City Council

27 WEST ALLEN STREET WINOOSKI, VERMONT 05404 (802) 655-6410 CITY OF WINOOSKI (802) 655-6414 (fax) RAYMOND COFFEY INTERIM CITY MANAGER MAYOR SETH LEONARD COUNCILOR NICOLE MACE sleonard@winooskivt.org DEPUTY MAYOR BRIAN CORRIGAN CITY COUNCIL COUNCILOR ROBERT MILLAR COUNCILOR BRIAN SWEENEY bcorrigan@winooskivt.org Agenda Tuesday, September 6, 2016 6:00 p.m. Claire Burke Council Chambers I. Call To Order II. Pledge of Allegiance III. Public Comment IV. Consent Agenda a. Approval: City Council Minutes of 8/15/2016 b. Approval: Payroll Warrant 7/13-8/13 & 8/14-8/27; Accounts Payable Warrant as of 09/06/2016; Subsequent to Payout Warrant July c. Approval: Reaffirm approval for Warrant as of 8/31/2016 V. City Update VI. Agenda Review VII. Regular Items: a. Discussion: Recognition of Ethan Hausman – Kirstie Paschall b. Approval: Public Safety Commission Appointment Ira Flateman – Rick Hebert/John Audy c. Discussion: Winooski Housing Study Results Presentation – Ray Coffey d. Approval: F-35 Lawsuit Next Steps – Seth Leonard e. Discussion: VLCT Municipal Policy Guiding Principles Review – Ray Coffey f. Approval: Appoint Delegate for VLCT Annual Business Meeting – Ray Coffey g. Approval CSWD Drop Off Center Survey – Ray Coffey h. Approval: City Manager Search Committee Update & Budget – Seth Leonard i. Discussion: Winooski Housing Authority Board Nomination Process - Ray Coffey j. Discussion: VIA Building Study Presentation Preview – Ray Coffey VIII. Executive Session: a. Discussion: Annual Audit Contract FY’16 – Seth Leonard VIII. Adjourn MINUTES The meeting was called to order by the Mayor at 6:00 p.m. The meeting began with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Deputy Mayor Corrigan. Members Present: Mayor Seth Leonard Councilors: Brian Corrigan, Brian Sweeney, Nicole Mace, Robert Millar September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council Officers Present: Ray Coffey, Interim City Manager; Carol Barrett, City Clerk; Heather Carrington, Community and Economic Development Officers; Kirstie Paschall, Interim Community Services Director; Angela Aldieri, Staff Accountant Others Present: Sr. Patricia McKittrick, Eileen Andreoli, Michael M. Mahoney, Maura O’Neill, Winooski Community Partnership; Michael O’Brien, Maura Collins, Kelly Lamothe, Danielle Shaw, Joy Dubin Grossman, Igor Zbitnoff, Paul Sarne, Vista; III. Public Comment No public comment was made. IV. Consent Agenda City Council Minutes of 8/15/2016 – MOTION by Councilor Mace seconded by Councilor Sweeney to approve the minutes of August 15, 2016 as presented. Voted and passed 3-0-1 Councilor Corrigan abstained. Warrants – MOTION by Councilor Millar seconded by Councilor Sweeney to approve the warrants as presented. Voted and passed 4-0. V. City Update - Mr. Coffey handed out a list of City Appointment that was approved at a prior meeting. - He said last week at the Gilbrook area there was a gentleman using the park in an inappropriate way the Police Dept. and CUSI are handling the incident. -He would like to give Kudo’s to Angela for the August 31, Warrant -Auditors are coming in September -Shout out to Kirstie Paschall with the Thrive opening today. Kirstie will be Interim Community Services Director thru February. Jeremy Beauregard will be the Interim Thrive Director. -Would also like to congratulate Kirstie and Loren on their wedding this past weekend. - Mr. Coffey said he attended the school BBQ- fun event. Congrats to the school with the energy and positivity when entering the school. - Deac’s farewell tour on Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 5:30 p.m. at the Monkey House. I encourage the community to come and bid farewell. VI. Agenda Review There were no changes to the agenda VII. Regular Items a. Discussion: Recognition of Ethan Hausman Mr. Coffey recognized Ethan Hausman. He said Ethan will be leaving us on September 9. He has been a significant impact here and we would like to thank him for that. Ms. Paschall said Ethan had a “get stuff done” attitude. We appreciate his spirit and he brought a high asset to the City and he will be missed. The Mayor said he was a great representative to the City. b. Approval: Public Safety Commission Appointment Ira Flateman MOTION by Councilor Corrigan seconded by Councilor Mace to appoint Ira Flateman to the Public Safety Commission for a one year term. Voted and passed 4-0. c. Discussion: Winooski Housing Study Results Presentation Mr. Coffey said this group started to take up issues around housing in particular thinking about some properties that the City has and how we want to leverage those. We were fortunate enough to work with Maura Collins who is here and some September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council of her students through the UVM Masters in Public Administration program to do a semester long housing study. Maura is here tonight to share some of the results and discuss next steps potentially. Ms. Collins, Professor of UVM said the official name of the class is Housing Community Development and Public Policy. It was 10 graduate students who are listed on the cover. She said she did not print this report but I did guide it. Ms. Collins said she plans on giving you a couple of highlights and having a dialogue about what kinds of questions we did not answer. She said the students did a lot of quantifiable research. We also held a focus group in this room with a Realtor, Builder Developer, and head of the Housing Authority. We did a community survey that 189 people responded to. The