In Barre City—no.
[6:23] In Barre City, so you
[6:24] said Montpellier,
[6:25] Yes.
[6:25] Berlin and only Barre
[6:26] City?
[6:27] They rent a
[6:28] space in
[6:28] South
[6:29] Burlington.
[6:29] And they rent in
[6:30] South
[6:30] Burlington.
[6:31] Of course.
[6:31] Ahem. So theoretically we
[6:36] could do this
[6:37] every year. If we
[6:38] were going to grant an
[6:39] exemption, it could
[6:41] be for 1 year. And
[6:42] then watch it?
[6:43] Or how often do you...
[6:45] We do it in Barre
[6:46] City.
[6:46] Well, it's definitely not every year
[6:48] in Barre City, but I'm not
[6:49] sure how often
[6:50] it happens. Maybe
[6:51] every 3 years.
[6:52] Of course.
[6:53] As I understood from the
[6:54] council meeting, it
[6:55] was presented as if
[6:56] yes, they
[6:57] would come to
[6:57] council every year to
[6:58] discuss what they
[6:59] could or could not
[7:00] afford. Regarding
[7:02] taxes.
[7:02] It would be more
[7:03] like a pilot
[7:04] program.
[7:04] This is
[7:05] instead of exemption
[7:06] from payment.
[7:06] This, this is
[7:07] correct.
[7:08] This makes a pilot
[7:09] program or
[7:10] tax exemption a kind of "
[7:12] middle ground," in
[7:13] my opinion.
[7:14] Yes.
[7:14] Of course? It's neither one nor the
[7:17] other, it's something in between.
[7:19] True.
[7:20] The Council tried to be The
[7:21] Council tried to be
[7:23] flexible and how did I
[7:24] interpret that then?
[7:25] What are the annual taxes
[7:27] ?
[7:27] Sorry, I have this
[7:28] data. I Yes, I do
[7:31] n't have an exact number.
[7:33] Somewhere around 30 thousand.
[7:35] This is 30 something.
[7:37] 30
[7:37] 26 39 28. Does it seem true?
[7:43] Yes.
[7:44] I hope so. $32,639.28. And
[7:55] they can pay
[7:56] quarterly.
[7:59] Yeah, I think, you
[8:00] know, clarifying
[8:01] the process, you know,
[8:03] city policy
[8:04] versus a pilot
[8:05] program for cities
[8:06] that is set up by the
[8:07] state. So, I'm still, you
[8:08] know, figuring out the
[8:10] difference between city
[8:14] policy and the
[8:15] pilot program
[8:16] that we talked about
[8:17] earlier, which was a
[8:18] state program
[8:19] for cities.
[8:22] Oh, you mean the one the
[8:24] state pays?
[8:25] Yes.
[8:26] Oh, with
[8:26] Here's a look at the
[8:27] state pilot
[8:28] program, which
[8:29] differs from
[8:30] our own
[8:30] city
[8:32] property tax policy.
[8:34] This is good. Can I
[8:38] ask a question?
[8:41] I'm a little
[8:42] confused. That 32,000 and
[8:44] something you
[8:45] just mentioned, was that
[8:46] taxes? Are these both
[8:49] city and school
[8:50] taxes? And how is that
[8:53] different from a
[8:54] grant, which has to be
[8:55] voted on at the
[8:56] meeting, and I don't think
[8:57] it can
[8:58] include a
[8:59] school
[9:00] tax exemption at all.
[9:02] Right. So I'll have to
[9:12] look and
[9:13] see. I just
[9:14] got the resume. I
[9:15] don't know if that includes
[9:17] school taxes or
[9:18] not. Um, there is no
[9:22] tax distribution specified here. This is
[9:24] just a quarterly
[9:25] amount. I don't see a
[9:29] breakdown here.
[9:31] Yes, I I you know, or
[9:33] it's
[9:33] I I don't know. I
[9:34] don't have this
[9:35] information. Sorry.
[9:36] So, Fran, I'm sorry. Are
[9:38] you saying that this
[9:39] should or should not
[9:40] include school
[9:41] taxes?
[9:41] Well, I What Vince said
[9:42] , about this being the
[9:44] "middle ground" for
[9:45] Grange, is
[9:47] tax exemption. But, if I
[9:51] recall, they
[9:52] did it
[9:53] wrong the first year, and they
[9:54] were allowed
[9:54] to be exempt from
[9:55] school taxes,
[9:57] but that's not possible, because
[9:58] it's separate. You would
[10:00] have to
[10:00] contact the
[10:01] school board.
[10:02] A.
[10:03] I think it's required to
[10:04] consider any
[10:06] dismissal, if I
[10:07] remember correctly.
[10:08] But if you're talking
[10:09] about a pilot project,
[10:10] then I think that's a completely
[10:12] different story that I do
[10:13] n't quite understand.
[10:16] But the other thing is that
[10:18] for
[10:19] tax exemption there had to be
[10:20] a vote in the hall. And
[10:23] the decision was
[10:24] made, how often? I
[10:26] forgot how it is. 3 years, 5
[10:28] years, it doesn't matter, but for
[10:29] some reason it had to be a
[10:31] vote in the hall. And
[10:33] for a while the fire
[10:34] department
[10:35] That's right.
[10:36] also did this, but
[10:37] now they are part of
[10:39] the municipality.
[10:59] See if they have it.
[11:01] That would be in March,
[11:02] right?
[11:05] It would be a special
[11:06] vote, it would be
[11:09] No, it should have been it
[11:10] should have been in March,
[11:11] it should have been it should have
[11:13] been
[11:14] Yes, but okay. Yes, it's
[11:15] still an appropriation.
[11:36] This is inaccurate.
[11:41] I would probably advise
[11:42] us to get more
[11:43] information about the
[11:44] actual tax
[11:45] bill.
[11:47] What? Is there a breakdown of what
[11:49] it includes?
[11:50] Right. And
[11:52] the Process.
[11:53] as to
[11:54] where we should go
[11:55] if this needs to be
[11:56] put to a
[11:57] vote in the floor. Uh
[12:01] , and as for the
[12:02] education tax,
[12:03] where does it go next? So
[12:09] , and also, I think you
[12:10] might have a
[12:11] conversation with your
[12:12] organization about
[12:14] what we have for the
[12:15] pilot program, uh
[12:16] , and then we'll
[12:17] come back when
[12:18] we have more
[12:19] information. Sorry to
[12:23] continue.
[12:24] No problem. But
[12:26] I think it's good
[12:27] because
[12:27] presenting it
[12:28] gives you time to
[12:29] review it with
[12:30] your people. Was there a
[12:31] third?
[12:33] Sorry. Uh, to
[12:34] see a breakdown of what
[12:36] they're paying
[12:37] now.
[12:37] True.
[12:38] What do I mean?
[12:39] Education
[12:40] vs. education
[12:41] tax. What is the process
[12:44] if we need to go
[12:45] to a floor vote
[12:46] for
[12:47] tax exemption. Because it
[12:49] seems to me that if we
[12:51] wanted to make a
[12:51] dismissal, it should be
[12:53] put to a
[12:53] vote in the chamber.
[12:56] But as for the pilot
[12:57] program, we could
[12:58] solve it here. Uh, and
[13:03] also just
[13:04] having more
[13:05] conversations in the future.
[13:10] Uh, because if it
[13:11] comes to dismissal,
[13:13] and we have to
[13:14] hold a
[13:14] floor vote,
[13:15] it should be a
[13:18] town meeting.
[13:19] I understand.
[13:20] Yes.
[13:20] Or special fees.
[13:23] To have
[13:24] We have to set
[13:25] Yes.
[13:27] If you would like to
[13:28] clarify this issue,
[13:29] perhaps you can
[13:30] contact us and
[13:31] we will return this
[13:32] suggestion or
[13:33] recommendation
[13:34] based on this
[13:35] pilot project. I
[13:38] don't see anything here
[13:39] about voting on
[13:41] this. I don't know what it
[13:44] could be. I'm
[13:48] looking at Well
[13:51] , I think we
[13:52] need to study
[13:53] history.
[13:55] You filled out a
[13:56] state application, it
[13:58] says you, and
[13:59] then the evaluators
[14:00] recommended it,
[14:01] you know, they either
[14:02] recommend it or they don't,
[14:03] and then it's
[14:04] reviewed. Are
[14:06] we talking about a
[14:07] layoff or a
[14:07] pilot project?
[14:08] What are you looking at?
[14:09] Release.
[14:15] Okay, we need to
[14:16] clarify.
[14:17] Yes. I think so.
[14:19] Get
[14:20] confirmation of the
[14:21] story. And then we'll
[14:23] come back and
[14:24] continue
[14:24] the discussion. Good.
[14:27] Thank you for your time and
[14:28] patience, and maybe
[14:29] we won't have to
[14:30] ask you to
[14:31] come back.
[14:32] Good.
[14:32] But we'll see.
[14:35] Thank you, Luke.
[14:37] Yes, sir.
[14:38] Good.
[14:39] Thank you for coming.
[14:40] Thank you.
[14:40] Goodbye.
[14:41] We appreciate your work.
[14:43] You too. Good.
[14:54] Discussion and
[14:55] decision on
[14:56] repayment of loan for
[14:57] fire truck. So, this has
[14:58] already been discussed
[14:59] several times.
[15:00] Yes.
[15:01] Let's just
[15:02] look at the
[15:03] solution. Are
[15:05] we making decisions?
[15:07] Um, so the payment for the
[15:15] Quint fire ladder truck. The total amount
[15:19] due, taking into account the
[15:21] repayment period,
[15:23] is 84,833.74. Um, for
[15:28] that one. For
[15:31] the Pierce truck,
[15:34] the payout is
[15:37] 63,728.31. For the same one. So, the
[15:47] loan dates were in, and I'm
[15:49] reading Kelly's notes
[15:50] because she couldn't be
[15:51] here, as I mentioned
[15:52] earlier. The interest rate
[16:00] on loans
[16:01] is 6.21%.
[16:07] Paid as of
[16:08] today, um, for the
[16:09] tower truck,
[16:11] um, interest
[16:12] is approximately
[16:14] 2676. And for the truck—
[16:19] 2016 with pennies. So,
[16:28] again, Joe, do
[16:32] you have anything, boss, you
[16:33] want to say about
[16:34] this? I
[16:37] suppose so.
[16:39] Of course. I mean,
[16:41] paying off
[16:42] loans is really the
[16:43] right thing to do.
[16:45] All I would
[16:46] ask is that the council
[16:48] consider the
[16:48] possibility when
[16:50] formulating the budget
[16:51] for next year, I
[16:52] believe 2027. Um, so
[17:00] we leave this
[17:02] expense line as is and
[17:02] direct it,
[17:04] perhaps, to CIP for
[17:05] the replacement of the next
[17:06] vehicle
[17:07] . You know, I tried to stick to
[17:15] the plan to
[17:16] buy a new
[17:17] rescue vehicle,
[17:18] since it's the
[17:19] workhorse of that department.
[17:24] I began to realize that
[17:25] we probably wouldn't
[17:26] see a new
[17:27] car at that
[17:28] station for a while
[17:29] . I think the board of
[17:35] commissioners, um,
[17:36] all parties should
[17:37] accept the fact that
[17:38] if we buy
[17:39] used
[17:40] vehicles, our maintenance costs
[17:43] will remain
[17:44] high. Because
[17:48] whoever owned them in the first place has
[17:49] already
[17:50] squeezed all the juice out of them
[17:51] . That's all I
[17:56] wanted to say.
[17:58] 2.3 years—that's how long it
[18:00] will take to pay off.
[18:02] Here it is.
[18:16] This is East Rise.
[18:18] OK.
[18:19] Yes.
[18:23] And we have the money for it, don't we
[18:24] ?
[18:25] This is included in the
[18:26] department's budget
[18:27] .
[18:28] This is
[18:30] the money we
[18:31] transferred to the city.
[18:33] Yes.
[18:36] pay it off.
[18:37] Yes.
[18:38] It doesn't seem right, does it
[18:40] ?
[18:41] Yes.
[18:45] high interest rates.
[18:47] These are very high
[18:48] percentages.
[18:49] Yes.
[18:50] You won't see the
[18:51] check there. You won't see the
[18:52] check there. Sorry, I
[18:53] know you're
[18:54] looking for it. You won't
[18:55] see any checks there.
[18:56] It's going to be, um
[18:57] No, I'm just looking
[18:58] at
[18:59] Okay.
[18:59] Good. I didn't know if you were
[19:01] looking for checks.
