Ward 3 NPA — Burlington, VT
Date: 2026-06-03
Time: 18:30

Ward 3 Neighborhood Planning Assembly
 Wednesday, June 3, 2026, 6:30 PM
 Join in person: City Hall, Sharon Bushor Conference Room, 149 Church St.
 Join virtually: https://zoom.us/j/98644635243

Facilitator: Christopher Haessly
6:00 pm Community Dinner | 30 min
 A free community dinner provided by our friends at American Flatbread.
630 pm Call to Order | 5 min
 Adopt the agenda and review meeting ground rules.
6:35 pm Lake Street Traffic Calming Resolution | 25 min
 A presentation on the need for additional traffic calming measures on Lake Street followed by a
 discussion and vote on the resolution.
 • Robert Sand, Waterfront Resident
7:00 pm Church Street Marketplace Restructuring | 30 min
 A presentation on the potential restructuring of the Church Street Marketplace as a public-
 private partnership.
 • Mark Bouchett, Church Street Marketplace Commission
7:30 pm Legislative Updates | 50 min
 An update on the work of the State Legislature by members of the Burlington delegation.
 • Brian Cina, State Representative, Chittenden-15
 • Kate Logan, State Representative, Chittenden-16
8:20 pm Public Forum | 10 min
 An opportunity to share opinions, news, and events.
8:30 pm Adjourn
 Our next meeting is Wednesday, September 2.




Use the QR code to go to any of these links: Email us • Go to our website • Watch
meeting recordings on CCTV's website • Connect with us on Facebook or Instagram •
Request a time slot with the NPA Request Form • Links from this agenda
Appendix to the Agenda

Ward 3 NPA Ground Rules
  • Meetings should have clearly defined agenda and roles.
  • Honor Time limits: A best effort must be made to start on time, follow the agenda, and finish on time.
  • Wait to be recognized: Members may not speak until recognized by the moderator.
  • Listen to others: Make efforts to be an open-minded member of the group.
  • Respect the agenda and the process: Try to remain focused on the issue at hand.
  • Share your opinion respectfully: Speak out, but not over, others’ comments.
  • Treat people how you would like to be treated: Be respectful of everyone, including guests.

Public Forum Protocol
  • Community members will be required to sign up for the Public Forum before the start of the meeting
 consistent with the process used by the City Council.
  • Participants will have up to two (2) minutes to share their thoughts and will speak based upon the
 order in which the requests were received.
  • Participants may speak only for themselves and individual speakers will not be permitted to yield their
 time to other speakers.
  • Personal attacks will not be tolerated and the moderator reserves the right to limit comments that are
 disruptive and/or obscene.
  • Ward 3 residents will be given priority and, if there is still time, persons who live outside the ward will
 be provided an opportunity to speak.

Question-and-Answer Protocol
  • Please state your full name prior to asking your question.
  • Each participant will have thirty (30) seconds to ask one and only one question.
  • There will be no follow up questions so everyone has a chance to participate.
  • Ward 3 residents will be given priority.

Discussion and Debate Rules
  • Members may not speak until recognized by the moderator.
  • Each member will have a maximum of two (2) minutes to speak on questions before the NPA.
  • No member will be permitted to speak a second time until every member has had an opportunity to
 speak once.
  • No member will be permitted to speak a third time until every member has had an opportunity to
 speak twice.




 Appendix to agenda | Wards 3 NPA - Page 2

Ward 3 Neighborhood Planning Assembly
 Wednesday, June 3, 2026, 6:30 PM
 Join in person: City Hall, Sharon Bushor Conference Room, 149 Church St.
 Join virtually: https://zoom.us/j/98644635243