students did interviews with local schools, area social service agency’s and some other key people in the community to make sure the data we were collecting was actually true in terms of people’s perception and experience working in and with the community. The key findings are not gong to be all that surprising to you. We didn’t find anything that you didn’t already know. Ms. Collins highlighted the following areas: Risk of Gentrification – We had a lot of discussion about gentrification. How do you know it when you see it? What is the bright line test of it and of course we didn’t come up with an answer. There are some data points that you will be well served to monitor over time. The Mayor explained gentrification – influx of market or about market housing that could put a strain on affordable housing. Ms. Collins said the risk becomes, if the new development is pricing out the people who could have lived in the community before the investment of resources. Winooski has a very diverse population. It is a desired homeownership destination. Winooski has one of the lowest home ownership rates in the country and the state. At the same time the community survey showed that there are a lot of people looking to buy a home in the next two years and the majority of them really would like for that to be in Winooski if they can find the right property. Young families are moving in and can see the demographics changing that way. So far we are seeing that they are not staying a whole long time. She said Winooski’s median household income is increasing faster than Winooski’s historical norm and faster than the county overall. Incomes are going up. We really noticed a growing disparity in renter and homeowner incomes. Homeowner incomes have gone up about 20% over the 5 year period of 2010-2014. Homeowner income has increased at 20% while renter income decreased by 20%. That kind of disparity is something to watch. We looked at the impact of schools on the housing market. This is something that came out in the focus group especially from the realtor’s and others. We heard that the schools could have an impact and the survey showed it was one of the highest items that residents believe impacts their home prices. Location and proximity are the biggest impacts on the home prices, public safety, and school was the third biggest. She said 30% of the student body either did not begin or end the school year in the public school district, so that transiency and turnover can not only effect educational outcomes but in the housing academic world we know that a lot of transiency and moving among rentals can really have an impact. Ms. Collins said there are recommendations here. We did look at a lot of data and tried to collaborate the data with survey findings, focus group with interviews. Whether it is this body or Planning Commission it is a popular thing in Chittenden County is creating a housing commission, Williston, South Burling and Burlington has one. It has become such a big topic in housing especially affordability and availability. Other communities have decided that they need a whole other body to dive in and start looking at changes. The Mayor thanked Ms. Collins and her students for all of the work that they have done. This has data that is going to keep on giving to us in terms of our ability to refresh it. Mr. Coffey said he really felt from the council perspective we were making decisions sometimes in vacuum without a real strong context of, “What is really going on in our housing” in terms of moving forward with it. I think there is a real need for us to create some kind of policy. J Councilor Mace wanted clarification about inclusionary zoning and what that term means. Was that done in Form Base Code? Were there any incentives associated with building certain types of either affordable or energy efficient units or is that a different thing all together. The Mayor said this is a different thing all together. Councilor Mace said none of what we’ve done to sort of try to encourage affordable housing to date thru recent form base code is captured in any of the recommendations. Is this a different type of a policy lever? Ms. Collins said it’s more of a mandatory as opposed to voluntary, so I believe in fairness to your zoning changes happened after our course started. We really couldn’t dive into understanding but we could see the impact of what you’ve done. Councilor Mace thanked them for the high quality of this report and for all the information; this provides us with a good road map. September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council Councilor Millar asked in comparing the percentage of folks income that goes to housing what did you use for that. Ms. Collins said for Renters it would be rent and utilities and for homeowners it was principal/interest/taxes/utilities and homeowner insurance. Sr. Pat said the health/wellness of the community is very important. If we have affordable and available housing it impacts everything else. Mr. Coffey said the thought here tonight is we would try to work out the recommendations. He said with Heather on board now, I think we have another person to bring to the conversation and to help shepherd some of these pieces along that we didn’t have a month ago. 1. Housing Commission – Mr. Coffey said this is valid and needed and to have a group look at this. I think the Planning Commission is at a point and has some really good capacity to take on a more meaningful conversation around housing. I think the primary concern that we have as staff at the moment about creating another commission is just management of another group. I think this feels like a better strategy at the moment. It’s not to say we would get to a spin off sub- committee. 