Comments | 5

  • Submitted by cgrotke on November 19, 2024 at 6:29 pm

    Preliminaries

    If you guessed “started late,” you win! 6:18pm…

    ….

    Chair Daniel Quipp – No remarks.

    Town Manager John Potter – reminder that Brattleboro’s new parking system starts November 21 – pay by plate. No more meters. Most have been removed. New kiosks are going in – will accept coins but not bills. Also can use the app. There is free parking Nov 18 -20. New Sunday parking fees now will apply. Rec and Parks has a wide range of winter activities. Go to Gibson Aiken or look online.

    Franz Reichsman – Brief mention that yesterday there was an annual meeting of the Brattleboro Housing Authority. I missed it but will watch it on BCTV.

    Public

    – a general comment about the budget…

    Daniel – the budget is on our agenda. If you want to stick around..

    Mark Y – listening to you talking about taking out the meters – what was the cost – why did we rip them out and go to something else? Why? Anybody? Okay, why did we go that route, cost wise , are you all Brattleboro residents?

    Daniel – if you have multiple questions…

    Mark – that’s it. Want to answer?

    Daniel – we are all resident of Brattleboro. And parking, that is a longer discussion.

    Mark – you can’t tell me why? Are you the only one? I’m not hearing from anyone else.

    Franz – I don’t recall the numbers. The bulk was paid for by outside funding

    Mark – to get us started

    Franz – to replace the meters. Money from the state… I think. There was funding available to do it.

    J Jersey – BCS – earlier was saw the results of the national election. The importance of youth vote… Brattleboro lowered the voting age. It is crucial to invest in the youth vote – at age 16 at the municipal level or at school boards – it is important to have young people engaged. We had the youth vote engagement day. Brattleboro folks that supported youth voting… thanks to those who made the event possible. Thanks for empowering young people in your community.

  • Submitted by cgrotke on November 19, 2024 at 6:31 pm

    Consent Agenda

    A. Red Clover Rovers Turkey Trot – Authorize Parade Permit

    B. Winston Prouty Center for Child and Family Development – Authorize Limited Event Permit

    C. Pleasant Valley Water Treatment Facility Loan Amendment – Approve $2,000,000 Loan Amendment

    D. Snow Removal – Accept Bid

    E. Global Warming Solutions Fund for Solar Engineering – Approve Use

    F. Clean Energy Tax Credit

    G. Additional Funds for Avenu Land Record Digitizing Project – Approve

    ….

    consent granted!

  • Submitted by cgrotke on November 19, 2024 at 6:34 pm

    Announce Committee Vacancies

    Daniel – I’ll read the list… without these committees a lot wouldn’t happen. (reads the list of vacancies that they will send out in the next day or so.) That’s it.

    Dick Degray – I was wondering why the budget discussion, because it is a continuing item, is the last item and not the first. It is is usually the protocol…

    Daniel – I didn’t think that much about it. It is about reviewing open house feedback. We’ll get there pretty soon.

  • Submitted by cgrotke on November 19, 2024 at 7:21 pm

    Windham and Windsor Housing Trust on the Chalet Project – Update

    Daniel – welcome.

    WWHT – Elizabeth and Peter… we are excited to share what we have been doing to prepare for redeveloping the chalet project. First, some history. In 2020 the public health crisis pushed us to put roofs over everyone’s heads – the motel program, pus developing more permanent housing. The timeline was short. We had 3 months to invest the first state money – in safety, mostly. Opening in 2021 January for new residents. WE liked that property because after the pandemic we could redevelop – 17 acres. Not all developable, but there is a good amount of space to help solve the housing crisis. WE started and set goals – maximize land, build more housing, and meet a variety of housing needs. We want he chalet people to have a place to live – conditions aren’t great. We want to improve the conditions,a nd expand housing – family housing, home ownership opportunities. We engaged the community to hear their thoughts about what they wanted on the property. The residents, the neighborhood, municipal official, anyone… we had community meetings. An interactive process to determine what was important to people. In addition to expanding housing opportunities, improving safety on the property for foot traffic, increasing accessibility on the property and in the units, and maintaining a community space – memories of the Chalet building and restaurant. We took all that feedback and developed the conceptual site design.