Facilitator: Christopher Haessly
6:00 pm Community Dinner | 30 min
 A free community dinner provided by our friends at American Flatbread.
630 pm Call to Order | 5 min
 Adopt the agenda and review meeting ground rules.
6:35 pm Lake Street Traffic Calming Resolution | 25 min
 A presentation on the need for additional traffic calming measures on Lake Street followed by a
 discussion and vote on the resolution.
 • Robert Sand, Waterfront Resident
7:00 pm Church Street Marketplace Restructuring | 30 min
 A presentation on the potential restructuring of the Church Street Marketplace as a public-
 private partnership.
 • Mark Bouchett, Church Street Marketplace Commission
7:30 pm Legislative Updates | 50 min
 An update on the work of the State Legislature by members of the Burlington delegation.
 • Brian Cina, State Representative, Chittenden-15
 • Kate Logan, State Representative, Chittenden-16
8:20 pm Public Forum | 10 min
 An opportunity to share opinions, news, and events.
8:30 pm Adjourn
 Our next meeting is Wednesday, September 2.




Use the QR code to go to any of these links: Email us • Go to our website • Watch
meeting recordings on CCTV's website • Connect with us on Facebook or Instagram •
Request a time slot with the NPA Request Form • Links from this agenda


 Page 1 of 10
Appendix to the Agenda

Ward 3 NPA Ground Rules
  • Meetings should have clearly defined agenda and roles.
  • Honor Time limits: A best effort must be made to start on time, follow the agenda, and finish on time.
  • Wait to be recognized: Members may not speak until recognized by the moderator.
  • Listen to others: Make efforts to be an open-minded member of the group.
  • Respect the agenda and the process: Try to remain focused on the issue at hand.
  • Share your opinion respectfully: Speak out, but not over, others’ comments.
  • Treat people how you would like to be treated: Be respectful of everyone, including guests.

Public Forum Protocol
  • Community members will be required to sign up for the Public Forum before the start of the meeting
 consistent with the process used by the City Council.
  • Participants will have up to two (2) minutes to share their thoughts and will speak based upon the
 order in which the requests were received.
  • Participants may speak only for themselves and individual speakers will not be permitted to yield their
 time to other speakers.
  • Personal attacks will not be tolerated and the moderator reserves the right to limit comments that are
 disruptive and/or obscene.
  • Ward 3 residents will be given priority and, if there is still time, persons who live outside the ward will
 be provided an opportunity to speak.

Question-and-Answer Protocol
  • Please state your full name prior to asking your question.
  • Each participant will have thirty (30) seconds to ask one and only one question.
  • There will be no follow up questions so everyone has a chance to participate.
  • Ward 3 residents will be given priority.

Discussion and Debate Rules
  • Members may not speak until recognized by the moderator.
  • Each member will have a maximum of two (2) minutes to speak on questions before the NPA.
  • No member will be permitted to speak a second time until every member has had an opportunity to
 speak once.
  • No member will be permitted to speak a third time until every member has had an opportunity to
 speak twice.




 Appendix to agenda | Wards 3 NPA - Page 2

 Page 2 of 10
 Resolution Relating to RESOLUTION_____

 STREET RACING AND TRAFFIC CALMING Sponsor(s): Robert Sand
 ON LAKE STREET IN BURLINGTON'S Date: June 3, 2026
 WATERFRONT NEIGHBORHOOD




 WARD 3 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ASSEMBLY
 In the year Two-Thousand Twenty-Six……………………………………………………………………
 Resolved by the Ward 3 Neighborhood Planning Assembly, as follows:

