[B]URLINGTON — The Burlington City Council voted not to include an advisory question about its plans to renovate City Hall Park on the March Town Meeting Day ballot in a contentious 6-6 vote Monday night.
With the vote, the battle over the park appears to be resolved with the city moving ahead with its current construction plans.
The vote followed lengthy discussion by the council and more than 50 members of the public, much of which focused on a debate on which was the more democratic process — the years-long process that led to the current plan, or holding a vote of the full citizenry.
Keep the Park Green, the citizen group fighting the city’s renovation plan, collected more than 3,300 signatures asking the council to put an advisory question about the park on the March ballot.
KTPG wanted a question on the ballot that asked voters if they wanted to cancel the current plan and “instead, repair, maintain and improve the Park by preserving more existing trees and shaded areas, repairing grass and existing walkways, increasing lighting and benches, and retaining the historic character of the Park?”
The group was seeking to prevent the city from cutting down fully-grown trees and increasing the amount of pavement in the park. KTPG also expressed concerns about the public process that went into the project, the funding for the project and alleged the city allowed the park to fall into its poor condition.
Supporters of the project, including Mayor Miro Weinberger, argued it would make the park more accessible while retaining the same number of trees and adding more than 1,500 new shrubs and grasses.
Supporters pointed to the long public process that led to the current plan, argued that the park’s poor condition was caused by its faulty design and said that putting the question on the ballot would stretch construction out into a two-year process.
Councilor Karen Paul said said she was concerned about the precedent that an advisory question on the park would set. She said the council’s votes need to be its bond with its constituents and city staff.
“Responsible governance and responsible democracy means allowing elected officials to make informed and well-reasoned decisions on their behalf,” she said.
Councilor Brian Pine supported putting the question on the ballot, and said that the council owed it to constituents because so many of them signed the petition.
Councilor Max Tracy said that many Burlingtonians feel as if they are not being heard, and putting the question on the ballot would help the council better understand the will of the people.
“We’ve heard lots of debate and lots of controversy that we can really put to bed if we put it on the ballot,” Tracy said.
Council President Kurt Wright and councilor Dave Hartnett both said they were voting against the resolution because they believed the language was leading.
They objected to the second prong of the question, which would instruct the council to “instead, repair, maintain and improve the Park by preserving more existing trees and shaded areas, repairing grass and existing walkways, increasing lighting and benches, and retaining the historic character of the Park?”
Wright said that if Keep the Park Green had been willing to compromise on the resolution’s language, it would likely have passed the council and gone to the voters.
Monique Fordham, one of Keep the Park Green’s leaders, said after the meeting that the group thought that if the second part of the question was eliminated, it would be framed as an unreasonable group that opposes everything.
Fordham said the group wanted to put forward an alternative, positive vision of what the park could be in front of voters. She said that the council’s vote was anti-democratic, and that the vote proved the Democrats on the council were unwilling to break from Weinberger.
The council received a letter from the Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Commission, which unanimously supports the project. The commission wrote that the increased use of advisory ballot items would undermine the public process and that the plan will improve tree health and the park’s pathways and lighting.
The council also received a letter from four department heads, who said city staff have dedicated at least 4,600 hours to the project from 2016-18 and wrote that derailing projects at the last minute would have a negative effect on city staff retention.
Supporters of Keep the Park Green outnumbered supporters of the current park plan, but both sides of the debate turned out a substantial number of people who spoke during the nearly two hours of public forum.
Wayne Senville, the former chair of the planning commission, said the citizen petition calling for the vote was like flashing lights at a railroad crossing warning of an oncoming train.
“We need to get it right and have a plan the majority of the community will stand behind,” he said.
Supporters of the plan stressed that the renovated park would be a major improvement, with healthier trees and plants.
“We don’t need to keep the park green, we need to make the park green,” said Vinson Pierce, a parks commissioner who supports the plan.
Downtown Improvement District
The council also decided not to remove from the March ballot the charter change that expands the Downtown Improvement District. Tracy’s motion to remove it failed in a 4-8 vote.
Proponents of the expanded improvement district argued that it would lift up the businesses on the streets surrounding Church Street and increase visitors to those businesses.
The new improvement district would combine the current district and the city operated Church Street Marketplace department, which provides additional security, cleaning and marketing services to businesses on Church Street for a fee.
Commercial property owners in the expanded district would pay a fee for similar services provided by a new nonprofit.
Opponents to the DID worry that it will lead to increased policing of the city’s homeless and raise downtown rents. DID opponents also say forming the new nonprofit would be privatizing services currently offered by the city.
Tracy said he thought the DID process was “incredibly rushed.” He said that the desires of business owners might not line up with the general public, and he believes the DID would give these business owners more power.
Councilor Hartnett said he believed expanding the DID would help the businesses on the streets surrounding Church Street to compete with businesses in surrounding towns, including Winooski and South Burlington.
“I just think this is an opportunity to say, we are willing to grow, we are not willing to stay the same,” he said.