2. Mandate that when housing is torn down, it is replaced within the City – Mr. Coffey said there is a desire to take more of carrot versus a stick approach and try to think about how to insensitive a development that we are hoping to see. I think we need to give some more thought to. I think we need to defer at this time. 3. Invest in a gentrification risk assessment tool – Mr. Coffey said this is another one where we felt there is real value and need for. I think we want to give this one more thought in time also before we are ready to say were going to dive in. With our rental registry coming online this will allow us to address some data deficiencies. We are in the process right not on implementing new software. 4. Expand limited Inclusionary Zoning Program - Mr. Coffey said we also want to give this more thought. 5. Create a Winooski Housing Trust Fund – Mr. Coffey said at the moment we do have a housing improvement program through the City. It hasn’t been particularly well promoted or leveraged. We haven’t had a person to spear head that process for us. I think the Housing Trust fund needs a dusting off and a polishing up of a program, we already have. Ms. Aldieri said there is a little over $334,000.00 on hand. The Mayor said it is currently managed by Champlain Housing Trust. We have a current operating agreement on that. Ms. Carrington said the loan is available to owner occupancy of low and moderate income residents up to 4 dwelling units as specified in the needs assessment Mr. Coffey said step 1 would be getting this off the map, step 2 would be getting successful ability to do that. This is a huge priority for us. 6. Invest in analyzing housing quality data – Mr. Coffey said this is a work in progress right now. John and his team have been working over the last couple of weeks to begin pulling information into a new software program. It will allow them to do their inspections remotely. They will have an IPAD on site. 7. Creation of Information and funding mechanism for accessory dwelling units (ADU’s) – We need to do some thinking around this. It is on our list to tackle on the short term. 8. Encourage more homeowners in the City 9. Use Winooski Ethnic Diversity to market the community. – Mr. Coffey said Mr. Millar point rings true here. We have not done a great job of telling our story. This is an area where it could stand some work. 10- Consider the successes of other mill towns – Mr. Coffey said this is duly noted. I think that’s one that’s a recommendation. He is not interested in reinventing the wheel. 11. Create and monitor a map parcels. – Mr. Coffey said this is a project in the works. He said CCRPC has a lot of these tools that are available. To date we haven’t accessed to the level that I think we could or should. The Mayor said at this point this item moves to the Planning Commission and will start to consider what investment were going to make in implementation in the future. d. Approval: F-35 Lawsuit Next Steps The Mayor summarized where we are: Since the basing of F35’s at Burlington International Airport was being discussed. The City is very engaged on the subject during the process that led up to the basing decision. The City Council issued two separate resolutions with a statement. We did a number of things, we expressed concerns, gave questions that we wanted answers to and also gave a stance to the City that there were concerns about whether or not there was enough information available to make the basing decision. Those were reflected in our resolutions that went into the EIS process which is discussed in this suit, those items became our voice in that process. Following the basing decision a group of private September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council residents and organizations filed a suit against the Air Force during the filing period. A vote also took place in Winooski in March of 2015 to ask the council to join the suit and to allocate $7500.00 towards legal action. This group in its current form took the issue up and decided to enter the suit with independent and separate attorney’s representing the City’s interest. We filed a motion in the suit by and large philosophically here to what was put into the resolutions that the Council had passed during the EIS process; The suit is fair to say technical in nature and it’s based around NEPA whether or not that rule that congress asked the Air Force basing follow in terms of investigative process in making a decision. The judge just handed down again a summary judgment on the case that was not favorable to the suit. Last week we brought it and our Attorney Robert DiPalma, Paul, Frank & Collins to give legal advice to Council or legal context and background advice and to give an assessment of the decision and we did most of that in public session and had a short period in executive session where we discussed strategy components that would have put us at a disadvantage had that been taken place in public. We did not invite Mr. DiPalma back today because there didn’t seem to be a lot of lingering legal questions. It’s really back in the court of Council to discuss what steps might be taken. The deadline for joining the appeal which the other plaintiffs indicated they do plan on going forward which is October 9. We could make that decision the first