Updated at 12:30 p.m.
Queen City voters will not get a chance to weigh in on the future of City Hall Park.
The Burlington City Council declined on Monday night to put a question on the Town Meeting Day ballot that would have asked whether voters wanted to cancel the $4 million project to renovate the downtown green space.
The 6-6 vote was a defeat for the citizen group Keep the Park Green, which has fought the park plans for nearly three years. Under council rules, a tie vote means the measure fails.
The vote means the future of the park is decided. Construction on the current plan, which includes a splash park, wider pathways and more seating, is slated to begin in the spring.
Mayor Miro Weinberger, who supported the current park renovation plan, argued that too much time and money had been invested to go back to the drawing board. The proposal, he said, was a result of “a multiyear effort by a multidisciplinary, multiagency team.” The mayor urged the council to “make a decision on this park once and for all.”
Some councilors argued that the question wording was one-sided and reflected the views of Keep the Park Green.“We are not obligated to put any question on the ballot,” City Council President Kurt Wright (R-Ward 4) said. He had previously pleaded with the group to amend the language, to no avail.
Ultimately, Wright and five Democratic councilors — Dave Hartnett, Richard Deane, Karen Paul, Joan Shannon, and Chip Mason — voted against putting the question to voters. Progressives Brian Pine, Jane Knodell and Max Tracy voted in favor of the proposal, as did independents Adam Roof and Sharon Bushor, and Democrat/Progressive Ali Dieng.
The decision followed nearly two hours of public forum. Residents filled Contois Auditorium in a standing-room-only meeting, and more than 50 people spoke forcefully on both sides of the issue.
Multiple speakers emphasized that the number of residents who signed a petition circulated by Keep the Park Green proved the widespread discontent over the existing plan. The group collected more than 3,300 signatures, significantly more than the 5 percent of registered voters required to get the question to the council.
Not allowing voters to weigh in, Andrew Simon told the city representatives, would be “a shame, an affront to democracy and a mistake.”
Wayne Senville compared the signatures to the blinking red lights that flash as a train approaches. The petition, like the lights, “is asking you to stop and to listen,” he said.
Those in favor of the current plan argued that the people of Burlington have already had plenty of opportunity to make their voices heard. That was the argument made by Milton Rosa-Ortiz, who contended that those opposed to the plan were losing sight of the benefits of the existing proposal. “I worry long-term wisdom is being trumped by short-term passions,” he said.
The ballot question was nonbinding. Even if it had gone on the ballot and passed, the council would not have been forced to act on it.
The proposed language read:
“Shall we, the citizens of Burlington, advise the Mayor and City Council to:
A. cancel the current plan for City Hall Park that was approved by the City Council on 6-25-18; and
B. 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 council on Monday also voted to allow residents to decide two charter changes. Burlingtonians will vote on whether to create a new city department, the Department of Permitting and Inspections. That charter change also gives the mayor the power to appoint the director of the Planning and Zoning Department.
The council also reaffirmed its decision to put the Downtown Improvement District on the ballot. Currently, a group of businesses that make up the Church Street Marketplace pay a fee to receive additional services such as local promotion, snow removal and public events. The new plan would expand that district to include all of downtown.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
https://vtdigger.org/2019/03/18/judge-rule…
Well, “grownassman”, I too am grown. (I must say though that I admire your ability to generate a second 270-word comment only two minutes later!) I do refute your arguments, as do many others. It’s easy to seem like the majority opinion Here In The Comment Section but out in the real world. we have a city that would NOT have five thousand more happy citizens if the darn activists would just get out of the way. This city is FULL of those darn activists. If you want Expedient Progress and Lots of Building Projects, you may be looking in the wrong city, or the wrong State. And no matter HOW MANY dislikes this comment gets, it will Never get 3300 dislikes. See you Monday at City Hall.