    Peter – shows a chart – it is being massaged and finessed, but this is what we are working towards. It will be multi phase. Total units will be 70, 60 apartments and 10 homes. WE are looking at single family homes. Right now there are two driveways, and upper and lower. We’ll use the same curb cut locations but formalizing a loop road around the property. Current in and out on South will be changed to more of a 90 degree angle. Come in on the upper loop near hotel wing (TB demolished) – new buildings and renovated chalet building. Down the road there would home ownership units, then to the back of the site for a 30 unit phase 1 apartment building. We need to move people out before demolition starts, to this new building. Currently an open field. Then we’ll work on rental phase 2. We expect all units online in 2 years of each other or so. The loop road will provide good access for the fire department. The first apartment will have 30 unties plus gorundworls offices and meeting spaces.

    Daniel – great.

    Peter – we’ll be doing permits with the DERB after plans are a bit more baked.

    Liz McCloughlin – thanks. I applaud your desire to build more housing and recall the days when you quickly got the money to rehab this space and you were on quite a time frame to do ot. I want to talk about the contract with Groundworks for supportive housing. I understand this is one of the top 10 emergency service calls in town and I want to make sure the development you have now is serving the needs of the residents and not overburdening the municipal services. I’d like assurances that as you grown and increase number of residents, that care will be given to the population and again that whatever is causing the high volume of calls to 911 for police at this location – the root cause of it will be addressed.

    Elizabeth – we will reduce people leaving homelessness..there will be a point where we don’t pick up additional units. We want the right mix going over to the new building. We are required to offer anyone living there a place to go, however our long term plan is to rebalance and diminish the number of people exiting homelessness there and match their needs.

    Liz – I didn’t expect that you would be de-escalating rather that the services would increase. I think that’s an interesting calculation… explain it a little more? I’d think more services… not less people.

    Elizabeth – de-concentration. Having 100% of people exiting homelessness in one facility is not the ideal mix. We’ve seen that. It would be great to have more robust services. WE’ve seen an ebb and flow with staffing and labor, wages…across the whole supportive service system. We are observing, with our capacity, deconcentrating is the better choice.

    Liz – you contract with a service provider and deal with their staffing challenges. What sort of mandate can you have to have supper available.

    Elizabeth – we con’t contract with them, we have a memo of understanding with Groundworks. There were labor shortages. We are in a continual conversation about what will make this work. It’s been pretty quiet there lately. We’ve made changes already. Given all the factors, a lower concentration in one location is a better decision. WE have 4 years of experience. That’s what we’d like to do.

    Richard Davis – Grundworks is the primary service provider?

    Elizabeth – they coordinate – they are the main anchor.

    Richard – and they have the capacity for this project?

    Elizabeth – we did regression analysis – average occupancy – it is 15. That is where we landed with Groundworks. Up to 15 homes. When the building comes online that will go up… but our aim is to have 15 supported homes available.

    Richard – if only 15, that need services and 70 units, the bulk don’t need the support services?

    Elizabeth – who knows what they need. What we are saying is there is a particular way to have people referred to a center. We are setting aside 15 for people coming through that process.

    Franz – There is an elephant in the room for me. I’ve heard stories and reports of a lot of drug use at the chalet and other properties. That is very concerning to me. How do you plan to address issues like that? How does it fit in to your plans?

    Elizabeth – no elephant – there are a lot of challenges with drug trafficking in general in Brattleboro. We have some on our property and were are very concerned about. We address it in different ways. More aggressive client selection. We are adjusting our tenet selection policy. We are excited about eh police increasing capacity to be more respondent. We’ve met with them for over a year, sharing information. We collaborate a lot. We are working with the BRAT team and our property management team. It is really challenging. We are working diligently. It is important to note that there are state regulations that make it challenging to deal with some issues. We need regulation change for stronger tools – no trespassing, for example. Also ways to expedite eviction if someone is engaged in illegal activity that is disruptive. Talk to your legislators. We are lacking in capacity and regulation and need to catch up quickly.

    Mark Y. – Question 1 – on a project like this, are you hiring local vermonters, are they getting tax breaks while building it, what are we giving up, I hear about sidewalks and roads what is that costing us as taxpayers, and are we taking over the plowing of the whole thing. We pay way too much taxes. I love this but the taxes are taxing people with houses out of their houses.