 1 That WHEREAS Burlington's Waterfront Park, with its lush lawn, its location on the shore of Lake
 2 Champlain, and its sweeping views of the Adirondacks, offers the finest sunset views in the city; and
 3 WHEREAS the beauty, serenity, and safety of this cherished public space are regularly disrupted
 4 by drivers of high-performance cars and motorcycles who use the Lake Street corridor to engage in
 5 reckless high-speed driving, deliberate engine revving, and other dangerous behavior; and
 6 WHEREAS these vehicles routinely gather in organized meet-ups behind the water treatment
 7 plant and proceed south on Lake Street at speeds far exceeding the posted 20 MPH speed limit, on
 8 multiple evenings per week during the warmer months; and
 9 WHEREAS this behavior poses severe dangers to the children, pedestrians, and cyclists who use
10 the area responsibly, and is incompatible with the character of Waterfront Park, the bike path corridor,
11 and a residential neighborhood; and
12 WHEREAS Lake Street was the site of a motor vehicle accident on September 21, 2024
13 (Burlington Police Incident No. 24BU022095) that caused significant damage to the pedestrian crossing
14 over the railroad tracks located to the west of Foam Brewery; and
15 WHEREAS the residents of the Waterfront and those who use Waterfront Park, the bike path,
16 and the Lake Street pier have serious and ongoing concerns about the potential for another traffic
17 accident resulting in loss of life, serious injury, or property damage; and
18 WHEREAS affected residents and other stakeholders have previously raised these concerns with
19 city officials without satisfactory resolution;
20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ward 3 Neighborhood Planning Association calls
21 on the Office of the Mayor, the Burlington City Council, the Department of Public Works, and the
22 Burlington Police Department to take the following actions:




 Page 3 of 10
 Page 2
 Resolution Related to STREET RACING AND TRAFFIC CALMING ON LAKE STREET IN
 BURLINGTON'S WATERFRONT NEIGHBORHOOD

23 1. Conduct a formal traffic safety assessment of the Lake Street corridor between Penny Lane and
24 College Street within 60 days of the adoption of this resolution, with special attention to
25 conditions between 4:00 PM and 10:00 PM when dangerous behavior is most prevalent;
26 2. Implement interim traffic calming measures — such as additional signage, temporary or
27 removable speed humps, or increased police patrols — while a longer-term plan is developed;
28 3. Develop and present to the Ward 3 NPA a permanent traffic calming plan for the Lake Street
29 corridor, including consideration of physical infrastructure measures such as speed tables, raised
30 crosswalks, or road diet options; and
31 4. Report back to the Ward 3 Neighborhood Planning Association on progress within 90 days.




 Page 4 of 10
Public-Private Partnerships: Setting a Course for the
Next Phase of the Church Street Marketplace
National Best Practices in Downtown Management



Prepared by: Progressive Urban Management Associates (P.U.M.A.)
December 1, 2025



When the CSM was formed in 1981, Downtown Improvement Districts (DIDs) were a ﬂedging concept.
Since then, the number of DIDs has ballooned to more than 1,000 around the country. With this growth,
the downtown management industry has matured and evolved – and today, DIDs are part of
sophisticated downtown management organizations, consistently adapting and learning from each
other’s successes and failures.

The following provides an overview of the preeminent structure for the management of DIDs – a public-
private partnership model. Several DIDs in similar markets are proﬁled to illustrate this model. Lastly, we
oﬀer a framework for putting this model in place in Downtown Burlington.



Nonproﬁt management: Nonproﬁt management ensures that the district is led by a dedicated, focused
organization with the ﬂexibility to respond quickly to district needs. It also allows for strong public-
private collaboration while buﬀering downtown management from political cycles and turnover, which
can hinder a DID’s long-term planning and consistent level of service. This structure generates
accountability for DID feepayers and businesses, giving them a direct voice in the organization’s
operations. It also ensures staﬀ is dedicated exclusively to the district. Lastly, unlike government
agencies, nonproﬁts can leverage DID dollars in unique ways, via fundraising, applying for grants,
building partnerships with other organizations, and so on.

Governed by a board of directors comprised primarily of feepaying property owners and businesses
within the district’s boundaries: Simply, these are the ones directly funding enhanced services through
their fee payments. This governance model promotes accountability and transparency – and reinforces
the core principle that DIDs are “self-help” and “self-imposed” initiatives. Local governments remain
involved in various ways, in part by maintaining ﬁduciary oversight of the DID and its management.
Additionally, government and other civic entities will often hold one or more board seats to ensure
strong public-private collaboration.