[19:01] No, no, no. Sorry. No,
[19:03] I was just looking, no,
[19:04] I just wanted
[19:05] to see what the
[19:06] offer said, and
[19:10] Yes, and these are high
[19:11] percentages.
[19:11] Yes, they are tall.
[19:13] OK.
[19:17] This seems like a
[19:18] financially sound
[19:19] decision, given
[19:21] the high interest rates, the
[19:22] fact that Joe
[19:23] explained everything clearly today, and
[19:25] that the funds are available,
[19:26] have been transferred to the city, and are
[19:27] sufficient. In
[19:33] today's economy, it's
[19:34] worth saving on
[19:35] high interest
[19:36] rates when you
[19:37] can. I
[19:41] recommend this.
[19:56] I am making a motion
[19:57] to pay off
[19:58] the debt owed on a
[20:00] 2008 Pierce fire truck
[20:02] in the amount of
[20:04] $63,728.31 to
[20:06] Eastrise Credit Union. And also
[20:08] for a 2001 Pierce fire truck
[20:11] with a 100-foot
[20:12] platform in the
[20:14] amount of $84,833.74 to
[20:18] Eastrise Credit Union.
[20:21] I support. Everyone who is
[20:23] "in favor"?
[20:24] By.
[20:25] Who is "against"? Thank you very much
[20:28] .
[20:28] Thanks, Joe.
[20:36] Let's move on to a review
[20:38] and discussion of
[20:39] the position of
[20:40] CFO.
[20:41] So, we had
[20:42] several candidates. Um
[20:44] , we did two
[20:45] interviews. We
[20:47] reached out to the other
[20:49] two of the
[20:50] top four. One
[20:51] has already accepted another
[20:52] offer. Um, and the
[20:55] other one didn't respond
[20:56] to follow-up
[20:56] emails or
[20:58] phone calls
[20:59] to the number on the resume.
[21:01] Um,
[21:02] no return calls. We
[21:03] recently received
[21:05] another resume, which is
[21:06] currently under review.
[21:09] Um, so my
[21:10] recommendation is
[21:11] probably to postpone
[21:13] it for another week.
[21:14] We'll see if
[21:15] additional resumes come in
[21:16] . It would be a good idea to
[21:17] interview
[21:18] at least three,
[21:19] if not four,
[21:20] people. And then
[21:21] make a better
[21:22] decision about what
[21:23] stage we are at. And what should
[21:26] we do next? So
[21:28] we won't, uh We didn't
[21:31] get the result we expected with all the
[21:32] resumes we
[21:33] received
[21:34] . So, I
[21:35] think we shouldn't
[21:37] rush. A little
[21:38] longer. This is my
[21:40] recommendation.
[21:41] Reasonably. So, some did
[21:44] n't. Sorry, some didn't
[21:45] respond to
[21:46] One responded. I wasn't
[21:48] interested anymore. He
[21:49] found another job.
[21:50] Another didn't
[21:51] answer
[21:52] a call at all, leaving a
[21:53] voicemail, or an
[21:54] email
[21:56] asking if
[21:57] they were still interested. And
[22:00] we sent By the way, to
[22:01] those who were selected for an
[22:03] interview, we also
[22:04] sent a letter of
[22:05] congratulations: they say,
[22:07] congratulations, you passed the
[22:08] first stage. We
[22:10] will contact you
[22:12] to schedule an
[22:13] interview. So, three
[22:15] tries—and, you know, we
[22:17] move on. We
[22:19] will not wait. So,
[22:25] here's the news.
[22:26] Is the vacancy still
[22:27] posted?
[22:27] We're
[22:29] actually going to
[22:31] update it this
[22:32] week. Let's give it a week,
[22:34] see what
[22:35] stage we're at, and then
[22:36] take a break. We'll add
[22:41] this to the agenda
[22:42] again when we have
[22:43] something new for you.
[22:45] Next steps.
[22:46] Thank you.
[22:47] So, So, that's it.
[22:51] Thank you. Do you have any
[22:52] questions?
[22:53] No.
[22:53] Good.
[22:54] Thank you for
[22:55] Would you like to go another
[22:56] way or what?
[22:57] But no, I think it's
[23:01] smart to wait and see what other candidates come up with.
[23:02] OK. Then let
[23:03] the fun begin
[23:04] .
[23:04] Mhm. E
[23:06] Solid waste.
[23:08] Schedule of upcoming
[23:09] board meetings and
[23:10] discussions/decisions.
[23:13] So, your packages
[23:14] have three schedules, for three
[23:16] months: October,
[23:17] November, and December.
[23:22] It lists meetings
[23:23] that have already been scheduled.
[23:26] Meetings that are not yet
[23:27] scheduled
[23:28] need to be added. So
[23:32] , we have a few, right? I would like to
[23:37] schedule interviews with the
[23:38] top three
[23:39] candidates for the
[23:40] board site. This is again
[23:44] if the
[23:45] council so desires. I would
[23:50] advise that we will not be
[23:50] able to
[23:51] coordinate
[23:52] all
[23:53] three one after the other.
[23:55] Of course.
[23:58] I assume it
[23:59] will be three separate
[24:00] meetings, probably 1
[24:01] hour each, so they
[24:02] can go online and
[24:04] present their
[24:05] proposals to the council. I
[24:09] think we have three
[24:10] very interested,
[24:11] good companies. You've
[24:13] all seen
[24:14] the information and stuff
[24:16] , so Yes
[24:16] .
[24:18] We need to choose
[24:19] dates and times, whether some
[24:20] , none, or all of
[24:21] you want to
[24:22] attend this
[24:23] presentation, and I will
[24:24] schedule those
[24:25] meetings immediately. So, this is
[24:28] one series of meetings.
[24:31] We need to
[24:32] set dates for
[24:34] something perhaps more
[24:35] important, namely
[24:36] budget meetings, with a
[24:38] tentative date of
[24:39] January 11. We need to
[24:42] hold a final
[24:44] budget approval meeting
[24:45] no later than January 11th.
[24:48] So the first meeting is
[24:49] already scheduled, and
[24:50] again, if you
[24:51] want to wait and
[24:52] see how it
[24:53] goes, we don't
[24:54] have to
[24:55] set a schedule
[24:56] tonight,
[24:57] of course, but the sooner the
[24:59] better. This will be
[25:01] October. We have little
[25:04] time, and we wanted to
[25:05] get a lot done
[25:07] before the start of the year. So
[25:09] this is the second series of
[25:10] meetings, right? This is
[25:11] the schedule for budget review and
[25:12] approval
[25:13] . Now I think the
[25:14] first meeting has already
[25:15] been scheduled,
[25:16] let's see how it
[25:17] goes. I broke everything down
[25:18] into parts, okay
[25:19] ? We
[25:20] will cover most of it at the first
[25:21] meeting. A lot of
[25:22] this is pretty simple. The
[25:23] main issue of the
[25:24] first meeting will be the
[25:27] road maintenance budget. Everything else is
[25:28] councils, commissions, and
[25:29] city administration
[25:30] . We have already
[25:31] discussed the issue of
[25:32] salaries a little. So, we
[25:33] know what
[25:34] stage we are at.
[25:36] Everything is clear with this question
[25:37] . This
[25:38] shouldn't take
[25:39] long. And then,
[25:41] next will be...we'll
[25:42] probably
[25:43] look at the police
[25:44] and the fire department separately.
[25:47] But after that,
[25:48] there will be the fire
[25:49] service, the police, and
[25:50] then the
[25:51] capital investment program
[25:53] , which will require a
[25:54] long
[25:54] discussion.
[25:57] Yes.
[25:57] OK. There are things that,
[25:59] depending on the course
[26:00] chosen by the council,
[26:01] will likely have to be
[26:03] cut, trimmed,
[26:04] or postponed. I think we
[26:06] will have to make
[26:08] several, I won't say "
[26:09] tough", but
[26:09] difficult decisions to
[26:11] balance the budget
[26:12] and make it as
[26:13] stable as possible.
[26:14] Yes.
[26:15] And be sensible about
[26:16] it. You know, there are
[26:17] some other things we
[26:18] want to start
[26:19] planning a conversation about,
[26:20] right? Regarding the office
[26:23] space and that
[26:24] property. So,
[26:26] Yes.
[26:27] All of this matters. Er
[26:30] ...So, from a
[26:34] planning perspective, I'll give the
[26:38] floor to you. I don't know
[26:40] how much the council wants to
[26:40] discuss this
[26:41] tonight and
[26:42] decide, and how much
[26:43] we want to postpone
[26:44] until later.
[26:44] I have to go.
[26:45] Of course. Of course,
[26:47] you all have your own lives
[26:47] outside of this
[26:48] place. You'll probably
[26:49] want to look at
[26:50] some of your personal
[26:51] charts. And so on.
[26:52] So,
[26:53] I
[26:53] want to focus. I
[26:55] want one or two
[26:58] about Thursday.
[27:00] Yes.
[27:02] week 4 degrees
[27:05] report today
[27:07] about Wednesday. I can
[27:08] send it out tomorrow.
[27:09] The meeting has been rescheduled and
[27:10] we are still within the
[27:12] 24-hour deadline.
[27:13] If it's possible, we
[27:14] could. I would be very
[27:16] grateful. I have things coming up for
[27:17] Thursday evening
[27:18] that
[27:19] I can't cancel.
[27:20] I have no problems,
[27:21] any option suits me
[27:22] . Wednesday
[27:24] or Friday.
[27:27] Wednesday suits me
[27:28] better than Friday.
[27:30] So it's Wednesday.
[27:31] So we can
[27:32] gather here on
[27:33] Wednesday. What, what
[27:35] time period will that
[27:36] be?
[27:36] You tell me. What
[27:38] suits you?
[27:39] I can on Wednesday at 6:00.
[27:41] This is the postponement of the
[27:42] first budget
[27:43] meeting from Thursday
[27:44] back to Wednesday.
[27:45] is tomorrow.
[27:46] This should be the third
[27:47] Wednesday, as
[27:48] originally announced.
[27:49] after sunset 6:30
[27:56] Yes. 7:00, is that better?
[27:59] Can we just Oh.
[28:01] But that's the only thing
[28:02] we're talking about. It's not like
[28:04] I know, but I
[28:05] hate starting
[28:07] meetings at 7:00.
[28:07] Yes.
[28:09] Why can't you, why are you
[28:10] here tonight?
[28:14] Ahem.
[28:17] 7:00 is fine for me.
[28:19] too, because it gives us
[28:20] time for dinner and we
[28:21] can still
[28:22] stay. So
[28:26] No, we will not
[28:27] delay.
[28:28] Who knows. But Wednesday is
[28:29] definitely a good time for me,
[28:31] and I'll be flexible with whatever
[28:32] time
[28:33] most people choose.
[28:33] it. I just
[28:34] need time. 7:00? 7:00?
[28:37] Wednesday 7:00?
[28:39] This is what I hear from
[28:40] most people.
[28:41] I, I am.
[28:42] 7:00?
[28:43] Karl?
[28:44] I might be here.
[28:47] Physically, are we
[28:48] in agreement?
[28:52] Good.
[28:53] Um, it's a tough time of year
[28:54] for me, that's all. This is
[28:56] , oh my god.
[28:57] Time to act.
[28:59] The phone is breaking
[29:00] , and
[29:01] I know that, and my family
[29:02] can't
[29:02] agree on what we're
[29:03] doing, so I haven't
[29:04] contacted you, and
[29:05] I'm sure it's too
[29:06] late, so I won't
[29:07] bother you.
[29:08] Uh, I, you know, have
[29:09] evenings and weekends.
[29:10] Well, I would.
[29:11] You can work
[29:12] in the evenings, right?
[29:13] We're going to
[29:14] meet on Saturday,
[29:15] so we can
[29:15] It's not uncommon
[29:16] to work in the evenings.
[29:17] I understand that when it
[29:18] comes to
[29:19] family, it's not worth even
[29:21] thinking about.
[29:21] Got it.
[29:22] Stop thinking.
[29:23] OK.
[29:24] Wednesday evening.
[29:27] Um, do we want to
[29:28] schedule any
[29:29] other meetings?
[29:30] I would like to if we
[29:31] can. Um, I'd like to
[29:33] talk about
[29:35] Monday the 12th. Because
[29:37] now we have a
[29:39] second
[29:39] public hearing scheduled for this day.
[29:42] Should we
[29:42] cancel these
[29:43] public hearings?
[29:46] Should we
[29:47] schedule them as the
[29:48] first public
[29:49] hearings? But if we
[29:51] do, we
[29:52] need to have a
[29:53] meeting between
[29:54] today and
[29:55] this date. What
[29:56] decision will the
[29:57] council make?