    Elizabeth – the financing for the project comes from private equity, not tax dollars – to build it. We will be responsible for plowing our roads and part of our operation budget. WWHT pays taxes – when we build a new facility the for profit entity pays taxes. We’ll contribute additional taxes to the town of Brattleboro by about $33k.

    Elias -Turning Point – I want to say that the supportive housing efforts has made a great difference in the work we do. W are grateful for that and if we can provide more support we would be happy to continue it or more – let us know.

    Fric S – Liz, commend you for talking about services. The successful housing first models made sure they have extremely robust services. Far beyond what we have in this country. Whatever we can do to make it better… As a housing provider having a mix may be a good idea… one disrupter can make life miserable for a significant number of people so good luck with that. The land trust has had trouble holding tenants accountable. There have bee drug dealers on Elliot for years. The change to the complex makes me wonder about the difference between the land trust and what the rest of us do with tenants. It’s rhetorical. legislation could improve the situation. I am curious if they could share the same concerns with how laws on the books are administered. Cost per unit? and also expecting to request any tax abatement as you have in the past?

    Elizabeth – the difference between us and a private owner – we have a ent cap on our rent so we don’t charge market rate – more affordable. There are income qualifications that go with that – serving a particular mix. While we are all part of the housing solution, and we applaud private developers. this is about affordability and a lower rent. We don’t expect to do tax abatement. We expect to pay $33k in the fist phase.

    Peter – still working on the plans so no construction budget yet.

    Degray – thank Liz and Franz talking about the huge impact the properties are having on our police force. 3-4 of your properties are on the top 10 list. Intermingling – families on the property – you should be doing background checks. pedophiles at your properties is a huge concern of me, given the liberal housing properties. Must screen people better. The drug traffic at your properties is unbelievable. You say 33k to the grand list – at 100% assessment or the tax rate set by the state legislature. You aren’t paying 100% and all of us are making up that delta. The lack of a screening process – what also concerns me that we should contact the legislators. I’m wondering why the legislators haven’t had conversations with you? Make sure this doesn’t fall into the state as several other properties in town.

    Elizabeth – we have had and will continue to have conversations with state legislators. Statewide. The tax question – our properties are taxed on what they are valued at and are valued lowered because our rents are lower – capped by state and gov’t. We can’t generate the same amount of revenue, so the value is lower. There is a reason the ties are lower… the values are lower.

    Mary C – I’m also concerned about our failure to grow the grand list to provide all the services we want to provide. The housing trust is trying to improve housing stock and policies – we can’t afford the policing of these properties – and a 22% increase this year. I like the mix of housing. One time was private home ownership. At least that property will be at 100 % of fair market value? 30 units at $33k won’t get us out of our budget crunh.

    Elizabeth – the homes will be shared equity – affordable housing. Not market rate housing. They will be shared equity and an affordability restriction on them. keeps it affordable for successive generations.

    Moriah – I am concerned that this property is so close to Academy School a there is a preschool program and the students play in the forest every day. I haven’t heard anything about safety and children. You said things were out of your hands, but I think you can be proactive rather than reactive – Safety of the children with 70 more units?

    Elizabeth – evictions are challenging, not impossible. The schooling the forest – when we bought the property we met with the principal and created open communication. There were some issues and we addressed them early on. Some homes will be for families. Excitement that families will be in the neighborhood. We haven’t had safety complaints other than early on in 2020. We have good communication. If something comes up e will address it quickly.

    Daniel – thanks to all!

  • Submitted by cgrotke on November 19, 2024 at 8:37 pm

    Solid Waste Program Decision

    Patrick Moreland – I’ll try to keep it lovely. There is a memo in your materials. It reviews all the meetings and memos leading to this. Shows all the issues, public feedback, the two main choices… we think we are in position to make the decision about whether to have trash services or not in the curbside collection program. If so, we can have a 5 year agreement with Casella as on Jan 1, 2025. Automated collection by 2026. There is an attachment – a chart of options. Included are options A and B, plus C and D… other options in discussion involving weekly collection. Accordingly, each is more expensive that the A or B. WE want to show them here to show you we looked at other options. But we don’t recommend any of these (ie, put in to make the other huge numbers look smaller). There is the franchise opportunity, or the one that is similar to what we do today with trash, recycling and organics. Staff recommends option B. One might look and say it is 1.3 million rather than 941k… I’d say, hopefully clear in the memo – while more expensive it represents a better value to the community of households (franchise price is about $320 a year per household.) Option B is about 60% less. We see the larger contract as saving people more money.