Supplemental or enhanced services: Even once a DID is formed, service delivery remains a collaborative
eﬀort. Core public services such as trash collection, snow removal, and capital improvements such as
brick repair remain City functions. And if a DID does take over some of these services, they are typically


 1

 Page 5 of 10
reimbursed for these eﬀorts by the City to account for these added costs. The most eﬀective practice
nationally is for a DID and City to establish a base level service agreement that documents who does
what within the district. These are foundational to an eﬀective public-private partnership and help
bolster collaboration amongst BID and City staﬀ.

Renewal Terms: This best practice ensures regular accountability, performance evaluation, stakeholder
engagement, and transparency. Having a deﬁned term (e.g., 5 or 10 years) creates a natural point for
feepayers and other stakeholders to assess whether the district is delivering value and whether its
services need to evolve for current needs. Terms prevent DIDs from becoming complacent or misaligned.
As the case studies show, once DIDs become established the terms can be lengthier, due to the time-
consuming nature of a formal renewal process.

In Sum: The above illustrate key themes of the public-private management model for DIDs. This model
helps foster accountability, transparency, representation, ﬂexibility, enhancement rather than
replacement, and collaboration. This is far and away the most common model, used by more than 90%
of DIDs nationally. Furthermore, satisfaction is indicated by a 99% renewal rate for DIDs, most of which
have required renewal as noted above.

The below oﬀer examples of highly-functioning DIDs managed via the public-private partnership model.

Downtown Asheville
• Management Structure: The DID is managed by the Asheville Downtown Association, a 501c6
 nonproﬁt organization.
• Governance: The DID is governed by a 20-member Board of Directors, which consists of 17 voting
 members and 3 non-voting members. Board members represent diﬀerent geographies within the
 DID and diﬀerent industries including hospitality, food and beverage, entertainment, retail, and
 oﬃce. The board includes commercial property owners, business renters, residential owners and
 renters, as well as representatives from nonproﬁt and social service providers.
• Services: Community Ambassadors, cleaning, hospitality, social service collaboration, small business
 support, special event support, and beautiﬁcation.
• Assessment Model: DID assessment rates are based on assessed value for taxable properties
 (nonproﬁt properties are not assessed).
• DID Term: 10 years

Downtown Berkeley
• Management Structure: The DID is managed by Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA), a 501c6
 nonproﬁt organization.
• Governance: The DBA is governed by a board comprised of up to 22 members representing a variety
 of property types, key civic and institutional partners including the City of Berkeley and UC Berkeley,
 and nonproﬁts within Downtown Berkeley.
• Services: Cleaning and Hospitality Ambassadors, beautiﬁcation and landscaping, social services
 outreach, marketing and communications, events, and business support.
• Assessment Model: DID assessment rates are based on lot + building square footage. The rates are
 tiered based on location.
• DID Term: 10 years


 2

 Page 6 of 10
Downtown Boulder
• Management Structure: The DID is managed by the Downtown Boulder Partnership (DBP), a 501c6
 nonproﬁt organization. DBP also manages an aﬃliate 501c3 nonproﬁt foundation.
• Governance: The DID is governed by an 11-member board. Board members are appointed by
 location within the DID’s boundaries. The board makeup includes: 9 property and business owners,
 and 2 representatives from City Council.
• Services: Downtown Ambassador Program, cleaning, hospitality, addressing quality of life issues,
 snow removal, beautiﬁcation and landscaping, holiday lighting, marketing and communications, and
 eﬀorts to support the economic vitality of downtown (such as tenant recruitment).
• Assessment Model: DID assessment rates are based on assessed value for commercial properties
 (residential and nonproﬁt properties are not assessed).
• DID Term: Initial term of 10 years; subsequent terms of 20 years