[29:57] I suggest we postpone
[29:59] this.
[30:01] That is, if
[30:02] the wording is incorrect
[30:03] , what's the point?
[30:04] Right.
[30:05] Yes, it will be the same.
[30:06] We need to do
[30:07] it once and do it
[30:09] right, whether it's
[30:09] now, in six
[30:10] months, or in a year.
[30:11] We need to decide
[30:12] what exactly we are proposing
[30:13] before we
[30:14] hold the next
[30:15] hearing.
[30:15] Right.
[30:16] I agree.
[30:17] I don't want
[30:18] to waste time on
[30:19] fruitless
[30:20] discussions again. We
[30:21] need to prepare everything well
[30:22] .
[30:23] Put a rehearsal on the agenda
[30:25] . Come on,
[30:27] let's put it all together. So, let's
[30:28] lay it out.
[30:29] So let's put it off until the
[30:31] 12th.
[30:31] Public hearings,
[30:32] you have to hold a
[30:33] regular meeting.
[30:34] Right. I'm just
[30:35] saying postpone the
[30:36] public hearing.
[30:38] My suggestion is to
[30:43] hold a regular
[30:44] meeting in
[30:45] Riverton.
[30:47] Yes.
[30:48] This is a planned place.
[30:49] Yes.
[30:50] This is to
[30:51] update information
[30:52] for them.
[30:53] Yes.
[30:53] Maybe we
[30:54] could meet
[30:56] next week.
[30:57] At 6:00 p.m.
[30:59] and
[31:00] what it should look like
[31:01] Yes.
[31:02] At least we
[31:02] have to discuss it. Yes.
[31:04] and then I can
[31:04] gather all the details.
[31:05] Yes.
[31:06] if it suits you
[31:07] .
[31:07] Yes.
[31:09] Can you just
[31:10] say that October 12th
[31:11] will be in Riverton?
[31:13] Yes.
[31:13] Right.
[31:14] Yes.
[31:14] This is to
[31:15] provide residents with
[31:16] the information we
[31:18] promised them in June.
[31:20] Um, we have some
[31:21] updates, and others we do
[31:22] n't yet. But we are doing our
[31:25] best, we
[31:26] promised to provide them with
[31:27] an update, so we
[31:28] feel it is necessary to
[31:29] do so. And I don't
[31:32] know if you saw
[31:33] the meeting, uh, the meeting
[31:34] last time, but we'll
[31:35] also be
[31:36] looking at
[31:37] holding meetings
[31:38] in different locations around the city
[31:40] . So not just Riverton
[31:42] , but other locations, we will
[31:44] be contacting the UVM branch
[31:45] to see if
[31:46] we can hold a
[31:47] meeting on Barre-
[31:48] Montpelier Road as well.
[31:49] Good.
[31:50] In your office? I
[31:51] don't know if I can.
[31:53] We still have a meeting that week on the
[31:54] 15th, right
[31:55] ? Right.
[31:56] Thank you.
[31:57] I am grateful for that.
[31:58] At that meeting, we
[31:59] still have a
[32:00] meeting on the 15th as well
[32:01] . On the
[32:02] 15th?
[32:03] Yes, this is a pre-election
[32:04] meeting.
[32:05] Oh, this is the Civil
[32:06] Affairs Council.
[32:07] This is the Civil
[32:08] Affairs Council.
[32:08] Yes.
[32:09] True.
[32:10] It's not...Well, it's...Well, it's
[32:11] all together, yeah.
[32:12] But not for
[32:13] Well, well, I...That's good to
[32:14] know. I'll put that on the
[32:15] calendar when I put it together
[32:16] so you're
[32:17] right.
[32:18] also had this as a
[32:18] reference.
[32:19] Mhm. This is great.
[32:20] I'll just write "
[32:21] Civil Affairs Council."
[32:22] October 15?
[32:24] And that too starts
[32:25] at 6:00.
[32:25] p.m. OK.
[32:27] Agreed.
[32:28] So, I
[32:29] thank you, Brian.
[32:30] Please. I have
[32:31] a suggestion:
[32:32] schedule a
[32:33] budget meeting every
[32:34] two weeks. If you don't
[32:35] need it, you don't
[32:36] need it. Maybe on
[32:38] Wednesday, a week
[32:39] when there are no meetings of
[32:40] our elected council,
[32:42] or on Thursday, or
[32:43] We did one
[32:44] first.
[32:45] Maybe we'll start on the 21st
[32:46] or 22nd, and then
[32:47] hold them every
[32:49] two weeks on a
[32:50] schedule. Or we
[32:51] keep it free
[32:52] in case
[32:53] these
[32:54] meetings are needed.
[32:54] All of the above.
[32:56] Until January.
[32:57] Yes, I'll plan it. I'll
[32:59] plan it.
[33:01] Well, I mean
[33:02] they can be on
[33:02] our calendar
[33:03] when we are free. We won't
[33:04] announce
[33:05] them in advance,
[33:07] well, until a week before the
[33:07] meeting. So we
[33:08] can always
[33:09] cancel them if they are not
[33:10] needed.
[33:12] But you're holding...We'll
[33:14] probably leave
[33:15] at 7:00 too, right?
[33:16] No, because it will get dark
[33:17] earlier.
[33:18] That doesn't mean I'm not
[33:20] interested.
[33:20] That's right. He works
[33:22] in the light.
[33:23] So working in the dark
[33:24] is the next budget.
[33:25] Well,
[33:26] so the next
[33:27] budget meeting is on
[33:29] Thursday, October 22nd. Uh
[33:32] , yes, or yes. If
[33:34] you... If we want to
[33:35] choose... I'm just saying
[33:36] we choose evening
[33:37] . I don't know which evening is
[33:38] best for everyone.
[33:39] It doesn't matter.
[33:40] And then, perhaps,
[33:41] alternate them.
[33:42] I never work on
[33:43] Sunday evenings.
[33:44] Okay, I, well, I'm free
[33:46] .
[33:46] My idea is to have
[33:47] them every week, starting
[33:49] on the 21st, so we can
[33:50] split them up: on the first one
[33:51] we'll look at roads,
[33:52] and you mentioned
[33:53] fire service,
[33:54] police, and
[33:55] capital expenditures. I
[33:56] think if we
[33:58] Roads to...roads to
[33:59] Wednesday. On the
[34:00] 30th, I know. I know.
[34:02] So, it will be this
[34:03] week, well, Wednesday.
[34:05] Yes.
[34:06] But if we start on
[34:08] the 21st and look at
[34:09] firefighters on the 21st,
[34:11] police on the 28th, and capital expenditures on November 4th,
[34:14] then we can't
[34:16] hold a meeting on the 4th.
[34:18] November 4th?
[34:19] It's election night,
[34:20] I think. Uh
[34:21] , yes.
[34:22] November? Yes, I think so
[34:24] . Uh
[34:24] , third? Third. That would be
[34:27] Tuesday the 3rd.
[34:28] Sorry.
[34:29] Right.
[34:30] Sorry.
[34:30] No,
[34:31] on your calendar.
[34:32] This is an election. It's up to you.
[34:38] Regarding our
[34:39] Wednesday nights, do we
[34:39] propose
[34:40] meeting weekly
[34:41] instead of every
[34:42] other week?
[34:42] I suggested every week.
[34:44] Uh, we could have
[34:45] meetings on the 21st
[34:46] and the 28th. Consider
[34:47] firefighters on the 21st,
[34:48] police on the 28th, and then
[34:49] skip 2 weeks
[34:50] due to election night and the
[34:52] busy first
[34:53] week of November, and
[34:54] move on to the 11th for
[34:55] capital expenditures
[34:56] . But at least, you
[34:58] know, it would allow us
[35:03] to start the
[35:04] discussion sooner rather
[35:05] than later, and it would be less
[35:06] likely that
[35:08] things would drag on, and it would be
[35:09] better to make
[35:10] our deadline of
[35:11] January 11th than to
[35:12] meet in a
[35:13] week.
[35:17] I agree to that. I
[35:18] mean, December could
[35:19] be...It would be great
[35:20] if we could make it in
[35:21] November. We do
[35:22] n't have it. That's
[35:22] right.
[35:26] So, my thought is, do
[35:28] we want to meet on the
[35:30] 21st, 28th, 4th, and 18th,
[35:31] just to
[35:32] reserve it
[35:33] in case we need a
[35:35] full review of the entire
[35:37] budget?
[35:41] That's right. Stop, stop. What
[35:43] So, the 21st, the 28th and the 4th.
[35:45] So, let's say:
[35:46] police, firefighters,
[35:47] capital expenditures.
[35:48] I'll just say it: a
[35:49] budget meeting.
[35:50] Right. And then on the 18th,
[35:52] do a full
[35:53] inspection. The
[35:54] 21st, the 28th, and the 4th?
[35:56] Do we want the 4th or the 11th,
[35:58] since we'll all
[35:59] be here on Tuesday
[36:01] night?
[36:02] Election night—3rd. I do
[36:04] n't mind. I'm
[36:05] fine with that.
[36:08] I...I mean, it's
[36:09] not like I have a
[36:10] personal life.
[36:11] Although I think I might
[36:13] be away. I
[36:14] may be away
[36:15] next week, but
[36:16] that's okay. Uh,
[36:17] let's do the 4th.
[36:18] Yes, I just realized
[36:19] that this looks like my
[36:20] Good. Let it be the 4th.
[36:22] But the 11th one is missing.
[36:23] Budget meeting on the 4th.
[36:25] What is our...What is
[36:25] Tuesday's
[36:26] Yes. What...What is our
[36:27] start time?
[36:28] 6:00 PM when we get
[36:29] to that time. The
[36:30] 4th starts at 6:00 p.m.
[36:32] Yes. And before that, it was
[36:34] 7:00 PM in October.
[36:36] I'll put up the 21st at 7pm
[36:38] and then the 28th on the website.
[36:42] Thank you.
[36:43] It's called
[36:44] compromise, I guess.
[36:45] Okay, so
[36:46] I'll do everything I can
[36:48] . I will do everything I
[36:49] can.
[36:49] Will this meeting be
[36:50] recorded?
[36:51] They will be
[36:51] public.
[36:52] Yes, these will be
[36:52] public meetings.
[36:54] Yes, they will be
[36:55] public.
[36:55] I understand that these are
[36:56] public meetings. I'm
[36:57] just curious, is this
[36:58] ...is this more than
[36:59] usual, right? So, is the
[37:00] 4th hour free?
[37:02] Yes.
[37:02] And they will be invited. They
[37:04] will be invited.
[37:05] Thank you.
[37:06] And then
[37:07] What is the 4th number when
[37:08] we work another
[37:10] day? The
[37:10] 18th is a full
[37:12] budget review.
[37:13] Are we okay? I
[37:14] was going to Okay, yeah,
[37:15] that's good. We
[37:16] may have to
[37:17] hold another one, but
[37:18] that's because the next one is... Are
[37:19] you sure we'll
[37:19] be ready by
[37:21] then?
[37:21] Well, even if not, we
[37:22] can skip to
[37:23] December, but
[37:24] AND it's
[37:25] right before
[37:26] Thanksgiving.
[37:26] And unless we
[37:27] use the 18th
[37:28] to consider something
[37:29] else, like
[37:30] capital investments
[37:31] or something like that, then we
[37:33] can only do something new in December.
[37:34] Let's set it
[37:36] for the 17th at 7:00, if everyone
[37:37] agrees, simply because
[37:38] it will be the final
[37:39] assembly and will probably
[37:41] take longer. Do
[37:42] you mean the 18th
[37:43] ?
[37:44] What? The 18th. Did I say a different
[37:46] date? I meant Sorry
[37:47] . I meant the
[37:48] 18th. Thank you. Do
[37:49] we start at 6:00 or
[37:51] 7:00 on the 18th? At 7:00.
[37:52] Why don't we start at
[37:53] 7:00 on the 18th?
[37:54] 6:00 6:00
[37:56] just because I
[37:56] think this is going to take
[37:57] longer and we need a
[37:58] break. Well, but we
[37:59] still have We are not limited in
[38:01] time. We still have I
[38:02] mean, we still have
[38:03] December, so it doesn't
[38:04] have to
[38:04] end that
[38:05] night.
[38:06] No, I just wanted to
[38:07] outline it for
[38:08] now.
[38:09] No, no.
[38:10] We call it a full
[38:11] budget review, but
[38:12] we may
[38:13] need an
[38:14] extra day for
[38:15] CIP. I mean, there's a
[38:16] lot of Yes, in
[38:18] this CIP we need to
[38:19] go through.
