When Burlington voters step into the polls on Tuesday, they’ll have a lot to read.
In addition to choosing among 10 candidates for five seats on the City Council, voters face eight ballot questions this year, ranging from police oversight and carbon impact fees to redistricting and election changes. The ballot items add up to around 1,300 words.
By far the most attention has been given to Question 7: a proposed independent community control board for the police department.
The question proposes forming a new city department to oversee the police department with the power to discipline or remove any member of the force, including the chief. The control board would have seven to nine members, all appointed by another independent committee. The appointment committee would consist of seven representatives from community organizations, the director of the city’s Racial Equity, Inclusion and Belonging department, and one city councilor. Former members of law enforcement would not be eligible to serve on the control board, according to the language of the proposal.
The control board question is similar to a City Council proposal from 2020 that was vetoed by Mayor Miro Weinberger, a Democrat. The initiative was picked up by advocates who put it on this year’s ballot by a petition campaign, where 5% of registered voters’ signatures are required to propose a charter change.
If passed by Burlington voters, the initiative, along with all other charter changes on the ballot this year, would require approval from the state Legislature to be enacted.
Beyond the ubiquitous lawn signs arguing for and against the control board, the debate has been fought in dueling press conferences. Since the beginning of the year, proponents and detractors have hosted a total of four major press conferences to promote their views.
The most recent was Feb. 22, when supporters of the initiative, including Ben & Jerry’s founders Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, gathered at City Hall to outline their arguments on how the control board would improve policing in the city.
While City Council Progressives have included the control board in their public safety priorities, one of the main groups driving the effort is called People for Police Accountability. Tyler Pastorok, a member of the group, said during the event that the control board proposal grew out of the Battery Park protests in 2020 that sought to call attention to use-of-force incidents involving police following the murder of George Floyd in Minnesota.
Other speakers included city councilors Gene Bergman, P-Ward 2, and Ali Dieng, I-Ward 7; a member of the Howard Center employees union; a policy advocate for ACLU Vermont; A prominent theme among the speakers was rebuilding trust in the police department.
“The fact that many people in this city do not trust the police speaks volumes to the need for our city to install independent public oversight,” Dieng said.
The Ben & Jerry’s founders said they were at the event both as Vermonters and to represent the company.
“The police work for the citizens of Burlington, and it’s a reminder that public safety is not one person’s job,” Cohen said. “It’s a job for the entire community, and it’s improved when we invite people from all parts of the community to work together.”
At another press conference earlier in February, Weinberger and other opponents of the measure argued it would worsen staffing problems at the police department.
Weinberger said the charter change has “little to no precedent in the country. It lacks basic protections to ensure the fairness we must offer our officers to succeed at rebuilding the department, and it will be needlessly and wastefully expensive, draining limited resources from other social reform and public safety priorities.”
The mayor was joined by a group of local leaders from the University of Vermont Medical Center, the Howard Center, labor unions and business associations, as well as several past and present councilors.
According to campaign finance reports, most of the spending has been on the side of the opponents. The political action committee Burlingtonians for Responsible Police Oversight, whose treasurer is listed as former Progressive councilor Jane Knodell, spent around $10,000 on a mailing. It reported to the state on Feb. 25 that it raised $13,500, most of that from large contributions. Of the contributions over $100, three were from the real estate realm. Redstone and Eric Farrell each gave $2,500 and Ernest Pomerleau gave $5,000. Seven Days first reported on the PAC’s spending.
By comparison, People for Police Accountability reported in its Feb. 25 report that it spent $638, mostly on yard signs. The group raised $1,059. Donors for the group kept their contributions no larger than $309.
Carbon impact fee
The question of whether to assess a carbon pollution impact fee might sound like something environmentalists would get behind. But recently, some environmental groups have stepped up their efforts to oppose it, saying the definition of “renewable energy” in this year’s proposal is too broad.
While a charter change passed in 2021 allowed Burlington to charge a carbon impact fee, this year’s proposal, Question 2 on the ballot, addresses how that fee would be assessed.