In a democracy everyone cant be satisfied, its that simple. some peoples views will not win the day and the majority will and should have the final say if its following the rules set in place. Otherwise it becomes a tyranny of the minority which is what the left is attempting to achieve in Burlington by trying to make an end run around the democratic process with lawsuits and ballot initiatives. It wants to give itself fiat veto power over decisions made through voter and council approved process. Thats bad governance and bad for business. It projects out to our representatives, hard-working city staff and potential investors in the city that nothing you work on or pass legislatively is guaranteed even if its by the majority and that at any time, any investment you make could be forfeit if it can be blocked through determined extra-legal means. You cant manage a city of Burlingtons size like that, it just wont work, its inefficient, unpredictable and dangerous to democracy. Lastly yes, 3,000 plus votes is a good amount of folks but likely still represent a minority of the general Burlington population. Progressives often mistake their ability to pack Contois Auditorium, raise petitions or hold public rallies with broad city-wide support. Finally lets not worry as much about city hall park trees as many trees are being planted in Burlington today. There are multiple ongoing tree planting efforts in Burlington. For example 120 alone in 2016 by Branch Out Burlington and 500 by Burlington/UVM in 2016. Most of City Hall Parks trees will be replaced and yes they will eventually grow hopefully like our city.
Well Charlie, as a grown ass man I may say some grown ass man things from time to time. Its okay if Im anonymous as long as my words make sense. Lets unpack what I said and how it matches up to recent progressive-backed initiatives. Burlington City-Place has been held up by lawsuits and delaying tactics after having been approved by city-wide and council majority votes. Its taken almost 4 years to build. Burlington Telecom progressives to this day continue to deny the reality that its been sold by majority decision and are trying for one more hail Mary obstruction with the regulatory board that is finalizing the decision. Again a multi-year process. The South End connector which offhandedly has been noted in this forum was sat on for decades by Steve Goodkind has finally cleared its last lawsuits and 40 plus years of stagnation. Its now being threatened with, you guessed it another lawsuit by the same collection of people who reflexively oppose everything the mayor proposes. What I sense has happened since Miro came into the mayorship is that people want more common sense process, expectations and growth that isnt held up by endless process. Someone correct me if Im wrong but I dont recall the Democrats nickel and diming every initiative put up by the progressives with lawsuits and ballot measures for the 30 years they ran the show. By natural growth rates Burlington should have 4 to 5 thousand more people in the same city but it basically stagnated for 30 years as there was no significant population or housing growth during Progressive rule, Its time to grow and change as a city again.
To concernedVter:
Sorry, I didn’t say 3300 is a majority of the citizens of Burlington. You are right, it is 8%! That is more than enough (5%) to get an item on the ballot. The BALLOT Item was to vote, so that we could SEE who is the majority – people who want the design to remain as it is, or people who wish to modify the design and still repair the Park. What I said was that 3300 was NOT a Vocal Minority, it was quite a bunch of people – enough to put the item on the ballot. [It was not put on the ballot because the Council had a problem with the wording, or just didn’t want to be un-supportive of the planners who have spent years on the project. The Council was split, 50-50, on whether to put it on the ballot (which by law doesn’t proceed – a majority of Council members must approve).] What I was saying is that the folks who are on this thread (dozens) protesting against KPTG and the ballot item are actually the minority compared to the 3300 who signed the petitions. There you go.
3300 is a majority?
In 2018 the population of Burlington was over 42,000
That is only around 8% of the population of Burlington.
This is a response to ” imagrownassmanbtv “:
In your comment, you said, “the vocal minority simply can’t respect city-wide or city council votes of the majority of Burlingtonians or their elected representatives. They cry foul and mistake not getting their way with a rigged process. “
However, 3300 people are NOT a vocal minority. The several dozen people on this thread who are cheering each other on in their dislike of Keep The Park Green are the minority. You are an anonymous person who only Thinks they are the majority. The vote would show who exactly IS the minority. You can have dozens of “likes” or “dislikes” on this page, and still – you will not get 3300 of them. Let the majority speak. The majority of residents in Burlington would like to save more trees. Sorry.
Sad to see Burlington going down hill. It’s a far cry from the Burlington I grew up in. It dates back to the fool who wants to be President, good old Bernie.
I should be honest here and say it pre-dates Bernie; when the city decided to destroy a whole neighborhood of hard working people that was the start. Bernie just gave it more speed once he became Mayor.
Now Burlington is a dirty little city that cares not for her citizens and does not even listen to them anymore.