    Liz makes motion – 5 year contract with Casella – for curbside, downtown, and municipal facilities. Option B. I was going to say what Patrick said. Option A is a false option. Option B… is adding less to household budgets.

    Richard – Can I amend that? I suggest an amendment to that – relating to how much waste we generate. Under plan B we’d eliminate the bag system. I’d like to see the possibility of using the bags with the Casella system after the first phase. There are communities that have used the bags with the buckets and had a minimal increase int he waste stream, Trash could increase with just the buckets. We could save money and be more environmental to have a combination.

    Daniel – we can consider bags another night. Tonight is the curbside trash pickup.

    Richard – just want it on the table.

    Peter Case – so are you suggesting we adopt this, it goes into taxes, then we continue to charge for bags over and above the cost of trash?

    Richard – I believe that would eat he case – it could decrease the cost by $200k…

    Peter Case – we could but all those people…

    Richard – I’m looking at saving money and reducing the waste stream…

    Daniel – important to recognize the bags are a disincentive to produce trash. When we remove that, trash could increase, and an increase cost for trash disposal. Do we want a contract for trash pickup or not?

    Franz – couple questions . First, on the chart of expenses, the figure under option B for the disposal of trash is 227k. That’s the dumping at the landfill. The tipping fee. Is that based on current trash volume or include the predicted increase – what is that number likely to be. So, a doubling?

    Moreland – Daniel is correct – we show the high option. This could be the upper end. But you said if we don’t do PAYT… we wild that regardless. Using bag system is one way to meet state regulations to pay by weight or volume. Having different size carts would give us that. If someone exceeds what can fit in a container, they’d need an extra collection so they’d pay more.

    Franz – I understand that it is technically legal – what I’m wondering is if that is effective for limiting trash. if too large, there will be no incentive to reduce – not buying bags anymore. Yes, it meets the legal definition but we need to look at if we can do a better job through this or an additional method. I like the Bags.

    Moreland – I appreciate your point. You seem to be asking if there is enough incentive to reduce what they throw in the garbage. Could there be other motivation we come up with? Maybe. But we will provide recycling and we provide weekly organics collection. Two impactful diversion efforts are made available. Throwing something in the grange is a costly way to dispose of that item. If it can go into organics, it saves us $40 a ton.

    Franz – are we set on 5 years. We discussed 3 years…

    Moreland – the advantages and disadvantages – we’ve been negotiating for months. They need to acquire new machines and it is a challenge for them to amortize them. Seems reasonable for 5 years.

    Liz – Increased tipping fees are based on people not using the bag system that will use regular trash system.

    Moreland – there are ways to get around our current system.

    Liz – the bag people are contractors and work with town staff and were told it could e cancelled. They contacted each of us selectboard members to lobby us for continued bags. An end run.

    Peter – our meetings with them that when we move to an automated system, no person would touch these. I do have some caners about people not using our recycling and composting properly. We could pay a larger tipping fee. I don’t have any way to control that. When PAYT came up, I was not a big fan, but I did see the benefit of reducing the amount of trash and I changed my tune. if we move forward, I don’t have faith people will keep sorting that out. I wish people would compost and recycle. Most will get lazy. No point, just a soap box speech. Don’t agree we need an additional expense for overtaxed taxpayers. No solutions.

    Daniel – the old contract was a great deal. When I learned about the new contract it was pretty rough. especially in this budget cycle. That’s in the past, can’t go back. these are our options. A is twice the old cost with no trash pickup. It look cheaper but does pass on costs and inconvenience and inequity. That leaves us with the other option. I have to make peace with the cost. It will no longer be paid for by bags, it will be paid out of property taxes. My home is $160k, I use 9 bags to meet trash needs …. it is cheaper. I have a friend who pays $50 a month – $600 a year! I choose the fullest service possible. Tough for our budget this year but the right thing to do.