Downtown Ithaca
• Management Structure: The DID is managed by the Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA), a 501c3
 nonproﬁt organization.
• Governance: The DIA is governed by a 27-member Board of Directors, which consists of 23 voting
 members and 4 non-voting members. New York legislation states that more than 50% of board seats
 must be held by property owners, and that three City representatives be included on the board.
 Board makeup includes: 12 property owners, 6 tenant businesses, 4 City and County representatives,
 1 residential tenant, and 4 ex oﬃcio members.
• Services: Downtown Ambassadors, cleaning, hospitality, business retention and development,
 marketing and communications, special events, beautiﬁcation, placemaking.
• Assessment Model: DID assessment rates are based on assessed value for commercial and multi-
 family properties (single-family and nonproﬁt properties are not assessed).
• DID Term: No term

Comparative Table
 Burlington Asheville Berkeley Boulder Ithaca
 (CSM district)
 City Population 45,000 95,000 122,000 107,000 34,000
 College student
 17,000 9,000 46,000 39,000 26,000
 population
 DID Size (blocks) 4 60 30 49 20
 Annual DID
 $733,000 $1,250,000 $2,000,000 $1,600,000 $650,000
 Revenue
 Approx. budget
 $183,250 $20,800 $66,600 $32,600 $32,500
 per block



Implementing a Public-Private Partnership Model in Our Downtown

It is recommended that Church Street Marketplace be spun-oﬀ as a new nonproﬁt organization (most
likely a 501c3). This nonproﬁt entity would oversee the District and provide or contract enhanced
services desired by downtown stakeholders, such as initiatives around cleanliness and maintenance,


 3

 Page 7 of 10
safety and hospitality, marketing, economic development, events, or others (see menu below). Here, we
provide a framework for this model, followed by a handful of speciﬁcs that would be ﬂeshed out as a
plan develops:

Governance: The new nonproﬁt would be governed by a Board of Directors. The Board would be a self-
perpetuating, independent governing board composed of a majority property/business owners within
the District’s boundaries – i.e., governed by those who are paying into the District. Board makeup would
have requisites to ensure a varied mix representing diﬀerent voices within the District, including by
location, business/property type, and size. The Board would also include City and other civic/nonproﬁt
organizational representatives, selected by City Council and/or the Mayor. (See the case study models
above for speciﬁc examples of board makeup.)

The recommended board size is 9-to-13 members, including any ex oﬃcio seats. As the examples above
show, there is no hard and fast rule for board size, and largely depends on District size and dynamics.
That said, given the small geography of our District, a smaller board size is recommended.

Board members would serve staggered terms (3-years, for example) with a maximum number of
successive terms. This will encourage new voices and ideas while maintaining institutional knowledge
and continuity for the organization. When vacancies occur, an Executive Committee or Nominating
Committee would initiate a call for nominations from District property and business owners.

Services: The nonproﬁt would contract with the City to receive assessment revenue and to manage
services and programs within the District using these dollars. These enhanced services would be
determined by an annual work program and budget developed by the Board of Directors. As part of the
nonproﬁt’s contract to manage assessment revenue, it would present this annual work program and
budget to City Council to further public-private collaboration.

The nonproﬁt and City would also establish a base level service agreement that documents who does
what within the District. This agreement documents “baseline” services – i.e., core level of services
provided citywide – that would continue to be provided in the assessment district just as they are
elsewhere. If the City and nonproﬁt decide its better for the nonproﬁt to take responsibility for some of
these core baseline services, then an agreement would be made between the City and nonproﬁt for
reimbursement of these services.

Staﬃng: The nonproﬁt would have its own staﬀ. This gives the District adequate attention and focus,
with full-time staﬀ dedicated to delivery of enhanced services and programs. Staﬀ would report to the
Board.

While high-level management and operational staﬀ would be employees of the nonproﬁt, there is
ﬂexibility in how ﬁeld staﬀ are hired. These could be contracted employees or remain City employees in
the near-term. This would reduce disruption to Church Street Marketplace’s current ﬁeld staﬀ, which
could eventually be replaced as nonproﬁt/contract staﬀ via attrition.