The new fees, passed by the City Council in December, apply to new construction, commercial and industrial buildings larger than 50,000 square feet, and city-owned buildings. If those buildings do not use renewable sources of energy for heating and cooling, then a fee would be charged at the time a permit was issued. The fee would start at $150 per ton of carbon pollution but would rise each year, depending on inflation, according to the version of the question described on ballots.
Weinberger promoted the carbon fee plan during a press conference in late January, calling it an important step toward his goal of achieving “net zero” carbon emissions by 2030.
“Climate leaders across the country and around the globe agree that, to accelerate market changes and encourage the adoption of renewable technologies, governments need to use both carrots and sticks,” Weinberger said.
According to a presentation given to the council in December by Burlington Electric General Manager Darren Springer, the definition of renewable would include geothermal and air-source heat pumps, wood heating, and systems that use renewable fuel such as “renewable gas, biodiesel, renewable hydrogen or renewable district energy.”
District energy is a plan to send steam heat from Burlington’s McNeil wood-fired power plant to other areas of the city, such as the University of Vermont and UVM Medical Center. Critics argue the use of biomass at McNeil is not renewable energy.
A group called Stop BTV Biomass takes issue with many of the energy sources in the proposed list. The group’s members were in city neighborhoods over the past weekend, distributing flyers that say that including “carbon-intensive forms of ‘renewable’ energy would incentivize the latter and increase greenhouse gas emissions, adversely impact public health, and impair forest biodiversity.”
Organizers for Stop BTV Biomass could not be reached for comment.
Prop Zero
Backers of so-called “proposition zero,” another measure placed on the ballot by petition, argue the proposed charter change could expand direct democracy in Burlington and bring the city up to date with other municipalities.
If passed, Question 8 on the city ballot would make it possible for city residents to put proposed ordinances, either binding or advisory, on the ballot by petition. It also has language to detail referendums, where voters can call on the City Council to repeal an ordinance.
FaRied Munarsyah, an independent candidate for the South District City Council seat and a major proponent of prop zero, said he sees the proposal as a way to “having a more grassroots approach to policy development.”
But opponents argue it could lead to problems with money in politics. City Councilor Joan Shannon, D-South District, worried that the proposal could lead to voters facing issues that they don’t know enough about, and argued that the system of having ordinances go through the City Council allows a few people to “dig into the details of this and make rational decisions based on a lot of information, not just the words that you will see on a ballot.”
Redistricting
Following a full year of City Council debate on how election boundaries should be drawn, the version in front of voters makes the most significant changes in Ward 8, long criticized for its high concentration of on-campus students.
Burlington has eight wards, each represented by one city councilor. It also has four districts that are made up of two wards each. If a census shows the most populous ward varies from the least populous ward by more than 10%, the city must redraw its election maps.
After public engagement to identify priorities last year, councilors worked with the city planning department through iterations of the maps over several months. The final version makes mostly subtle changes in the wards and leaves the districts in place. The most significant changes in Ward 8 sought to reduce the influence of on-campus students. The proposed boundaries of Ward 8 would be expanded to include more permanent residents in the downtown area.
Many other smaller tweaks pushed around other boundaries, too. The city’s website includes an interactive map that details all changes in the proposal.
When the council finally advanced the redistricting plan in December, its approval came with a sense of disappointment. Councilor Zoraya Hightower, P-Ward 1, said it failed to accomplish the public priorities.
Mark Barlow, I-North District, said that while the changes might be “incremental,” they are also “significant” because of how they correct problems in Ward 8.
Election changes
Also on the ballot are three proposals that would bring a slate of changes to city elections.
In 2015, the city weighed allowing all legal residents to vote in local elections, but the measure was voted down. This year voters will get another shot. The charter change would allow noncitizens who are legal residents to register to vote in city elections.
Another question would expand the use of ranked choice voting to include more city offices. Ranked choice allows voters to select candidates in their order of preference. City Council elections are already conducted with ranked choice, but the proposal in front of voters this year would mean ranked choice would apply to mayoral, school board and ward officer elections.
The third election change would update the city charter to allow more flexibility in the location of polling places. Each ward should have its own polling place, “unless a more accessible facility is available outside the ward which is in as close proximity to the ward in which each voter resides.”