[38:20] Just as a
[38:20] reminder.
[38:22] We have a personnel
[38:23] policy. Let's
[38:26] review the
[38:27] addition we
[38:28] made.
[38:29] Uh,
[38:30] which we haven't read yet
[38:31] because I haven't received
[38:32] any feedback on
[38:33] it. Uh, and then it's
[38:35] ready for signing. We have a
[38:38] traffic ordinance coming up, for which
[38:39] we also have to
[38:40] hold two
[38:40] public hearings.
[38:42] Uh, finish this.
[38:43] is the 26th. You have the first one.
[38:46] Yes. But this is during a
[38:47] regular
[38:48] board meeting.
[38:49] Right. So,
[38:50] again, my
[38:51] question is: you know, I
[38:52] know you don't want
[38:54] more meetings, but
[38:55] do we want to
[38:56] split them up? Uh,
[38:58] make meetings
[39:00] shorter? Maybe, I
[39:02] don't know.
[39:02] I think you should
[39:03] add public
[39:04] hearings to the
[39:04] regular
[39:05] council meeting.
[39:06] Good. Good. I
[39:07] will continue this. I'll
[39:08] continue with this then. This is in
[39:13] I will be on I will be Yes,
[39:14] let's arrange a
[39:16] night shift. I will
[39:18] slow down. I
[39:19] will slow down with
[39:20] updating the resolutions,
[39:22] maybe until winter.
[39:24] Yes.
[39:24] Right. And then we
[39:25] will talk about
[39:26] additional meetings
[39:27] regarding
[39:28] those resolutions. Let's
[39:29] finish with
[39:30] budgets.
[39:33] This is where we are now, and
[39:35] after that—so,
[39:36] okay. Hmm, what did I
[39:40] miss?
[39:41] So,
[39:42] you said something else.
[39:43] Sorry. You said
[39:45] ...there was another
[39:45] meeting that you
[39:46] mentioned.
[39:47] Well, there is...What did I say? Oh,
[39:49] three meetings for
[39:51] website interviews.
[39:52] Yes. Do
[39:53] we want
[39:54] to schedule them
[39:55] tonight?
[39:58] I would like that. I would like to
[39:59] participate
[40:00] , and have you thought about day
[40:02] or evening?
[40:03] At the discretion of the council. I
[40:04] warned all three
[40:06] that it would likely be an
[40:07] evening meeting,
[40:07] as I expected
[40:09] most of the
[40:10] board members would want
[40:10] to join. There is
[40:12] great interest in this. Um,
[40:14] but yeah, I...I work
[40:15] at the will of the council, so.
[40:25] They
[40:26] will probably last about an
[40:27] hour for this
[40:28] meeting.
[40:29] I estimate it's
[40:30] probably an hour. I'll
[40:31] probably schedule an
[40:32] hour and a half in Teams,
[40:34] but will
[40:34] you put it before
[40:35] our regular
[40:36] board meeting like
[40:37] we did today?
[40:39] This is more on your
[40:40] part.
[40:41] I don't want to
[40:42] do that because this isn't
[40:43] exactly a public
[40:44] meeting. The other two
[40:46] companies could
[40:47] join.
[40:48] Okay, yes.
[40:49] I would like to see
[40:50] more, you know, for the
[40:51] presentation.
[40:52] Special meeting.
[40:54] Can this be done
[40:54] in a closed
[40:55] session?
[40:55] We could hold a
[40:56] closed session.
[40:56] No, no, no, but I don't
[40:57] know how it
[40:58] happens.
[40:58] Well, we can't have a
[41:00] full meeting unless it's
[41:00] announced. It
[41:01] will be announced.
[41:02] Well, yes, but you can't
[41:03] not invite people
[41:05] if it's a public
[41:05] meeting. You don't...you don't
[41:07] We...we'll have to...
[41:08] we'll have to...we'll have to
[41:08] go
[41:09] into closed
[41:10] session, like you
[41:10] said.
[41:11] Yes.
[41:11] For this, so I think
[41:13] we could.
[41:13] So, we could
[41:14] hold a closed
[41:15] session during the
[41:16] regular session if you
[41:17] want.
[41:17] Start with a closed
[41:18] session and move on
[41:19] to a regular
[41:19] meeting? That's what
[41:21] I'm just wondering if
[41:22] we could do
[41:23] interviews with them.
[41:23] Conduct interviews with them
[41:24] .
[41:25] Yes.
[41:25] Recommendation—before
[41:27] each of these
[41:27] budget meetings. An
[41:31] hour before.
[41:34] Stand still.
[41:36] I wouldn't recommend
[41:37] it. But I was looking at a
[41:40] week in October,
[41:41] actually the following
[41:42] week, you know.
[41:43] That's what we're going for.
[41:45] week. Yes. I was thinking of
[41:47] just doing them,
[41:48] even if it meant
[41:50] doing more than
[41:51] one presentation
[41:52] per evening or all three in
[41:53] one evening with
[41:54] intervals. Um, or one every
[41:57] night.
[41:58] But I think this would be a
[41:59] good week to have
[42:01] them and get the
[42:01] process started.
[42:03] I don't...I'll try to
[42:04] schedule all
[42:05] three on the same day. It won't be
[42:06] easy, but
[42:07] we'll see how
[42:08] badly they want to
[42:09] get this job.
[42:10] What is the approximate time of
[42:12] each presentation?
[42:13] You...
[42:13] I'll say they'll
[42:14] probably take
[42:15] at least an hour.
[42:16] I was thinking about an hour.
[42:18] Well, you know what? I'll tell
[42:19] them they have an hour.
[42:21] And not a minute more.
[42:23] Yes, that's all.
[42:24] So, if we do
[42:26] this on Wednesday the 7th,
[42:27] starting at 5:00 p.m.
[42:34] I'll bring the pizza.
[42:35] Starting at 5:00 PM on
[42:37] our website.
[42:38] Don't forget about it.
[42:39] I'll bring the pizza.
[42:42] Presentations.
[42:43] It's like a
[42:44] steak dinner.
[42:45] Do you think it will take an
[42:46] hour?
[42:47] I think it will take
[42:48] three. I think a couple of them
[42:50] will take...
[42:53] So you're saying 6:00 PM?
[42:55] That's what you said.
[42:57] We agreed to start
[42:58] at 5:00 PM.
[42:58] Oh, at 5:00 PM?
[42:59] From 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
[43:00] Giving them 45 minutes is
[43:01] enough, but...
[43:02] I'm counting on you. Do
[43:03] you want me to give
[43:04] them 45 minutes, Tony? I...I
[43:05] can tell them about 45
[43:06] minutes. I'll tell them about
[43:07] 30 minutes.
[43:08] Well, the only thing is...I just
[43:09] ...we really want to
[43:10] ask all
[43:10] the questions at the end,
[43:11] so it might delay the
[43:12] process.
[43:13] Their presentations. What do
[43:14] you say, Karl?
[43:16] I was going to say...I
[43:17] was going to
[43:18] suggest starting
[43:19] at 6:00 PM, because our
[43:20] meetings usually
[43:21] start at 6:00 PM
[43:22] if companies can
[43:24] do that, and I
[43:25] like 45 minutes
[43:26] and 15 minutes for
[43:27] discussion, but that's
[43:28] just my suggestion. It
[43:30] just seems to me that
[43:31] it's 7:00 PM, 7:00–8:00 PM, and 8:
[43:33] 00–9:00 PM. That's why I
[43:34] said we should
[43:36] start at 5:00 PM.
[43:36] If we're going to
[43:37] do all three in
[43:38] one evening, I thought
[43:39] we'd break it up.
[43:40] You were going to
[43:41] try to do
[43:42] all three in one evening.
[43:43] The best approach for the
[43:45] council, in my opinion, from what
[43:46] I hear.
[43:48] Good.
[43:48] Yes, we can
[43:49] do that.
[43:50] 7th at 5:00 p.m.
[43:51] Yes, at 17:00 on the 7th.
[43:54] So this is a face-to-face meeting
[43:55] ?
[43:56] No.
[43:56] Okay, so it's all through
[43:57] Teams, so you don't even
[43:59] have to come.
[44:00] Oho.
[44:01] No need, John, don't
[44:02] give them ideas.
[44:05] Why? You don't
[44:06] need my background
[44:07] noise, do you? Just
[44:10] turn off the microphone. Oh,
[44:14] great.
[44:17] I don't
[44:18] like it. I don't
[44:19] like attending
[44:21] meetings like at DRB. It's
[44:23] very difficult to be on
[44:24] the screen and not in the room
[44:25] .
[44:26] They are all about the schedule
[44:27] on the website.
[44:28] So, oh, you
[44:29] mean the speakers?
[44:30] Yes.
[44:33] 7th at 5:00 for all
[44:35] three websites.
[44:36] This is the 7th.
[44:37] Time in October.
[44:38] It will be at 5:00 p.m.
[44:40] Yes. And I'll bring the pizza.
[44:43] I have a small
[44:44] burger. That is, I can
[44:46] bring a burger to
[44:47] Again, this is an
[44:48] alternative. I have to
[44:49] work with them
[44:51] to get things sorted out.
[44:54] So, okay. I
[44:58] will check everything, try to
[44:59] confirm it, and
[45:00] then send
[45:01] you these three completed
[45:03] documents again for your review.
[45:06] And we are holding December
[45:07] .
[45:07] And we are holding December
[45:09] .
[45:09] Like, okay. OK.
[45:13] We want to target
[45:14] No, we
[45:15] will not do anything with the
[45:16] charter change right now.
[45:18] Right, while we're
[45:20] talking about changing
[45:21] my note. I'm not
[45:22] going to
[45:23] put up with this.
[45:24] We'll do it later, we'll
[45:25] set a date.
[45:26] You could leave
[45:27] We could consider the
[45:29] 26th if we're ready.
[45:30] next time
[45:31] No, let's just
[45:32] leave it at that. So,
[45:34] we'll have a
[45:34] transportation
[45:35] ordinance there, and then we
[45:36] could do
[45:36] Oh, this is a public
[45:37] hearing on the
[45:38] transportation
[45:38] ordinance. Never
[45:39] mind. I thought it was a
[45:40] public hearing.
[45:42] Give me directions
[45:43] for tomorrow. Next
[45:44] step. That's all I have
[45:47] at the moment regarding the
[45:48] schedule. What is it?
[45:53] Well, nothing else
[45:54] uses that
[45:55] room on those evenings. I
[45:56] didn't look at the
[45:57] calendar.
[45:57] Um, yes, there probably is something
[45:59] , but I'll have to
[46:00] move them to another
[46:02] room. Let me
[46:04] see.
[46:05] We can always
[46:06] go to New
[46:07] Orleans.
[46:11] All of them, the ball and the alley. There are
[46:16] plenty of places there.
[46:21] We just need to
[46:21] warn you
[46:22] in advance, right?
[46:23] Yes.
[46:24] OK. Board review and
[46:27] approval of
[46:28] award upon request
[46:29] for proposals regarding
[46:30] staff compensation.
[46:32] Okay, some of you
[46:33] have responded to the
[46:34] posted
[46:35] suggestions. Again
[46:37] , this is something we
[46:38] wanted to try to
[46:40] complete by the 1st of the
[46:41] year if we
[46:42] could. My
[46:44] recommendation to the board at
[46:46] this time is
[46:47] to award this request
[46:48] for proposals to
[46:49] MGT. And
[46:52] accept their
[46:53] offer,
[46:54] invite them here and
[46:55] start working. And
[46:57] we should get
[46:58] theirs based on that,
[46:59] we should get
[47:01] their presentation and
[47:04] proposal either by
[47:05] the end of the year or
[47:06] right after the New
[47:07] Year. Because we delayed
[47:09] it on our end,
[47:10] probably for almost 2
[47:11] weeks. So, but right
[47:13] now most of
[47:14] their schedule
[47:15] shows that they
[47:16] can provide it to us
[47:17] by the end of the year,
[47:18] maybe after
[47:19] talking to them. Also.
[47:21] Good.
[47:22] This is my recommendation.
[47:23] What would the council like to
[47:29] do?
[47:30] I mean, I was the one I
[47:31] thought about
[47:32] when we were watching
[47:33] Tak.
[47:33] which is not what
[47:35] you were looking at.
[47:36] Again, they're not the
[47:38] cheapest, but their
[47:39] package as a whole, their
[47:40] presentation, and the
[47:41] resources they're
[47:42] going to
[47:43] give us, I think it's the
[47:44] best option
[47:46] for us. This is my opinion.
