Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger announced Monday that he wants state Commissioner of Housing and Community Development Noelle MacKay to be his new Community and Economic Development Office director. She would earn $96,836.
Weinberger is seeking a “personal hardship” exemption from the city council on MacKay’s behalf so she does not have to move from Shelburne to Burlington. Otherwise, MacKay would need to comply within a year with a charter provision that stipulates top appointees must be legal voters in Burlington — for which residency is a requirement.
The mayor also wants to expand such exemptions going forward.
Debate flared about the residency rule last month. Some residents questioned the hardship exemption given to Burlington’s new school superintendent, Yaw Obeng, who earns $153,000 and bought a house in South Burlington.
Supporters of the charter provision, including city council president Jane Knodell, say it means that leaders have to live with their decisions and have “skin in the game.” Opponents say it’s not fair to ask people to move for appointments that might last just a few years, that doing so can limit the pool of qualified applicants and that it doesn’t matter where they live anyway.
Seven Days recently found that a number of high-paid city appointees have exemptions. They included former CEDO director Peter Owens, who commuted from a home in Hanover, N.H., and who recently resigned.
In a memo to the council, Weinberger wrote that it would be a personal hardship for MacKay to move to Burlington because she and her husband purchased their Shelburne home in 2012 and “have put significant resources into restoring it.” Weinberger added: “If they are required to sell their home in the next year, they are likely to suffer a financial loss.”
The mayor also wants the council to approve an amendment to broaden exemptions. The proposal would grant exemptions to appointees who “own and reside in a home in Chittenden County at the time of their appointment and who certify that having to move from that home to become a legal voter of Burlington would cause the appointee’s family significant hardship. “
MacKay’s appointment confirmation and exemption request will come before the council May 16. She would start work August 1.
In her state position, MacKay oversees a staff of 40 permanent employees and 50 seasonal employees and a department with a $28 million budget. She is the former executive director of Smart Growth Vermont.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
IMPEACH THE MAYOR. THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS.
Unacceptable.
Terrible idea. The City Council should unanimously reject this proposal to pretend that all of Chittenden County = Burlington city limits. If you want to be making critical decisions on behalf of City government that impact all residents and taxpayers of Burlington, you better live in Burlington yourself and be subject to the results of your decisions.
It’s a hardship for me to commute 35 miles to work everyday…..who gives a rat’s ass! It’s called life Mr. Mayor!
She could rent a house/apt in Burlington. She will make plenty of money to afford the rent.
Hiring the most qualified person for the job makes good business sense…but it doesn’t make sense for a person to move (unless distance is a factor) to take a job, and especially one in which we know their is not likely perpetuity for the candidate. Focus on people who are qualified and have a sincere interest in keeping Burlington one of the best small cities in the United States.
Here’s another example of the mayor making exceptions for friends.
Furthermore, if it is going to cause a personal hardship to take the job, then don’t take the job.
There is no law that says a department head must sell property outside Burlington in order to take a city job. The laws says department heads must live within city limits. For a position that could significantly alter the city’s landscape, it is not an unreasonable request.
Outsourcing is not a Burlington value.
Who could blame Obeng not wanting to enroll his kids in the Burlington Schools?
This Charter requirement is way outdated and should be presented to the voters for repeal..
There is a significant difference between Mr. Obeng’s situation and Ms. Mackay’s. The policy clearly needs to be revisited and a more sophisticated approach employed. I generally agree with the idea that public employees serving Burlington should live within city limits. Mr. Obeng is in charge a critical system which has a lifelong impact on Burlington children. As such, it is essential that he be willing to have his own children attend Burlington schools. He moved here from Canada for the job, had a choice, and chose not to live in Burlington. That’s wrong. Ms. MacKay, in contrast, has lived in the area for many years, much of it in Burlington, and has been committed to the area’s well-being at both her public and private endeavors. Years before being offered the job, she purchased a home just south of Burlington which is part of the greater Burlington area. Arguably, she would be as motivated in her Economic Development post whether living in Burlington or Shelburne as both communities are dependent on the strength of the city’s economy. The two jobs are not analogous, and neither are the candidates’ backgrounds.
Stop for a moment and pretend you’re the employer. Do you tie your hands and limit yourself to a particular subset of applicants to get the best candidate? Or do you cast your net as wide as possible and see who responds to your call? Clearly the answer is the latter. It is in the best interest of Burlington residents to get the best candidate they can, and the way to do that is to not cut the applicant pool to some minuscule number based on an outdated residency requirement. This is especially true in Burlington – We may be Vermont’s “Big City,” but in the larger scheme of things we are simply a small town on the northern fringe of the country.
Clearly elected officials need to live in Burlington, but beyond that the residency requirement makes no sense at all. Why stop at department heads? What about our school teachers, parks & rec employees, or the guy who collects my recycling? Is he or she somehow better qualified or more motivated to perform on the job simply because he or she happen to live within city limits?
Gee making almost $100,000 a yr is a hardship??? You’re kidding right!! She want the job move to Burlington, if not find another job.. Think Mr.Weinberger just want his rich liberal friends to be
“personal hardship” exempted..She and Mr Obeng make good money and could very well live in Burlington..
@Bill Keogh, the charter residency requirement, over 60 years old, was presented to the voters for repeal not that long ago, during Mayor Clavelle’s administration. As this paper recently reported within the last month or two, “When Mayor Peter Clavelle tried to get rid of it in 2006, Burlington residents voted overwhelmingly to keep it in place.”
Burlington residents and taxpayers fully support this law, regardless of the shenanigans of our Mayor to usurp the will of the voters on this very issue with ever-increasing “exemptions” and “waivers.” Mayor Weinberger has overall been a decent mayor and more fiscally responsible and on the ball than Bob Kiss. However, on this issue, he is wrong. I am surprised you would not know the recent history of this given your long-time involvement in city politics.