meeting in October, but it is cutting it close to having time to prep things. I want to make that clear as we consider tonight’s discussion. Mayor Leonard said we could take comments from the public up front which in the past is something we offered to do before deliberations. If you want to hear from the public right away, that’s probably recommended or we can dive right in. Councilor Millar said it would be good to open to the public first. The Mayor said we will have a public comment in the beginning of this session. Mr. Mahoney read the following statement – See attached. Sr. Pat McKittrick said she would also like to speak in support of asking the Council to go forward and to continue their support with this legal issue. One of my biggest concerns is the health issue’s involved around the F35’s. All the data that was in the EIS was more than 10 or 12 years old regarding health issues. I think that two years ago in South Burlington two of the Doctors did a report and talked about the health issues and the outdated data that was being used; this is unfair to the residents. Mr. Michael O’Brien – As you know, I’m against joining the appeal. I was against joining the lawsuit in the first place. I sent you all some information over the weekend. I hope you had a chance to look at it. It’s some update noise information which is consistent with what I experienced when I went down to listen to the planes in Eglin back in 2012. The question today is should you join the appeal of a lawsuit. You entered the lawsuit as the residents of Winooski asked you to do in the vote in 2015. You took the stance you did what you were asked to do. A federal judge made a ruling looked at the arguments and denied all accounts included the accounts you were involved in. The question tonight is not about the things that have been reiterated over and over again, but should you join the lawsuit. The last meeting when you came out of executive session you looked at the fact it was going to cost tens of thousands of dollars to join the appeal. You really have to ask yourself is it worth it. You have a federal judge who looked at the question examined and looked at it in relation to the NEPA, did it meet all the requirements and he said it did. Are there other avenues that you take to accomplish what you are trying to do? Mr. Zbitnoff, as a citizen of this city said we moved here in 2004 and discovered unexpected noise pollution. It turned out this was the Air Guard training with F16’s. Neither the realtor nor the seller in our purchase disclosed this. I’ve since come to understand the local real estate has played fast and loose with the disclosure of the noise pollution of the Air Guard. Then I come to find out their replacing the F16’s with F35’s and make noise pollution worse. I think the City Council should do what it can to mitigate this noise pollution. In this case this being supporting the appeal of the F35’s right to know lawsuit, I urge you to do so. Ms. Andreoli thanked the Winooski City Council for joining the F35 right to know lawsuit in 2015. I’ve been a long time Winooski advocate and worked many years to improve my community and instill a sense of pride in my City and I don’t think I have ever been so proud of my elected officials as when you all wanted to join the lawsuit. Any responsible municipal government insures the cost on behalf of the good of its citizens. The cost of the City’s continued involvement and the F35 right to know lawsuit hales in comparison to what is at stake for our community. The cost of the City’s participation in the lawsuit to date has been approximately $12,000.00 over two years. That total amount spent is less than ¼ of 1% of the City’s annual budget. In comparison it is projected that residents and the F35 noise impacted communities will lose an average of $30,000.00 of property value. That property loss will have a terrible ripple effect on our community continuing the lawsuit is a financial sound investment with potentially huge financial savings in the future for Winooski as a City and for its citizens. Please continue with your partnership with the stop the F35 coalition and those September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council who seek full disclosure of the F35’s base and its effects and join the appeal of the judge’s decision. Please remember that a majority of Winooski voters asked you to join the lawsuit in 2015. We are counting on our City Council to do the right thing for our citizens and continue with the goal of obtaining information on the full impact of the basing so we may better prepare ourselves for the consequences of the basing and to help us protect our community. I would like to raise a note of caution; you may have received documents produced by Lockheed Martin suggesting the F35 is not as loud as previously reported. It should be understood that this document and it claims has not been verified by the U.S. Airforce and it’s also been revealed that Lockheed Martin has erroneously reported the job #’s in the past and has substantially initiated those #’s. Lockheed Martin obviously has a self interest in this issue. Please disregard that information from Lockheed Martin using the U.S. Airforce noise modeling information provided in the EIS when making your decision about the lawsuit. The Mayor said we are opening this back up to council discussion. The first from my perspective is trying to understand what our goal is and what are impact in this conversation is. I think it is important that we stick to the