[47:50] I agree with that. Are there
[47:55] any other discussions?
[47:56] No, I'm just looking
[47:57] at the second option.
[47:58] Good.
[47:59] Second
[48:00] Keep going, Karl.
[48:01] company and look at the
[48:02] weaknesses. That's
[48:03] all. Ahem. I know I've
[48:08] read them before, but I'm just
[48:09] trying to remember.
[48:11] OK. Good. Yes. I am
[48:15] ready.
[48:16] MGT.
[48:20] I hate this
[48:21] computer. I just can't get
[48:23] the image to display.
[48:24] I'm sure it's the
[48:25] user's fault.
[48:26] Um...Well, anyway
[48:27] .
[48:31] I propose to approve.
[48:32] Yes, therefore, the proposal is
[48:33] to approve the involvement of MGT
[48:35] .
[48:35] Award them a
[48:36] contract.
[48:37] Give me a contract.
[48:38] I propose to award.
[48:39] based on
[48:40] the results of a request for
[48:40] proposals (RFP).
[48:41] Yes.
[48:43] I support this
[48:44] proposal.
[48:45] Who is for it?
[48:45] Ya.
[48:47] Who's against? Thank you,
[48:50] Vince.
[48:50] OK. Thank you.
[48:52] Here it is.
[48:55] Okay, approval of
[48:56] all licenses,
[48:57] permits, vouchers, and
[48:58] applications. Did
[49:00] you want to open this
[49:02] ?
[49:02] No, you can
[49:03] handle it yourself.
[49:04] I just need
[49:05] new glasses.
[49:10] I propose to
[49:12] approve
[49:14] payroll 2707 for the
[49:16] period from September 6,
[49:18] 2026 to September 19,
[49:20] 2026, due on
[49:22] September 23, 2026, in the
[49:24] amount of $78,093.88
[49:26] . Expense
[49:30] warrant 27G06, checks number
[49:34] 26574-26616 and electronic
[49:37] checks number 28-29 in the amount of
[49:41] $315,928.35 cents.
[49:46] Expense order 27G07
[49:48] with electronic
[49:50] checks number 33 and 34 in
[49:53] the amount of $148,562.05
[49:55] cents. Expense
[50:00] warrant 27S04 with checks
[50:03] number 4778-4786 in the amount of
[50:06] $22,501.42 cents. I
[50:09] support. Are
[50:13] there any questions?
[50:14] Can I ask
[50:15] a question? Um, I've
[50:21] noticed that we're
[50:21] getting more of
[50:23] these direct
[50:23] payments along with
[50:24] checks, but aren't they
[50:26] listed? So are
[50:32] they separate? I
[50:33] tried to listen
[50:34] when you spoke, but do
[50:36] you understand what I mean
[50:37] ?
[50:37] Mhm.
[50:38] So I'm just
[50:38] trying to understand
[50:40] where exactly we are
[50:40] approving them. I
[50:41] mean, they're all
[50:43] electronic, right?
[50:44] But this...so I don't know,
[50:45] but they're not listed in the
[50:46] general list.
[50:48] I need to
[50:49] check to
[50:49] make sure I'm
[50:50] right. Again,
[50:52] she was supposed to be here tonight for
[50:53] this. But
[50:54] yes, I told you why it's
[50:55] not there.
[50:56] Yes, yes, yes, yes.
[50:58] Ahem. that direct payments
[51:00] are included in the
[51:02] total. That's why I started
[51:04] explaining to him why
[51:05] you don't see
[51:06] some checks there, but
[51:07] they are accounted for. Yes? In
[51:09] general terms, but
[51:10] I need to
[51:11] confirm this. Ahem.
[51:12] It looks like she might
[51:14] need to add another
[51:15] chapter. You would I
[51:16] guess that's my
[51:18] question. If you
[51:19] want to see them
[51:20] separately
[51:21] Well
[51:21] as a direct payment, yes,
[51:23] not checks. Good. Yes.
[51:25] We need to know what
[51:26] they are in total
[51:27] , and know where we are
[51:28] approving them,
[51:29] right?
[51:30] Yes, I agree.
[51:31] Perfectly.
[51:33] Direct payment, indicated
[51:34] separately. Without a warrant.
[51:36] Chris, do you have anything?
[51:37] Yes, that would be
[51:38] ideal.
[51:39] And that's clear.
[51:40] Sorry. I didn't catch the
[51:41] last part.
[51:42] Say it again.
[51:43] I said.
[51:44] That made it harder
[51:45] to swallow, didn't
[51:46] it? This is a single payment,
[51:48] right? This is not an
[51:49] additional bill.
[51:51] That $168,000?
[51:53] Yes.
[51:54] I believe this is the
[51:55] last and
[51:56] final one for now
[51:57] .
[51:58] Yes.
[51:59] Behind that fence?
[52:01] For that sidewalk.
[52:02] Yes.
[52:02] We'll talk
[52:03] about this a little bit at the roundtable
[52:04] .
[52:05] Good.
[52:05] Also.
[52:06] Good.
[52:07] I support. Who is for it?
[52:09] By.
[52:10] Against?
[52:12] We will discuss this at the
[52:13] round table.
[52:14] Good.
[52:20] We may
[52:21] have to
[52:22] go back. Maybe
[52:25] I should
[52:26] say this.
[52:28] Just as long as you
[52:29] sign and write,
[52:30] just a note.
[52:33] You should look
[52:34] at the details for them, because
[52:35] this is the same company
[52:36] that is still working on
[52:37] replacing the
[52:38] culvert
[52:39] on Painter Pike North.
[52:40] Got it.
[52:41] They do both
[52:42] objects.
[52:43] Good.
[52:43] So, we don't want to
[52:44] confuse them.
[52:45] Yes.
[52:46] And this should be
[52:47] described in detail there.
[52:48] This is actually very This is
[52:49] very Pike North.
[52:50] And Fisher Road.
[52:51] Yes.
[52:52] It was very
[52:53] It was clear.
[52:54] Yes.
[52:57] Eh, a round table? There is
[53:00] nothing for me today.
[53:02] Chris?
[53:04] Um, yeah, so in terms of
[53:10] future spending by
[53:11] cities with some of these
[53:13] companies, I'll just
[53:14] use PT Can as an
[53:15] example, because that's one of the
[53:16] most recent cases
[53:18] .
[53:20] Mhm.
[53:20] Ahem. We
[53:24] spent, I think,
[53:25] thousands of dollars in that process, right?
[53:28] For
[53:28] attorneys' fees and so on
[53:30] .
[53:30] It was a considerable amount.
[53:32] So maybe it's worth
[53:33] considering
[53:34] further discussion
[53:35] . Maybe not
[53:36] necessarily
[53:37] tonight, but think
[53:42] about it for the future
[53:43] when these things
[53:44] come up again.
[53:47] Maybe these people
[53:48] should cover
[53:50] our
[53:51] attorney fees and all that.
[53:54] Just part of
[53:55] the business. Part of the
[53:56] deal, I mean
[53:58] . That's right. So it makes
[54:00] sense.
[54:01] This was, this was one
[54:02] of my roundtables
[54:03] , uh
[54:04] Okay, continuing with this
[54:05] .
[54:06] Mhm.
[54:08] Remind me, did they
[54:09] need us to
[54:10] act before they
[54:11] bought the building, or were
[54:12] we just doing it out of
[54:14] politeness? Because
[54:16] maybe we should
[54:17] just say we
[54:18] won't consider
[54:19] it until
[54:21] MGM. I actually
[54:22] agree with that. Yes.
[54:23] Yeah, I mean, I do
[54:24] n't think it was about
[54:26] wanting to pay a
[54:26] lawyer to
[54:27] look at it.
[54:28] True.
[54:29] Yes, I don't know for sure.
[54:31] Ahem.
[54:31] Yes, I'm not asking you
[54:33] specifically. I'm
[54:34] just curious.
[54:35] They were considering
[54:36] purchasing the
[54:37] building and studying it.
[54:38] Both they and they didn't, both
[54:39] they and they didn't buy the
[54:40] building.
[54:41] True. So, I
[54:42] We sold it
[54:43] So, but my
[54:44] question is: why did we
[54:45] immediately move on to having the
[54:46] lawyer
[54:47] do all this work
[54:48] ? If we did it
[54:49] just for them because
[54:50] they were studying the issue,
[54:51] maybe
[54:51] So we need, to
[54:53] put a process in place. I
[54:54] think that's the point.
[54:55] Mhm.
[54:56] Good.
[54:57] And this, this should not
[54:58] be at the expense of the city of
[54:59] Verno.
[55:00] you know.
[55:00] True.
[55:01] If there are costs
[55:02] that
[55:03] I, I will look at what is available
[55:04] for the process or what
[55:05] best
[55:06] practices exist.
[55:07] I mean, I
[55:08] understand they
[55:08] want to know
[55:09] in advance, but
[55:10] okay. This will cost
[55:11] us money.
[55:12] Simple answer:
[55:13] assume you
[55:14] will pay
[55:15] taxes.
[55:15] Until then, yes. Or, you, if you want to
[55:17] pay to have
[55:18] our lawyer
[55:19] look at it.
[55:20] True.
[55:21] Yes, something and, and
[55:22] Looking at it from the
[55:23] perspective of the best
[55:24] interests of the city.
[55:25] Perfectly.
[55:26] Yes, I agree. I'll
[55:27] show you, I'll take a look to
[55:28] make some
[55:29] Thanks.
[55:29] something written on the
[55:30] spot. So some
[55:32] rules. That's great, and
[55:35] then regarding the candidate
[55:36] for the position of
[55:37] CFO,
[55:38] maybe something can be
[55:40] added there. Do they have
[55:43] strengths in
[55:44] investing our
[55:45] money in places where
[55:46] it can grow?
[55:48] Yes.
[55:49] there are time windows
[55:50] when money could be
[55:52] invested.
[55:53] Certainly.
[55:53] We, we're just
[55:55] looking into this right now. And you'll
[55:56] see when we
[55:57] talk about
[55:58] budgets, we've already
[55:59] made some changes.
[56:01] As an example, 2 years
[56:02] ago we received
[56:03] interest and
[56:04] budgeted about
[56:05] $5,000 for interest.
[56:08] Last year,
[56:09] MGM.
[56:09] 77,000.
[56:11] Yes.
[56:12] it's pooling
[56:13] money and moving to a
[56:14] higher interest rate, um,
[56:15] just a higher savings
[56:17] rate.
[56:17] Yes.
[56:18] in order for this money to
[56:19] be stored there.
[56:20] Yes.
[56:20] We earned
[56:21] 77,72
[56:22] thousand more than
[56:24] we earned before.
[56:25] This is a huge amount. I mean
[56:26] , with
[56:28] Absolutely.
[56:28] with growth and requirements,
[56:30] so
[56:30] Yes. We mentioned it to you
[56:32] , so it's your
[56:33] fault. We
[56:34] looked into this after
[56:35] you
[56:36] mentioned it and found
[56:37] some easy
[56:38] ways to do it
[56:39] right now.
[56:40] Yes, that's good. I am
[56:42] wonderful.
[56:42] And I'm sure there are more
[56:43] complex banking
[56:45] things we can
[56:46] look into,
[56:46] Yes.
[56:47] but it was simple.
[56:48] Yes.
[56:49] We were able to do this immediately by
[56:50] simply
[56:51] moving to higher
[56:52] interest rates with a
[56:53] larger pool of
[56:54] funds.
[56:55] Yes. And this is huge
[56:57] money. 77 thousand. I
[56:59] mean, this is one of
[57:00] our trucks.
[57:01] Yes, that's right. I
[57:03] mean, yeah, and we
[57:04] should. You'll see
[57:05] it. It will come up when we
[57:06] talk about it.
[57:07] Yes. Good.
[57:08] started doing a little bit of
[57:09] that. But is there anything
[57:10] else? I am sure we
[57:11] can do
[57:12] more.
[57:12] Yes, I'm sure there is,
[57:14] and Yes. Good.
[57:15] E I think it was
[57:19] Yes. Thank you.
[57:21] OK.
[57:23] Well, I think this is a
[57:24] clarification on
[57:26] who is
[57:26] responsible for the
[57:27] interceptive
[57:28] parking here. I
[57:31] think I sent
[57:32] you a message about the
[57:34] residents in our
[57:35] parking lot, which I
[57:36] believe is state-owned,
[57:37] but I don't know if there's
[57:38] anyone we can
[57:40] or should contact
[57:41] about this
[57:42] because it could be a
[57:43] problem for the city.