Required Review: A 5-year review would be required for the District. This is a new layer of
accountability, common nationally, that hasn’t been used in Burlington, where the current district has



 4

 Page 8 of 10
been in place unchanged since the 1980s. In Year 5, the District would undergo a formal evaluation to
determine that the services and assessment methods are consistent with the needs of the District. Any
adjustments would be considered at that time. An updated operating plan would be developed at this
time, approved by the Board of Directors and subsequently, City Council.

City Role & Relationship: The City primarily acts as (1) a collector of assessment fees, (2) the contracting
authority, and (3) oversight and compliance reviewer. While the nonproﬁt is independent, accountability
would ﬂow through the service contract and annual reporting. The City and nonproﬁt would also
collaborate to develop the base level service agreement. City would also have participation on the Board
of Directors, as noted above.

Accountability: There are numerous checks and balances built into this model. Financial accountability is
in place via annual audits of the nonproﬁt that are shared with the City and District ratepayers. Legal
accountability is in place via the City contract, plus general nonproﬁt/IRS/Vermont laws. Performance
accountability is in place via annual work plans and annual reports, plus a sunset clause and required
renewal.

Speciﬁcs to be addressed as details develop: While the above oﬀers an overarching framework for
implementing this best-practice model in Burlington, several speciﬁc key details are to be determined,
requiring further discussions between property owners, businesses, and the City:

 • Service Mix: Services provided by DIDs and the nonproﬁts that manage them are varied, but
 there are some common traits around the country (as the above examples show). The following
 are typical “bundles” of services undertaken by these organizations. A speciﬁc service mix would
 be determined based on ratepayer priorities and feedback.
 o Cleaning
 o Hospitality and public safety
 o Beautiﬁcation and maintenance
 o Marketing
 o Placemaking
 o Programming and events
 o Economic development
 o Capital improvements
 o Parking and mobility
 • Speciﬁc Board Makeup: While the above gives a general construct for the Board, the speciﬁc
 numbers and composition would be detailed and documented – i.e., how many seats by
 representative type, etc.
 • Boundaries and Assessment Model: Currently, the Church Street Marketplace’s boundaries are
 very conﬁned presenting challenges in raising adequate funds and service delivery. If a larger
 district is proposed, this is yet to be deﬁned. A larger district could also have a new assessment
 methodology, which could include a tiered assessment structure, with Church Street properties
 paying a higher rate given the higher level of enhanced service they would receive.




 5

 Page 9 of 10
Summary of Advantages

In conclusion, the Public-Private Partnership model detailed above oﬀers numerous advantages:

 • A nimble nonproﬁt oﬀers the most ﬂexible, responsive, and entrepreneurial approach
 • Encourages a strong sense of ownership by ratepayers
 • Easier to adapt and innovate programmatically as conditions change and opportunities arise
 • Accountability and transparency are maintained in a variety of ways as discussed above
 • The nonproﬁt can pursue diverse funding sources to leverage the required assessment fees
 • Fosters collaboration between the nonproﬁt and City – at both the leadership and staﬀ level