case on this without regard for personal sense of whether we think it is right or wrong. That’s not what the case is about. I think there is a potential secondary step that you could look beyond, legal pieces that says what do we want to say as a Council that maybe includes something outside that box. I’m hoping tonight to stay focused on the case. That’s my first question to try to kick things off. What’s the intended impact here and what are we going to try to achieve? Has this been accomplished and what the stance was legally is we want a judge to look at this to insure that our process was followed that a proper review took place. This is the legal approach. The question is there a sense that this has been accomplished. Is there a sense that there is something else that we want to achieve from a legal perspective outside of that? Councilor Mace very much appreciated the ability to read the case and understanding more of what the technical issue and understanding more about the standards for judicial review and what the issues are spelled out for the opinion. I think it clarified a lot for me in terms of the EIS process generally. I think it is a pretty high standard in terms of their deference to the decision of the federal agency. It wasn’t clear to me reading the opinion that Winooski is a city that our involvement made any difference in terms of the analysis that the judge did the review of the record. It wasn’t apparent to me that our involvement makes a difference especially when you’re dealing with that technical preview. I think that as a city we’ve been very clear that there were serious concerns about basing the F35’s here. We’ve made that clear through our resolutions and through the involvement in the lawsuit but I am convinced that pursuing this lawsuit is not going to stop the F35’s from coming here. If it is successful at the second circuit level it will require a supplemental EIS which may have an impact in terms of the lay but that’s not even clear to me. I think we spent in addition to $12,000.00 in resources. We spent; I don’t know if we could put a number, on the amount of staff time, Seth your time on pursuing this particular strategy and I want to talk about what impacts that’s had on our ability to have discussion with both VTANG and City of Burlington our other partners about possible mitigation measures. This is part of the discussion I would like to have. Would our staff and monetary services be better staffed? I want to address the health impact data. I don’t think the court was asked to look at that particular issue. I can’t recall discussion about the health impact data and the age of that data that was used so, but I agree that is a concern it doesn’t seem to be an issue before the court so appealing the case wouldn’t resolve that necessarily. The Mayor said does it impact our ability to communicate? Of course it does. We are legally at odds with a couple of entities. We’ve done our best to continue those conversations. We came out and meant with the airport twice over that and received an in depth review from the folks who did the study, but of course we can’t speak openly about this issue. Nobody’s attorney is going to let them have that kind of conversation with somebody who is involved with litigation. Councilor Mace concern is the cost benefit analysis in terms of the cost of continuing in the lawsuit. What is the potential benefit? To me the benefit there is a supplemental EIS not the F35’s don’t come to Burlington versus the ability to negotiate or have constructive conversation about how we minimize the impact of the residents of Winooski. Councilor Millar said he is trying to stay narrowly focused on this case. It’s difficult to do. Many of the things we talked about tonight that are improving in this City and could be set back by continuing down this path. I agree with Nicole’s analysis of what we have been given. What comes out of this if we succeed is it necessarily that we stop the F35’s from coming here. Notwithstanding that I think that if this is the only rock that you have that we stick with that. I’m not convinced that we can politically safeguard our City by working with the folks who have this whole thing on us. If this is the rock we have I think we need to continue with what we started down this path and I think if cost is a concern and our own attorney’s are uncomfortable with out investing a lot of their own time which means a lot of our resources that an September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council option that I put forward when we first went into this would be to go into the appeal with Mr. Dumont as our attorney. I would even make a motion to that effect. Mayor Leonard said that leads to the conversation to the decision initially was to use the City’s own legal representation for a number of reasons; it wasn’t just out of thin air. I’m putting into public context. He said the City remains its own independent voice and controls. There is certainly a sense that becoming a party with 8 other people represented by one representative that control might not be preset and I think that would need to be discussed and negotiated in general. The other piece was whether or not the City was signing off on every account involved in the suit. For context we were not interested in spending the resources to independently verify and develop our own thoughts and opinions in those separate counts. So I think with that idea on the table a secondary conversation has to take place of what level of our