[57:46] Okay, I'll give you a name.
[57:48] I'm sure there's a name.
[57:50] We discussed this,
[57:51] seeking the permission
[57:52] we were expecting.
[57:54] Yes.
[57:55] What are the conditions there?
[57:56] Fourth item on the
[57:57] agenda,
[57:58] Brede.
[57:59] What?
[58:01] Contact regarding
[58:01] public parking.
[58:03] Yes. I will find out for
[58:05] you.
[58:05] Thank you.
[58:06] Can I go
[58:08] back? I had another
[58:09] one. And this
[58:11] Can I ask you to
[58:12] do more?
[58:13] Sorry. So, I
[58:16] chatted with him a little bit
[58:17] about the "
[58:18] Welcome to Rowley" signs, and
[58:19] his schedule has been a little
[58:21] crazy the last
[58:22] couple of weeks. And mine is
[58:25] going crazy. We
[58:28] will try
[58:29] to do something, but we
[58:30] cannot guarantee anything. I will
[58:33] do my best,
[58:34] and this is a challenge. It will be e
[58:39] We will just
[58:39] have to cut
[58:40] your salary.
[58:41] I can go for it. Yes,
[58:43] you can
[58:44] fire me.
[58:46] Fewer meetings for
[58:47] you.
[58:48] Anything you can
[58:49] do, we appreciate.
[58:50] Maybe I'll skip
[58:51] a few meetings and
[58:52] order catering. No
[58:54] , thank you, Chris.
[58:56] I appreciate you and know
[58:57] you will do your
[58:58] best within
[58:59] your time.
[59:01] Yes. That's all.
[59:04] Thank you.
[59:04] Sorry. Why does everyone
[59:07] frown when it's
[59:08] my turn?
[59:09] Carlo, no, it's fine,
[59:11] Carlo.
[59:15] So I don't know if this is
[59:17] on your list, but
[59:18] today or this
[59:19] week I suddenly
[59:20] thought about the
[59:21] Turnpike payment and what's
[59:22] going on, because I
[59:23] thought the money
[59:25] had to be spent
[59:26] before...I thought there was a
[59:27] deadline for using
[59:28] the funding.
[59:29] This is next year.
[59:31] What about the
[59:32] culvert?
[59:32] Yes.
[59:32] No, everything is fine. Are
[59:33] you sure?
[59:34] Yes, a
[59:35] culvert, yes. Yes,
[59:36] sorry. I thought you meant another one
[59:37] .
[59:37] What about, um, is that
[59:38] Richard Sanborn?
[59:39] Is this correct?
[59:40] Richard Sanborn, we're in
[59:41] trouble.
[59:41] Yes, we will have
[59:42] problems. We have time
[59:44] until, um, we're still
[59:45] working, still
[59:46] working with the state.
[59:47] She was very
[59:48] good. But from an
[59:50] engineering perspective and due to
[59:52] delays, we're
[59:53] likely to have
[59:54] problems with that. If there is
[59:56] no breakthrough by
[1:00:00] the end of November,
[1:00:02] significant
[1:00:03] progress will be made. We won't
[1:00:04] be able to get another
[1:00:05] sequel.
[1:00:07] We already had three of them.
[1:00:08] The fourth is usually an
[1:00:09] unheard of thing.
[1:00:10] Now if I push the
[1:00:11] Well and
[1:00:12] Berlin sides and work with the
[1:00:13] city department
[1:00:14] Yes.
[1:00:15] maybe we can
[1:00:16] do it.
[1:00:17] Yes. Yes, but I will have
[1:00:20] better information
[1:00:21] after talking to her. I
[1:00:24] think we have another
[1:00:26] meeting the second
[1:00:30] week of October.
[1:00:32] So, what's the delay
[1:00:33] on the engineering side? Does
[1:00:34] n't this go on for
[1:00:35] years?
[1:00:36] Yes.
[1:00:37] It's not that
[1:00:37] difficult.
[1:00:38] It, it, it
[1:00:39] moves forward. It's
[1:00:42] not, um, there were just
[1:00:44] a lot of things in between that
[1:00:45] happened and things didn't
[1:00:46] go so well.
[1:00:49] Mhm. We can
[1:00:51] discuss this in more
[1:00:52] detail later.
[1:00:54] Good.
[1:01:00] This is a risky object
[1:01:01] .
[1:01:01] Mhm.
[1:01:05] Oh, never mind. I'm
[1:01:07] done. I am everything.
[1:01:11] Good.
[1:01:12] Yes.
[1:01:16] So, I have one
[1:01:17] question, and it's one of
[1:01:19] our favorites—the
[1:01:20] sidewalk. Um,
[1:01:24] actually, Mr. Schultz, a
[1:01:26] representative from
[1:01:27] Mr. Sanders' office, is
[1:01:28] also in touch with us right now
[1:01:30] , because he's
[1:01:30] obviously very
[1:01:31] interested in this
[1:01:33] project and the
[1:01:33] funding. And one
[1:01:38] of the things that came out
[1:01:39] of our meeting with
[1:01:40] the state is that no matter
[1:01:42] what we decide
[1:01:43] at this late
[1:01:44] stage, any
[1:01:45] action will require an
[1:01:46] extension of time
[1:01:47] . So we are announcing this right
[1:01:49] now. Um,
[1:01:53] but there is interest,
[1:01:55] the question is whether there are
[1:01:56] other projects in which we would be
[1:01:58] interested in
[1:01:59] investing this money, this
[1:02:00] 1.6 million, that are
[1:02:01] related to
[1:02:02] pedestrian or
[1:02:03] bicycle
[1:02:04] infrastructure or
[1:02:06] multi-purpose
[1:02:07] paths. He
[1:02:14] raised this question and
[1:02:15] asked me
[1:02:16] to ask the council if
[1:02:17] they had any
[1:02:18] ideas.
[1:02:21] Yes, the initial
[1:02:22] project.
[1:02:22] Well, that's what we were
[1:02:23] talking about. Besides,
[1:02:25] I'll have to
[1:02:26] go back and
[1:02:26] see what
[1:02:28] stage
[1:02:28] the mall is at,
[1:02:30] right? But it
[1:02:31] was mentioned as one
[1:02:33] of the projects.
[1:02:35] Original.
[1:02:37] Right.
[1:02:37] Return to
[1:02:38] the original.
[1:02:39] That would be ideal.
[1:02:42] Another option
[1:02:44] discussed was a
[1:02:45] 3.8-acre trail.
[1:02:47] From Burlington to
[1:02:48] school.
[1:02:49] Yes. Is
[1:02:49] n't that right? Which
[1:02:50] will require
[1:02:51] significant funds due to the
[1:02:52] bridge that needs to be
[1:02:53] built over
[1:02:53] wetlands.
[1:02:54] Right. But this is
[1:02:56] another potential
[1:02:57] option.
[1:02:59] I was thinking about this
[1:03:01] because I have repeatedly
[1:03:02] received calls
[1:03:03] from residents regarding
[1:03:05] people walking
[1:03:06] along Route 62.
[1:03:09] Yes.
[1:03:10] And about the children
[1:03:15] walking on the side of the
[1:03:16] road. I understand that
[1:03:19] this applies to people
[1:03:21] walking, and
[1:03:23] Yes.
[1:03:23] Where do they go?
[1:03:24] Yes.
[1:03:26] But I've had residents call me
[1:03:27] asking what we're
[1:03:29] going to
[1:03:30] do about it because they don't
[1:03:31] want to see
[1:03:32] little kids
[1:03:33] getting into...
[1:03:34] They don't go to
[1:03:35] school, right? Are they
[1:03:37] just leaving? I
[1:03:38] mean, I don't.
[1:03:41] So, I was told that there
[1:03:42] are those who go there with their
[1:03:43] parents to school,
[1:03:44] but there are also those who go
[1:03:46] and then cross the
[1:03:47] street to get to
[1:03:53] Applebee's or something
[1:03:54] else there. Ahem.
[1:03:57] Yes, no, just curious
[1:03:58] , because
[1:03:59] Yes.
[1:03:59] So, of course,
[1:04:03] I think it opens up
[1:04:04] possibilities if we
[1:04:05] make a path there,
[1:04:10] what is the school's position
[1:04:16] on this in terms of
[1:04:17] safety?
[1:04:19] From what I understand
[1:04:20] from previous
[1:04:21] staff
[1:04:22] who
[1:04:24] worked on this,
[1:04:25] conversations were ongoing with the school
[1:04:26] and they were
[1:04:27] very interested in
[1:04:28] it. One of the
[1:04:29] main reasons was that
[1:04:30] it would provide
[1:04:31] them with an escape route
[1:04:32] in case of an
[1:04:34] emergency. As far as I
[1:04:35] understand, they don't have it right now
[1:04:36] . They
[1:04:40] also tried
[1:04:41] to look into the future
[1:04:43] so that if
[1:04:44] young families moved into a
[1:04:46] nearby housing estate, they would have a
[1:04:47] safe walking
[1:04:48] route to school.
[1:04:51] Or on a bike, or
[1:04:52] whatever.
[1:04:53] No, because the residents
[1:04:54] were worried that if
[1:04:56] we put a
[1:04:56] path there, people would start
[1:04:58] walking.
[1:04:58] Yes.
[1:05:00] from that area to
[1:05:01] school, and then they will
[1:05:02] walk along the school
[1:05:04] paths, etc. Are there any
[1:05:07] security issues there? So, I hear
[1:05:08] it from both sides.
[1:05:11] I...there was a lot of...
[1:05:12] I understand there
[1:05:13] was also a lot of
[1:05:15] discussion about the
[1:05:15] general safety of the
[1:05:17] path that goes
[1:05:18] through that wetland
[1:05:19] area, right?
[1:05:21] Yes.
[1:05:23] This is definitely a
[1:05:25] factor to
[1:05:26] consider for people and
[1:05:27] children.
[1:05:29] Yes. I remember that, but I
[1:05:31] also remember that there
[1:05:33] was...it was an
[1:05:33] extremely high
[1:05:35] cost.
[1:05:37] Ugh. I
[1:05:37] don't know if we had an
[1:05:39] official
[1:05:42] I think, if memory
[1:05:43] serves, from
[1:05:44] one of those
[1:05:45] meetings, the project was
[1:05:46] completely rejected
[1:05:47] because of
[1:05:48] wetland procedures.
[1:05:50] Well, I think it's partly
[1:05:51] because of the cost of
[1:05:52] going through this
[1:05:53] process.
[1:05:54] Yes, this very
[1:05:55] process. Yes.
[1:05:56] Ugh.
[1:05:56] Yes. But...but you're
[1:05:58] right. I think that's a
[1:05:59] big part of the
[1:06:00] problem.
[1:06:02] Let me propose an
[1:06:03] unconventional idea,
[1:06:04] okay? On Route 62, there
[1:06:07] 's actually an
[1:06:08] overly wide
[1:06:09] emergency
[1:06:11] stop lane there, right? Is it
[1:06:16] possible or advisable
[1:06:18] to install, say,
[1:06:19] a fence that
[1:06:20] would provide sufficient
[1:06:21] width for walking and
[1:06:22] preserve an
[1:06:23] emergency stop lane?
[1:06:27] strip. I
[1:06:29] don't know if it's a state law. I
[1:06:31] think it's a
[1:06:32] state law that
[1:06:33] prohibits
[1:06:34] pedestrian access to
[1:06:35] these highways. You have to
[1:06:36] get permission from the
[1:06:37] state.
[1:06:37] They can
[1:06:38] ban as much as they
[1:06:39] want. It still
[1:06:40] happens. And they
[1:06:41] don't enforce it
[1:06:41] and
[1:06:42] don't do anything about it.
[1:06:43] Yeah, but I
[1:06:44] mean we won't
[1:06:45] get the permits
[1:06:46] until they...they would have to
[1:06:46] ...We have to
[1:06:47] ...They would have to
[1:06:48] do...I don't even
[1:06:49] know if they can.
[1:06:50] So, what can I
[1:06:51] ask? I'm not saying
[1:06:53] we can't ask
[1:06:54] .
[1:06:54] Yes, I was just about to
[1:06:55] say that. I can
[1:06:56] ask. By the way,
[1:06:57] Eric is here today.
[1:06:58] I guess we'll have a
[1:06:59] meeting with the
[1:07:00] state representatives next
[1:07:01] , and that's something I can
[1:07:02] ask them about. Maybe
[1:07:04] with a little
[1:07:04] help from Eric,
[1:07:06] they'll consider this as a
[1:07:07] viable option
[1:07:08] . Here are three options
[1:07:10] . Which we talked about tonight
[1:07:12] .