 6

 Page 10 of 10

Ward 3 Neighborhood Planning Assembly
 Wednesday, June 3, 2026
 Sharon Bushor Room, Burlington City Hall
 Meeting Minutes
1. Welcome & Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at approximately 6:30 PM by Chris Haessly, Ward 3 NPA
Steering Committee member. He thanked the community members for attending.
2. Attendee Introductions
  • NPA Steering Committee Members:
 ✓ Brooks Cummings, Cherry Street
 ✓ Christopher Haessly, College Street
 ✓ Charlie Messing, College Street
  • City Officials/Staff:
 ✓ Melo Grant, City Councilor, Central District
 ✓ Laura Sánchez-Parkinson, City Councilor, Ward 3
 ✓ Barbara Turnbull, Dept of Finance and Administration
 ✓ Charlie Giannoni, Town Meeting TV
  • Presenters:
 ✓ Mark Bouchett, Church Street Marketplace Commission (Chair)
 ✓ Jeff Nick, Church Street Marketplace Business Owner
 ✓ Rep. Brian Cina, Chittenden-15
 ✓ Rep. Kate Logan, Chittenden-16
 ✓ Rep. Abbey Duke, Chittenden-17
 ✓ Sen. Martine Larocque-Gulick, Chittenden Central
  • Community Members/Public:
 ✓ Bobby Sand, Lake Street
 ✓ Henry Bechtel, Lake Street
 ✓ Gerry Prentki, Lake Street
 ✓ Jill Lesh, College Street
 ✓ Grace Grundhauser, North Street (Ward 2)
 ✓ Steve Colbert, North Street (Ward 2)
 ✓ Bill Eichhorn, Lake Street
3. Lake Street Traffic Calming Resolution
Presented by: Robert Sand, Lake Street resident and former State's Attorney (Windsor County)
Issue Overview: Mr. Sand presented a collection of photos and videos showcasing extreme
speeding, reckless driving, and engine noise caused by high-performance cars, motorcycles, and
mini-motorcycles on Lake Street. He noted that vehicles regularly organize meetups behind the
water treatment plant/pier and accelerate down Lake Street far exceeding the posted 20 mph
speed limit.
Neighborhood Impact: Multiple residents voiced serious safety concerns:
 • Gerry Prentki (Lake Street) emphasized that vehicles travel 50–60 mph directly past
 parallel-parked cars where pedestrians and children frequently cross. He proposed
 parking an empty police cruiser at the waterfront to act as a visual deterrent.
 • Bobby Sand (Lake Street) noted reckless driving at the railroad crossing and emphasized
 that dangerous driving occurs at all times of day.
 • Henry Bechtel (Lake Street) highlighted teenagers operating high-powered, unlicensed
 electric and gas-powered "e-moto" bikes performing dangerous wheelies on sidewalks,
 streets, and the waterfront bike path.
City Councilor Perspective:
 • Councilor Laura Sánchez-Parkinson noted that city councilors have been discussing
 physical traffic infrastructure controls with Public Works and patrolling limits with BPD
 Chief Burke.
 • Councilor Melo Grant reported meeting with the Parks Director and School District
 regarding "e-moto" bikes to encourage parental education, noting that the state of
 Vermont may eventually need to follow California's lead on regulating these specific
 vehicles.
Resolution: A formal resolution was read into the record calling upon the Mayor, City Council,
DPW, and BPD to perform a traffic safety assessment within 60 days, implement interim
calming measures (temporary speed humps/increased patrols), and design a permanent
infrastructure plan (speed tables/road dieting) with a progress report due in 90 days.
Councilor Grant cautioned that predefined DPW construction schedules might restrict their
ability to execute projects within the exact 60/90-day seasonal frames, though a status
response is achievable.
Vote: A motion to adopt the resolution was called, voted on, and passed unanimously by the
members of the Ward 3 NPA.
4. Church Street Marketplace Restructuring
Presented by: Mark Bouchett and Jeff Nick (Church Street Marketplace)
Background & Governance: Established in 1981, the Church Street Marketplace operates
uniquely as a municipal city department. Property owners and retailers pay some of the
highest ground-floor square footage fees in the nation ($35/sq. ft.) to fund dedicated
marketing, events, and maintenance crews. However, because the Mayor appoints the
Executive Director and City Council selects the Commissioners, business fee-payers have
minimal control over their own district's operations.
Proposed Concept: The Commission is exploring public-private partnership models. The
concept involves spinning the marketplace into a standalone nonprofit organization to handle
marketing and promotions independently, following national industry best practices.
Core Protections: Organizers emphasized that any changes would preserve the highly rated
marketplace maintenance crew, including their city contracts, benefits, and retirement
accounts. The proposal would expand the commission's board, keeping dedicated seats for city