representation are we comfortable with and is that something that people want to discuss because that is not the path we took last time. I think that the reality is we can’t do what we did in the initial suit. That’s been legally made clear to us. We can not ask our attorney to stand as a place holder, that’s not a responsible thing to do, that’s not achieving anything. That’s, an option I’ll just say personally I’m really uncomfortable with and have no interest in asking a professional attorney to do. I think that makes that decision clear it’s either you invest the resources, maintain the City Attorney or you except the items that people were; I understood that this body was unwilling to sacrifice in the initial inscription of the lawsuit. The Mayor asked do you want to go full bore with this. Councilor Sweeney doesn’t think it is financially responsible to go in full bore on this is, considering the best outcome, it doesn’t pay off. Its opportunity cost and what else could we be doing to benefit citizens and to protect them from potential arm. I think our time is better spent else where. I would not be moving forward with that. The Mayor said if there is going to be an action taken that doesn’t involve the suit I think what I would recommend is we bring back a slate of options for how we address this issue moving forward. We want to make it really clear that if we have issues that arise from the basing take place we fully expect that you are going to be in our corner supporting us, this is a potential option. I think the age old question is whether or not Winooski has a seat via ex officio or otherwise on the airport commission is something we can and should very openly and actively reopen. Those are somethings that I see exist in terms of opportunities outside the legal process. I think before a motion is made or action taken I would like to see us commit to also if the decision is to not move, what’s the case that we commit into bringing that back in terms how to move forward with the issue and the relationship. The Mayor said if a vote takes place and it’s to say withdraw from the suit then at that point and time, I don’t want people to think it’s just done. I think there is a second step to this that we are really obligated to outside the legal agreement. MOTION by Councilor Mace to withdraw from the lawsuit and devote city staff and resources to the development of mitigation measures. Councilor Corrigan said we already done what we have stated. We don’t have to withdraw from the lawsuit. The Mayor said it needs to be a positive action. I think we need a vote direction that states withdraw. The City will no longer be a party to the lawsuit. The City will actively not engage in any appeal. Councilor Mace is not clear. The Mayor said the withdraw piece doesn’t make sense. Councilor Mace asked if you are looking for a more broad definition of the actions to be decided at a future date. For me the focus on the energy’s around the Resolutions that have been on the position of the City and developing mitigation measures in connection with the parties played a role in developing those suits, that’s the concept. The Mayor said withdrawal is not a real thing in this because it’s just not joining an appeal. Councilor Mace we will no longer be a party to the lawsuit. Councilor Millar said I would prefer two motions: 1 option is strictly dealing with the appeal and 2 something in regards to giving new direction. Councilor Mace the intent to come back and develop and action plan relative to mitigation issues, strategies moving forward and in to effectuate the City’s resolution on the matter. The Mayor said we give one more opportunity to folks for public comment. Mr. Mahoney asked to summarize the motion. The Mayor said for the City not to enter the appeal, that’s being discussed but to commit to a secondary process that involves the building of another strategy. Mr. Coffey said the motion will be explicit to remain party to the suit or not. The Mayor asked that the motion be in the positive again so the motion should actually say should the City join as a plaintiff to the appeal process and a vote against that you vote no and to vote for it you vote yes, that being defeated in the process that leaves it in the positive. He said no one has made a full motion. Mr. Mahoney said part of this motion you’re going to bring back some kind of action item or some kind of effort to try to take a different approach or step in regards to all these issues. The Mayor said regardless with the specific action that’s not included in the actual motion because that is something we don’t need to vote on, but that commitment is there. This will come back with those non-legal items. It’s not part of the formal motion. Mr. Zbitnoff said in the future you outline what you reasonably expect rather than just say silence or mitigation. I would like to know specifically what you expect. Mr. O’Brien said having worked with the guard for 4 years, met with them and discussing all these things. They are willing to work with us, they are responsive and there September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council are constraints that they have obviously because of the Air Force, but the local Air Guard will work with us. I think we can establish a good working relationship with them. MOTION by Councilor Millar seconded by Councilor Mace authorizing the City to join in the appeal of the F35 lawsuit. Voted and failed 1-3. Councilor Sweeney, Councilor Corrigan and Councilor Mace voted no. Motion