[1:07:14] Is there an option to involve
[1:07:16] all three participants
[1:07:17] together?
[1:07:18] Of course.
[1:07:18] You know.
[1:07:19] Of course.
[1:07:20] Having Eric, having
[1:07:22] Let me
[1:07:23] clarify, Eric...
[1:07:24] Vince, you're
[1:07:25] off the mic now,
[1:07:26] but is there anything you'd
[1:07:27] like to add or
[1:07:28] say now? Your
[1:07:29] thoughts?
[1:07:31] Yes. Em. I
[1:07:32] don't want to single you out,
[1:07:33] but I will still single you out
[1:07:34] .
[1:07:34] No, don't worry. I, I
[1:07:36] apologize, I'm sorry.
[1:07:37] I'm sitting here at the
[1:07:38] dinner table. Thank you
[1:07:39] for letting me
[1:07:40] join at the
[1:07:41] last minute. No, I'm
[1:07:43] grateful you let me in
[1:07:44] . My name is
[1:07:46] Eric Schultz. I
[1:07:47] handle
[1:07:48] transportation issues for the
[1:07:49] senator. I know that
[1:07:52] this project has a long
[1:07:54] history, and a lot of it
[1:07:55] happened before me.
[1:08:00] So I just ask you
[1:08:01] to continue the work
[1:08:02] and be open to
[1:08:04] discussing
[1:08:04] options for
[1:08:05] using this
[1:08:06] funding. Our
[1:08:11] position is clear:
[1:08:13] the senator put
[1:08:14] himself at risk to
[1:08:15] secure this
[1:08:16] $1.6 million in
[1:08:18] funding. If
[1:08:22] the term
[1:08:22] expires—which is at
[1:08:24] the end of
[1:08:24] next September—
[1:08:26] that $1.6 million
[1:08:27] will return to
[1:08:28] the Treasury, and we
[1:08:29] won't be able to
[1:08:31] redistribute it
[1:08:32] within the state. So your
[1:08:36] city, like the entire state,
[1:08:38] will lose that
[1:08:39] $1.6 million
[1:08:40] earmarked for
[1:08:41] improving our
[1:08:42] infrastructure. I
[1:08:46] like what I
[1:08:48] hear. Vince, can
[1:08:52] you talk about that
[1:08:53] third idea, which is
[1:08:54] downtown? You can
[1:08:57] just...
[1:08:58] Yes.
[1:08:58] Just give me...
[1:09:00] Yes. So, it's in the
[1:09:02] city center. It runs
[1:09:06] along Highway 62, a
[1:09:07] small section of
[1:09:08] state highway, the
[1:09:09] intersection
[1:09:11] we always talk about
[1:09:12] near the school that leads to
[1:09:14] Highway 62.
[1:09:16] Yes.
[1:09:17] That's what we're
[1:09:18] talking about, along it
[1:09:19] , and it also
[1:09:20] connects to the road
[1:09:21] to the mall.
[1:09:23] So it runs
[1:09:25] from the road to
[1:09:26] the mall to the
[1:09:27] intersection of Painter and
[1:09:28] Bike North, right next to
[1:09:30] Highway 62. As you just
[1:09:34] heard from the council,
[1:09:35] the biggest challenge
[1:09:36] is getting
[1:09:37] permission from the
[1:09:38] state itself for something like this
[1:09:39] .
[1:09:41] This is considered a
[1:09:43] limited access highway.
[1:09:44] Got it. Got it.
[1:09:46] There are very clear
[1:09:48] rules about what is
[1:09:49] allowed and what is not.
[1:09:51] Yes. Yes. And if we
[1:09:58] go back to the
[1:09:59] original plan,
[1:10:00] so to speak, to the
[1:10:01] original scope of
[1:10:02] this
[1:10:03] mall project,
[1:10:04] Vince, where do you think
[1:10:07] this discussion is at now? Have
[1:10:13] you talked to anyone
[1:10:15] from the mall
[1:10:16] lately? And, I
[1:10:17] mean, what do you
[1:10:19] think about that?
[1:10:20] So, since our
[1:10:21] last conversation,
[1:10:22] I haven't been able
[1:10:23] to talk to anyone
[1:10:24] at the mall yet.
[1:10:25] Yes.
[1:10:27] After our
[1:10:28] last
[1:10:28] discussion or
[1:10:29] meeting with the state, I will
[1:10:31] be contacting them
[1:10:32] this week to
[1:10:33] find a time to
[1:10:33] discuss their
[1:10:34] thoughts on that
[1:10:35] initial
[1:10:36] conceptual
[1:10:37] plan that was
[1:10:38] proposed earlier
[1:10:39] .
[1:10:41] Of course.
[1:10:42] And what stage are they at
[1:10:43] now?
[1:10:45] I just want to
[1:10:46] point this out, because as I
[1:10:48] understood it, we went
[1:10:52] to the
[1:10:53] sidewalk option because
[1:10:54] we needed to
[1:10:55] spend these funds,
[1:10:56] they were supposed to be
[1:10:57] used this year.
[1:10:59] This fall. And we wouldn't have had
[1:11:01] time, because the
[1:11:02] shopping center chose a
[1:11:04] different option due to the
[1:11:05] large number of
[1:11:06] other projects. They
[1:11:07] said that now is not the
[1:11:08] best time to
[1:11:09] implement a
[1:11:10] multi-use
[1:11:11] trail. But this was the
[1:11:12] initial option.
[1:11:13] This is the best-case
[1:11:14] scenario if we
[1:11:15] can get back
[1:11:16] to that
[1:11:16] multi-use
[1:11:18] path. It was about
[1:11:19] her that we conducted
[1:11:20] a survey. I
[1:11:21] mean, at least in
[1:11:23] my opinion. I speak
[1:11:24] only for myself. This is something that has
[1:11:28] already been considered
[1:11:29] and we have already done this
[1:11:30] research or
[1:11:31] preliminary plan. But
[1:11:36] we thought it was a
[1:11:36] matter of
[1:11:37] funding deadlines. So it's
[1:11:39] nice to hear that we
[1:11:40] might be able to.
[1:11:42] Well, Eric, as we were
[1:11:44] saying, I think it's
[1:11:45] still a problem, right?
[1:11:46] In a meeting with the state,
[1:11:47] we discussed that
[1:11:49] any
[1:11:49] future direction we take
[1:11:51] will likely require an
[1:11:52] extension of time
[1:11:53] , if possible.
[1:11:54] We are already at the finish
[1:11:55] line, but we still need to
[1:11:57] conduct an environmental
[1:11:58] assessment and
[1:11:59] design work. I
[1:12:01] know you've already invested
[1:12:03] time and money into your
[1:12:04] design and concept,
[1:12:05] but yes, it
[1:12:06] looks that way, and besides,
[1:12:08] nothing is
[1:12:08] guaranteed. You
[1:12:12] know,
[1:12:14] extensions are not
[1:12:14] guaranteed, but we will
[1:12:16] certainly, if
[1:12:17] we can get a
[1:12:18] viable project that
[1:12:20] your council agrees to, do
[1:12:21] everything we can to
[1:12:23] help you. And, as I
[1:12:27] said, we really want to
[1:12:28] keep these funds in the
[1:12:29] state and put
[1:12:31] them to good use, and I'm
[1:12:32] sure you do too.
[1:12:35] Is the shopping
[1:12:37] mall project...I don't
[1:12:38] want to
[1:12:39] embarrass anyone,
[1:12:40] but do you feel
[1:12:41] as a group that you would have a
[1:12:42] consensus on the
[1:12:44] initial scope of
[1:12:45] work if everyone
[1:12:46] agreed to it?
[1:12:49] I'm not even sure if the
[1:12:51] new members saw it.
[1:12:52] Yeah, I saw the original
[1:12:53] when it was
[1:12:54] OK.
[1:12:55] proposed.
[1:12:56] Has the engineering
[1:12:56] design
[1:12:57] been completed yet?
[1:12:58] planning
[1:12:59] No, no, it was just a
[1:13:00] concept.
[1:13:01] We would get
[1:13:02] more.
[1:13:04] Well, actually, that's what I
[1:13:06] was going to say: if
[1:13:07] we move on, you
[1:13:09] know, we just
[1:13:10] spent 168,000 on something that we've
[1:13:11] now
[1:13:13] decided to give up
[1:13:14] . If we do all of
[1:13:20] this and don't get an
[1:13:21] extension on
[1:13:22] these funds, we
[1:13:23] could be facing
[1:13:24] another significant
[1:13:25] amount of
[1:13:26] design work, and to be
[1:13:27] honest, that's a
[1:13:28] little disconcerting to me.
[1:13:31] Yes, that's a valid
[1:13:32] point, and I know,
[1:13:33] Eric, we talked
[1:13:34] about that, right? To
[1:13:36] find out if these
[1:13:38] funds can be used for
[1:13:39] planning and/or
[1:13:40] design.
[1:13:45] Well, you know, we have to take it
[1:13:46] step by step.
[1:13:48] We need to assemble a
[1:13:50] team, we need to
[1:13:51] reach an agreement on the
[1:13:52] project. Um, and all
[1:13:53] I can say is
[1:13:55] , you know, we, as I
[1:13:56] said, our office
[1:13:57] wants the city to
[1:13:59] use this money,
[1:14:00] wants it to
[1:14:01] stay in the state, and
[1:14:02] we'll do everything we can
[1:14:04] to
[1:14:05] help. So if
[1:14:07] you want to get together and
[1:14:08] get everyone
[1:14:09] involved, I
[1:14:10] worked with
[1:14:11] Vince quite a bit and he was very
[1:14:12] helpful in getting
[1:14:14] people in from the state and
[1:14:15] calling different
[1:14:16] meetings. But if you
[1:14:17] want to call,
[1:14:18] you know, get everyone together
[1:14:20] for a meeting, I'd be
[1:14:21] happy to organize one
[1:14:22] for you.
[1:14:23] This is a great idea.
[1:14:26] Yeah, and, um, just to
[1:14:27] keep, I do, and to keep
[1:14:29] everything, you know,
[1:14:30] open, and if there are
[1:14:31] any concerns,
[1:14:33] let's discuss
[1:14:34] them and make sure
[1:14:35] everyone is, you know,
[1:14:37] hopefully on the same
[1:14:38] page about the project, I'd be
[1:14:39] very happy to do that
[1:14:41] . Um, what I would
[1:14:44] suggest or
[1:14:45] what I would hope for is,
[1:14:46] you know, to take, um, I don't
[1:14:48] know if you want to
[1:14:49] bring this up as an
[1:14:50] agenda item for
[1:14:51] one of your
[1:14:52] next meetings.
[1:14:54] It looks like you have
[1:14:56] a lot of work ahead of you. I, um,
[1:14:57] listened to your meeting
[1:14:58] here over dinner.
[1:15:00] But, um, yeah,
[1:15:01] discuss it
[1:15:01] internally, like I said,
[1:15:03] and all I'm asking
[1:15:04] is to keep an
[1:15:05] open mind and
[1:15:05] let's try to
[1:15:07] find a way to
[1:15:07] keep that money in the
[1:15:08] state, and, um, you know,
[1:15:10] hopefully you
[1:15:10] get, uh,
[1:15:12] yeah.
[1:15:12] something that will
[1:15:13] benefit your city.
[1:15:15] Therefore.
[1:15:18] But, Eric, just to
[1:15:20] follow up on that point,
[1:15:21] I think it would be helpful for the council
[1:15:22] to know that
[1:15:24] some of that money,
[1:15:25] if they wanted to,
[1:15:26] we could put toward
[1:15:28] design or
[1:15:29] planning—if we were to
[1:15:30] negotiate a
[1:15:31] project with the
[1:15:32] mall or with the state
[1:15:34] , whether it's Lot 62 or the
[1:15:35] mall, and we could reach an agreement.
[1:15:39] I think that would make a
[1:15:40] significant impression on this
[1:15:42] council. Are
[1:15:44] you now... We're not
[1:15:45] talking about the money
[1:15:46] you've already spent
[1:15:47] ?
[1:15:48] No, no. We are talking
[1:15:50] about 1.6 million.
[1:15:52] Yes.
[1:15:54] Can some of this
[1:15:55] money, as we
[1:15:56] discussed with
[1:15:56] the state, also
[1:15:57] be used for planning purposes?
[1:16:00] Planning and design would
[1:16:01] make a significant difference
[1:16:02] .
[1:16:03] OK.
[1:16:04] Of course.
[1:16:04] Yes. And this...