    Peter – in current sweetheart deal right now, it is still money being paid by the taxpayer – we pay close to $80k if you include the cost to homes, not just taxes. Have to do something. I’m in agreement. Confused by it, and it is inconvenient in our budget year…

    Franz – I would like to address some of Liz’s questions. The PAYT – the people that provide the bags came to MY office hours and don’t know if they met with Town Staff. I didn’t solicit them. I did have an interesting discussion that led me to think we should talk about this more. The notion that our trash volume will go up… the source of that info will be Casella. Maybe others have a different point of view, or evidenced of combined systems. If we can save money that way I’d advocate for it. Maybe we will have bags.

    Daniel – if we want staff to have that conversation we can – you want a contract that incudes trash. (yes)

    Richard – I want to reduce the trash we throw… whatever works. Everything we’ve said so far if just guessing. Have to see what happens before we do anything else. See what happens for a year. Look at the numbers and then if it appears we increased the trash stream significantly. Keep an eye on it.

    Mary – to clarify, with the $1.5 million contract, that includes the large volume tipping. But Patrick said families get smaller bins and families will have to pay extra. Why am I paying for larger tipping off I get the smaller canister. The overall budget and affordable housing – increasing taxes is less affordable. We had our taxes raised and now are looking at additional taxes – it is stepping away from affordable housing.

    Moreland – still don’t have a precise calibration of how much trash tipping will grow. Current program hasn’t been a good fit for many ( explains that people with diapers have problems) so you could choose to skip our PAYT bags and have someone else pick it up. Many have made that decision for themselves, outside the current program at their own expense. There is a difference between the specificity of Triplet T and Casella. Triple T were never give a specific list of addresses. They were at a bit of a disadvantage. With the automated collection, there are expensive carts provided to eligible properties. We’ll assign carts to locations. I don’t think as many people will choose private haulers , so we think it will increase.

    Tim W. – It is a nice time to not be on the selectboard. A favor. Could you repeat the motion? (repeated) Everyone knows annoying ASI summaries. You are voting on a 5 year contract and the vendor and switching the pickups schedule? (yes) Recycling moving to every two weeks is a nightmare for my family. What is the rush? If there is no immediate rush and can have a few more months… it kicks in in 2026? Has it been explored to groom a different company to supply and service our town? We have Goodenough – local and family owned. It would be great to partner with someone like that. Could we use grant money to boost a local company?

    Daniel – the size of the recycling container will be larger and more accommodating for two weeks of recycling. Urgency?

    Moreland – The urgency – our contract with Triple T expired June 30 and we have been operating on a month to month handshake with Casella. No more than 6 months. Dec 31. That’s why the contract would be executed on Jan 2025, and automated collection in 2026. They need to order large trucks…

    Amanda Thurber – the more ruler part of the dirtiest – we have some roads with tight overhead canopy… what are the conversations about real roads, big storms and an automated truck?

    Moreland – uh.. this is a town with many paved and dirt roads and we collect waste on all of them. Not really sure what the.. the discussion hasn’t differentiated rural and less rural.

    Potter – in some areas they may use a chase truck if necessary.

    Tom Franks – I sent the selectboard a note and recommend Option A but I changed my mind., I like Option B. Option A had two things – connection with consequences of throwing trash away, and user fees. If I make trash I should pay for it. Kids used to have to carry their trash for a week and it impacted their thinking. What is the size of the small container…

    Moreland – 42 gallons.

    Tom – I’m a trash guy and like not making it. I recommend you provide 5 gallon buckets and go in increments. I may be different and crazy. A small bucket is better to connect people to how they treat the world around them. If you have a higher value home you’ll pay more for trash than a lower price home. But these services are essential. We all have discretion on how much trash we use, not what we pay for it.