fails. e. VLCT Municipal Policy Guiding Principles Review Mr. Coffey said we are members of VLCT and they are holding their annual meeting in October. Are there any thoughts or feedback to the policy? The Mayor said to continue looking into management of joint enterprises. Support for Regional Planning. Councilor Mace – parking garage. Councilor Sweeney has a question on the Law Enforcement Issues. # 3. Enacting State Law that mirror’s federal law regarding forfeiture of property, particularly when property is used in commission of a crime and. Mr. Coffey said he would follow up with Chief Hebert. Councilor Millar has concerns about multi modal transportation. Mr. Coffey said he would bring this to their attention. f. Approval: Appoint Delegate for VLCT Annual Business Meeting MOTION by Councilor Millar seconded by Councilor Mace to appoint Ray Coffey as the delegate for the City of Winooski at the VLCT Annual Business meeting. Voted and passed 4-0. g. Approval: CSWD Drop Off Center Survey Mr. Coffey said he has received a survey from CSWD. CSWD is planning the next generation of Drop Off Center Services. The Mayor stated that this isn’t for approval. Mr. Coffey said he will follow up accordingly. h. Approval: City Manager Search Committee Update & Budget The Mayor updated the Council on the City Manager Search Committee & budget. He said the search committee is up and running, and will hold their second meeting on Wednesday, September 7th. He said the Search committee has two upcoming expenses on the horizon. 1. Hiring of a facilitator for the committee meetings: 2. Support of a Community Dinner to gain public feedback. See attached memorandum. MOTION by Councilor Corrigan seconded by Councilor Sweeney to approve the use of funds for City Manager search as presented. Voted and passed 4-0. i. Discussion: Winooski Housing Authority Board Nomination Process The Mayor said this is a nomination process. This position is appointed by the Mayor and we are taking applications. We will bring this back and discuss at our next meeting and have a discussion with the group. There was some discussion concerning this item. Mr. Sarne said he and Jessica have been working on the boards and commission process for months. He would like to clarify housing and other commissions, having stuff available on the website is a two prong thing for us. The pool committee is a good example. The pool committee was not appointed by the council and technically do not have to meet in open meeting law, so we don’t post those agendas and minutes to the website. The Mayor said that is a fantastic point and on that opens up some more legal billing for us. This is a real good question how the appointment takes place and whether or not and by shifting it over to the council we create what is technically a council appointed body and what ramifications has for them as a separately chartered entity. I don’t know the answer to that. Mr. Coffey said we will take this back to staff. j. Discussion: VIA Building Study Presentation Preview Mr. Coffey said we are coming back to you guys on the 3rd of October with the folks from VIA who did the programming study for City Hall. This is helping us to look at different options for the future of the City and services and what that facility will look like. At this point is to come back with some compelling information about this building that sort of made it as to why expanding or adding on or retrofitting did not make sense. We will be looking at energy usage, etc. This would all be based at 32 Malletts Bay Ave, Community Center with a range from everywhere to just taking the Police Dept. from here or there or building 60,000 square feet of mixed use condoize, full street front build out. I think the housing conversation is going to be part of that context. Mr. Coffey brought this tonight and asked if there are any burning September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council questions or issues that you feel like you really want to know about leading into this meeting on the 3rd. I would like to know that now or in the next couple of days. The Mayor asked if it is correct to say what would be talked about and presented is not facades and drawings. Mr. Coffey said it’s what a building management looks like on the property. Councilor Mace said we are not going to get into detail. Mr. Coffey said it is not a design review. The focus will be, do we just want to move the Police Dept. or do we want to build this whole thing out. There will be some pretty detailed budgeting piece as well. The plan is to have the details of those budgets which are 11x17 spreadsheets available in part of the packet and that night a more boiled down of what those budgets are. Mr. Coffey said it’s up to you guys to help me guide what’s there what’s not. It will be a 30 minute presentation. Councilor Mace said her concerns are cost/possible funding options. We also have to consider where’s the pool committee at with their recommendations. I don’t want to have 3 different presentations. Mr. Coffey said to email him with any specific questions. VIII. Executive Session MOTION by Councilor Mace seconded by Councilor Sweeney to go into executive session at 8:45 to discuss the annual audit contract as presented and that no other business will be conducted except to adjourn. Voted and passed 4-0. MOTION by Councilor Corrigan seconded by Councilor Mace to adjourn meeting at 8:57 p.m. Voted and passed 4-0. ATTEST:______________________ City Clerk September 6, 2016 Agenda Winooski City Council