[1:16:07] And I just want to
[1:16:08] say that I think
[1:16:09] the school is a very important
[1:16:10] potential project
[1:16:12] , but we're not yet far enough along to make
[1:16:14] it a reality.
[1:16:17] Especially considering
[1:16:18] environmental permits.
[1:16:22] And the thing is, I don't
[1:16:23] know, given the
[1:16:24] last vote,
[1:16:26] how this will affect the
[1:16:26] matter, whether this should
[1:16:28] now be considered by the
[1:16:29] entire supervisory
[1:16:30] union.
[1:16:32] I'm sure it is.
[1:16:34] Of course, it will
[1:16:34] have to, because now,
[1:16:36] after that
[1:16:36] vote, it must
[1:16:38] be approved by
[1:16:38] a vote of all
[1:16:39] five cities.
[1:16:40] At the moment.
[1:16:41] Yes.
[1:16:42] So, maybe that
[1:16:43] project has
[1:16:44] been shelved for now, but the 62nd
[1:16:45] is still
[1:16:46] viable.
[1:16:47] That's right.
[1:16:48] And the original
[1:16:48] concept is certainly still
[1:16:51] relevant.
[1:16:51] Yes.
[1:16:52] And if I
[1:16:52] remember correctly, there weren't that
[1:16:53] many
[1:16:54] environmental
[1:16:54] implications, at least
[1:16:55] for one of the
[1:16:56] design options. The
[1:16:57] impact on
[1:16:58] wetlands in
[1:16:58] the initial design of the
[1:16:59] multi-use
[1:17:01] trail was
[1:17:01] minimal. So
[1:17:02] hopefully it won't
[1:17:03] happen... That
[1:17:04] 's right. ... a
[1:17:04] serious obstacle
[1:17:05] to obtaining
[1:17:06] permits.
[1:17:07] Good.
[1:17:07] But I think that's the whole point of a
[1:17:09] city center—
[1:17:10] to make it
[1:17:11] pedestrian-friendly.
[1:17:11] Well, that was one of the
[1:17:13] discussion topics
[1:17:14] I wanted to
[1:17:14] suggest, but
[1:17:15] since it came up
[1:17:17] tonight, I'd
[1:17:18] really like to have a
[1:17:19] meeting with the
[1:17:20] mall. And find out
[1:17:23] what their plans are. We, as a
[1:17:26] city, have invested a lot
[1:17:26] in
[1:17:28] making that entire
[1:17:29] area our
[1:17:30] city center.
[1:17:33] You know, we were
[1:17:33] hoping they
[1:17:35] would be built, and we
[1:17:36] would like to understand
[1:17:37] their position.
[1:17:38] Yes.
[1:17:39] And I would also like to
[1:17:40] go to the
[1:17:41] hospital, you know.
[1:17:42] Yes.
[1:17:43] Because we had already
[1:17:44] discussed before
[1:17:45] that they would help with a
[1:17:47] certain construction,
[1:17:48] and I would like to know what's going on
[1:17:49] with that plot.
[1:17:52] I think now is the right
[1:17:54] time for us as a
[1:17:55] council to reach out
[1:17:56] to these two
[1:17:57] major
[1:17:58] property owners in our
[1:17:59] city. I think
[1:18:02] we put a lot of effort into
[1:18:04] getting this
[1:18:05] appointment and
[1:18:05] moving forward. And
[1:18:09] then we had to
[1:18:10] urgently move
[1:18:12] this project to another
[1:18:13] location because they weren't
[1:18:14] ready to continue.
[1:18:19] Therefore, I want to understand
[1:18:20] their plans for
[1:18:21] further development
[1:18:23] and investment, because,
[1:18:24] in my opinion, the city
[1:18:25] has spent a lot of
[1:18:26] time, effort, and money
[1:18:27] on this.
[1:18:30] Tell me, where would you
[1:18:31] like to invite them?
[1:18:32] Can I make
[1:18:33] a suggestion? I'm not
[1:18:34] sure they will
[1:18:35] publicly come to the
[1:18:36] meeting to talk
[1:18:37] about their plans. I would
[1:18:39] advise the city, if
[1:18:40] you want to meet
[1:18:41] with them, in person or
[1:18:42] otherwise,
[1:18:45] no, I'm not saying, and I'm not
[1:18:46] saying we should
[1:18:47] have
[1:18:48] Yes, no, I just
[1:18:51] think there are conversations that are
[1:18:53] worth having,
[1:18:54] especially if we're
[1:18:55] going to
[1:18:56] invest 1.6
[1:18:57] million plus
[1:18:58] city spending in this
[1:18:59] mall area
[1:19:00] . Because, look,
[1:19:05] let's be
[1:19:06] honest, this is their
[1:19:07] property. After all,
[1:19:08] this is their territory where
[1:19:09] we are laying this
[1:19:10] multi-use
[1:19:11] path. What is the
[1:19:13] future of their
[1:19:14] site? If we
[1:19:15] went for it.
[1:19:16] the city as a whole.
[1:19:18] No, and I understand that.
[1:19:19] Yes, we are
[1:19:20] taxed too.
[1:19:21] no, and I'm not saying no,
[1:19:23] but we
[1:19:25] When you have a
[1:19:26] minute this week,
[1:19:27] write to me, what
[1:19:28] suits you, and we
[1:19:29] will schedule a meeting
[1:19:30] for you and me with the
[1:19:31] management of the
[1:19:32] shopping center, and
[1:19:33] another with the management of
[1:19:35] the hospital.
[1:19:36] Two separate meetings.
[1:19:39] Yes, I agree.
[1:19:40] Yes, yes.
[1:19:41] We will go there.
[1:19:42] Yes.
[1:19:42] And, uh,
[1:19:43] Yes. to
[1:19:43] get out of the cage.
[1:19:44] Yes.
[1:19:45] I just think we
[1:19:46] all need to have a
[1:19:47] common understanding.
[1:19:48] Yes.
[1:19:49] We
[1:19:50] Of course.
[1:19:51] No, I don't object.
[1:19:53] evolve. We have
[1:19:55] two fairly large
[1:19:56] parts of the city that
[1:19:57] belong to these two
[1:19:58] entities. I think we
[1:20:00] all need to act in a
[1:20:01] coordinated manner,
[1:20:02] wondering where we are
[1:20:03] headed. So.
[1:20:05] Yes.
[1:20:06] What's going on with
[1:20:07] the hospital there?
[1:20:08] Yes, I heard something.
[1:20:10] They are not
[1:20:11] MGM.
[1:20:15] it's about it's
[1:20:16] about
[1:20:16] Yes, it's a complicated
[1:20:17] question. Yes, but
[1:20:18] something worth
[1:20:19] talking about
[1:20:20] So it
[1:20:20] won't hurt.
[1:20:21] I think it would
[1:20:22] n't hurt to have
[1:20:23] something to talk about.
[1:20:24] Yes.
[1:20:24] No, no, no, I'm not saying
[1:20:25] you can't talk to them
[1:20:26] . Ask
[1:20:27] if they want
[1:20:27] to connect because they
[1:20:28] once wanted to
[1:20:28] connect their path,
[1:20:29] or we talked about
[1:20:30] connecting their
[1:20:30] paths with other
[1:20:31] paths further down the
[1:20:31] road. So that's a different
[1:20:33] topic.
[1:20:33] Of course.
[1:20:34] Um, I'm grateful you
[1:20:35] came. It's really nice
[1:20:37] to hear this
[1:20:37] directly from
[1:20:38] you.
[1:20:38] Yes, thank you very much.
[1:20:40] Yes, I'm glad. I'm
[1:20:41] more than happy
[1:20:42] to join in, um, when
[1:20:44] needed. And as I
[1:20:49] said, if there's
[1:20:50] anything I can
[1:20:51] help with, like
[1:20:52] bringing other
[1:20:53] partners to the
[1:20:54] meeting or if I
[1:20:55] can reach out to
[1:20:57] my colleagues in
[1:20:57] Washington on
[1:20:58] any federal
[1:21:00] issues that would be
[1:21:01] helpful, please don't
[1:21:01] hesitate to reach out
[1:21:03] . And, um, yes, I would
[1:21:07] encourage such
[1:21:08] meetings. And the last thing
[1:21:10] I'll say is: there's not
[1:21:12] much leeway here in how
[1:21:13] it's written,
[1:21:14] but it's written in the
[1:21:15] law. So the funds
[1:21:20] should be
[1:21:20] used
[1:21:22] downtown, in downtown
[1:21:23] Burlington, for
[1:21:24] bike or
[1:21:24] pedestrian
[1:21:25] infrastructure, but
[1:21:26] with that in mind, I would
[1:21:27] advise you
[1:21:28] to keep
[1:21:29] an open mind and
[1:21:30] maybe be creative
[1:21:31] about how to
[1:21:32] spend that money and
[1:21:33] improve your city.
[1:21:37] Perfectly. Thank you.
[1:21:39] very much.
[1:21:40] Thank you. I appreciate it.
[1:21:41] Please.
[1:21:42] We'll
[1:21:43] talk again soon.
[1:21:43] Good evening.
[1:21:44] Okay, good evening
[1:21:46] . Thank you.
[1:21:47] Sara. Take care of
[1:21:48] yourself. That's
[1:21:50] all I have for the
[1:21:51] roundtable. Are there
[1:21:54] any other questions for the
[1:21:55] roundtable?
[1:21:57] I wanted to ask about the
[1:21:58] Perry Hotel. What is
[1:22:00] the status?
[1:22:01] Sold Out.
[1:22:02] I know, but I wanted to
[1:22:03] make sure because I didn't
[1:22:04] hear anything from our
[1:22:05] last conversation.
[1:22:06] I don't know when they'll
[1:22:07] start
[1:22:08] construction or
[1:22:09] anything.
[1:22:09] No, I didn't expect
[1:22:10] you to know, but everything has been going according to
[1:22:11] plan since
[1:22:12] our
[1:22:13] last conversation.
[1:22:14] No problems after
[1:22:16] that.
[1:22:16] OK. Thank you. Oh, that
[1:22:21] was good news,
[1:22:22] right?
[1:22:22] good news.
[1:22:23] Very good.
[1:22:24] news.
[1:22:25] Yeah, I'm just me. No
[1:22:27] , I mean, oh,
[1:22:28] never mind.
[1:22:29] So, by the way, right?
[1:22:31] If you notice a
[1:22:33] skating rink here,
[1:22:33] yes.
[1:22:35] It's all raised up.
[1:22:37] I didn't have any.
[1:22:38] We hopefully saved a little
[1:22:40] by moving the soil from
[1:22:42] another place here.
[1:22:44] To raise the level.
[1:22:45] Again, not that
[1:22:47] we want to
[1:22:47] talk about the
[1:22:49] skating rink project, but during
[1:22:50] that discussion,
[1:22:51] it seems that the
[1:22:52] amount discussed was between 30 and 50 thousand
[1:22:54] to do everything
[1:22:55] right; but we did
[1:22:56] it for free and
[1:22:57] hopefully
[1:22:58] saved on the
[1:22:59] earthworks
[1:23:00] near the city garage.
[1:23:01] Great, I didn't know.
[1:23:03] Yes, take a look when you go
[1:23:04] out. It's
[1:23:05] almost level with
[1:23:06] the parking lot, and they're
[1:23:07] not finished yet. That's it.
[1:23:08] Class, sounds good.
[1:23:10] Oh, and those old
[1:23:11] dangerous sides are
[1:23:12] gone.
[1:23:13] Good.
[1:23:14] So. We live on.
[1:23:16] Good news. OK.
[1:23:21] Finished?
[1:23:22] Ahem.
[1:23:23] Yes. Yes, sir.
[1:23:25] I'm done.
[1:23:26] Good. Do
[1:23:27] you have a question?
[1:23:28] No.
[1:23:29] Chris?
[1:23:31] I'll probably
[1:23:32] hold off for now. I don't want
[1:23:35] my words to be
[1:23:36] taken out of context again.
[1:23:37] Got it.
[1:23:38] Good.
[1:23:39] I think I'll put it off until
[1:23:40] later.
[1:23:41] Yes, well, I'm
[1:23:42] Yes, I'm fine.
[1:23:43] OK.
[1:23:44] Okay, okay.
[1:23:45] No closed
[1:23:46] meetings, right?
[1:23:47] No, no.
[1:23:48] Yes, it's yours.
[1:23:50] This is an option.
[1:23:51] John. I
[1:23:52] support.
[1:23:54] Who is for it?
[1:23:55] I.
[1:23:56] Against? The meeting
[1:23:57] is closed.