    Ann – wondering about logistical issues for households – the 64 gallon cans are too big. I don’t want to shlep around a 60 gallon container. There are stairs and a hill where I am. WE are an aging town. Lots will have difficulty with those size trash cans. We had a big roll out to go to the new composting systems, but what happens to the thousands of trash cans we currently use – we’l get new plastic containers. We do more recycling than trash. It needs to go out every week. I don’t bring plastic into my house if I don’t have to. Be conscious of those investments in plastics. That’s a lot of plastic in town. I live in a narrow one way street and it is a challenge to get in and out when trash cans are out. Now they will be large, and no people, and winter and snow plowing. So, another problem. As it is, I have to call the DPW to make another pass down our street. Nobody has mentioned the recycling costs – town used to be paid for recycling and now we pay for it. And Casella owns the landfill where the trash goes. Landfill sets the tipping fee.

    Daniel – what about existing containers…

    Potter – compost containers will remain the same. Recycling containers would need to be recycled. The town doesn’t have a lot of options. Only one company responded to the RFQ. They’ve worked with us, and will if we go with them…

    Peter Case – trying to help a local company… the question was asked but it was “thanks but no thanks” – we tried. We had the one response.

    Ken – I’d like to ask about the process – I was in the focus group and we were to meet twice – did I sleep through it? The other was I agree about smaller places. We have BDCC and business incubators. What were you negotiating with Casella? They are a public community. They might be messing you and patting you on the back. They are a business. They have a huge economy of scale? Why charge more than a local place?

    Daniel – we put out and RFQ8 months ago and had one response. We sent it to the local folks. Don’t know why they didn’t respond. Do we want to continue these services? If we blow up this process, it could be fine years from now but we need a contract Jan 1.

    Moreland – focus groups – we had four of them and there was a group from West B and one from renters, and one from RTM, and one downtown group. Each group had A meeting. We wanted to hear different views

    Mark – You sound like you tried to save us some money. Did you ver bring up doing it ourselves like you did with Rescue? Like Rescue – they crave too much and we did it all ourselves. How intensely di you do it.

    Daniel – building the infrastructure for this would be really expensive – we recognize the similarity.

    Mark – why allow a monopoly to take over everything. get other bids or we do it ourselves.

    Franz – that’s not a new idea. The initial expense would be a lot – to buy trucks. It is doable. It would take a long time to set it up. That’s why I asked about three year contract. If we wanted to set up a municipal trash service we could do it in three years. It’s a big undertaking. Casella owns the landfill… if we collect it, where do we take it. I’d like the state to open landfills for towns. But that is long-term. We need to have a contract now.

    Fric – Historical perspective – Triple T picked up everybody’s trash, then the selectboard decided to skip bigger buildings, and that led to double dipping on big buildings. When PAYT started, double dipping happened with dumpsters for that. Now, the new system, unless you pick up everyone’s garbage, there will continue to be double dipping. I’d like that addressed. Gonna give us a tax break or will we pay for a service we are not getting? Residential commercial…

    Moreland – couple things – the curbside collection program has been designed for residential properties. That can easily be misunderstood to be properties where people live. It is more nuanced than that. Properties are residential or commercial. You can have a shop with an apartment above – that is a commercial property. It has been longstanding that commercial properties should be responsible for their own expenses – it is a business expense. The program is for residential properties. Everyone contributes to the cost in the vernal fund, though.

    Degray – one great thing that residential properties get is the commercial properties pay for trash but don’t get the service. I was a commercial property owner. There was never pickup on Main Street. PAYT – 5 or more apartments were deemed commercial. I want to ask about large item pickup – is that in this contract? And Morningside Commons – composting picked up as it was with Triple T?

    Moreland – Morningside – yes. Contract will include large item collection – there will be a mess that happens at a to be determined interval.

    Bob Oeser – mechanized or automated collection probably won’t work in all areas of town – small streets, dead ends, rural streets. Have you compared with other towns with similar geographies how the mechanized system will work? I agree with Tim – not giving a franchise to one company. Pieces could fit into another company’s contract. can we let other options develop? Is there a way to opt out? Large containers will be a disaster in some neighborhoods.

    Moreland – If the board chooses this contract, then no, no opting out. We haven’t looked at other towns. Brattleboro is a complicated place – one way roads, narrow winding roads, and places where you can’t run around at the end of the road. There have always been unique locations where the norm is addressed differently. That will continue.

    Daniel – we spent 40 minutes longer than we thought but these are good questions. We have to decide if we will sign a contract for trash collection.

    5 year contract approved! Option B

    5-0

    5 minute break.

Leave a Reply