voices to maintain public oversight of the public street.
Public Retail Safety: Property owners organically pooled private resources to hire an
"ambassador" (Andrew LeSturgeon) to help deter skyrocketing retail theft, coordinate with
BPD, and actively connect struggling individuals on the street with social services.
Next Steps: The concept is in its earliest dialogue stages. Because the Marketplace is
established via the city charter, any finalized restructuring plan must ultimately be approved by
Burlington voters. The presenters agreed to forward a copy of the PUMA (Progressive Urban
Management Associates) study report to the City Council for broader review.
5. Legislative Updates
Presented by: Rep. Brian Cina (Chittenden-15), Rep. Kate Logan (Chittenden-16), Rep. Abby
Duke (Chittenden-17), and Sen. Martine Laroque-Gulick (Chittenden Central)
Burlington Charter & Housing Changes (Rep. Logan): Charter changes passed allowing City
Council to update electoral maps without legislative approval and embedding REIB (Racial
Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging) into the charter. Act 181 advanced, establishing Tier 1A
mapping to allow development in Burlington to proceed without the standard Act 250
permitting process. Water quality permitting was successfully streamlined by delegating state
point-source authority to Burlington's local staff.
Environmental & Business Regulations (Rep. Logan): Municipalities are now restricted from
regulating agricultural required practices (RAPs) following a supreme court case correction—
meaning Burlington's historical local camel ban is unenforceable, though strict state agricultural
rules still apply. Controversial 3-acre stormwater runoff rules went into effect state-wide; Rep.
Logan collaborated on a study committee to assess regional stormwater utilities to prevent
excessive parcel-by-parcel costs to homeowners. Efforts are ongoing to establish a captive
insurance plan for Burlington bars to counter skyrocketing liquor liability insurance rates.
Revenue & Tax Proposals (Rep. Logan / Rep. Duke): Rep. Logan highlighted proposed
progressive tax legislation aimed at recapturing federal tax cuts by increasing taxes on high
earners (over $250k–$586k/year) and levying a 4% net investment income tax to generate over
$415 million for the general fund. These measures were held back due to certain executive
veto risks. Rep. Duke highlighted successful legislation capping event ticket commercial resale
prices at 110% of face value to block deceptive marketing and fraud, alongside ongoing
optimization of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) for project-based housing (CHIP) and a
comprehensive data privacy framework.
Education Restructuring (Sen. Laroque-Gulick): House Bill H.955 will establish a second homes
tax starting in 2029 tied to a new foundation formula for education financing. Crucially, starting
this fall, Burlington is mandated into a study group with Winooski and South Burlington to
analyze a multi-district school system merger. District mergers are tied directly to state
construction aid incentives. Reference-based healthcare pricing bill S.190 also faces potential
executive gridlock despite projecting $40–$80 million in state-wide savings.
Healthcare, Private Equity, & AI (Rep. Cina): Healthcare committee priorities focused on global
hospital budget management with the Green Mountain Care Board to stabilize small failing
facilities. Transparency bills were introduced targeting private equity firms, which currently
finance 100% of Vermont nursing homes and own/operate 57% of local opioid treatment
(methadone) clinics. Rep. Cina authored a historic "Vermont Model" AI bill, making Vermont
the first state to enshrine "neurological rights" into law, establishing legal barriers against
advanced neurotechnology/EEG data mining without direct consumer consent.
Homelessness & Transportation Crisis: The panel discussed the highly controversial
homelessness compromise bill. Advocates express intense concern that cutting motel/hotel
vouchers without having supported mental health or substance-use housing units ready will
directly expand unsheltered street populations in Burlington. Additionally, the state
Transportation Fund is in a dire underfunded status due to falling gas tax revenues from fuel-
efficient and hybrid cars. A vehicle-miles-traveled tax framework was severely watered down,
leaving Vermont in danger of losing matching federal transit infrastructure and GMT funding.
6. Public Forum
Members of the community came forward to speak on various topics.
7. Adjournment
A motion to adjourn was made, seconded, and passed unanimously at approximately 8:30 PM.