Some Burlington Progressives and activists are incensed after Mayor Miro Weinberger denounced party-backed candidates last week as coming from a “reactionary fringe.” Weinberger made the remark at a Democratic caucus where he condemned opposition to city projects, including the downtown mall redevelopment.
Members of the Coalition for a Livable City, a group that has opposed the mall plan, may adopt the label and dub themselves the “reactionary fringe,” said John Franco. He’s a veteran of the mayoral administrations of Peter Clavelle and Bernie Sanders, and an attorney who is representing the coalition.
“Trash talk doesn’t usually end well,” Franco said. The remarks will come back to haunt the mayor, he predicted.
Independent city council candidate Genese Grill, who is also a member of the CLC, characterized Weinberger’s comments as inaccurate and misdirected.
“In calling everyone who was against his rezoning of the downtown core a ‘reactionary fringe,’ Mayor Weinberger has insulted almost half of the people in this city,” Grill wrote in an email to Seven Days. In response, Grill is inviting others to join her in protest at next week’s city council meeting.
At the Burlington Democratic caucus, Weinberger directed the pointed remarks at candidates nominated by the Progressive Party who, he said, were “opposing much of what we are trying to achieve.” Their positions, he said, have been “shown to be anti-environment, anti-senior, anti-business, and even anti-equity.”
Only one Progressive candidate, Charles Simpson in the South District, is challenging a council incumbent. Party chair Charles Winkleman is running for a seat in Burlington’s East District against Democratic candidate Richard Deane.
Weinberger last Thursday asked fellow Democrats to nominate Progressive council member Jane Knodell, the council’s president, to retain her Central District seat in her race against Grill. Attendees obliged, but not without some dissent.
The following morning, Weinberger resolutely stood behind his remarks. “What these candidates represent is not just principled disagreement about [the Burlington Town Center],” he said in an interview on Friday. “There is a small group that is opposing a wide range of the city’s efforts that has been the city’s priorities for a long time.”
Meanwhile, a storm of comments — on both sides of the issue — have erupted on social media and on a story on sevendaysvt.com.
“I am a member of the ‘radical fringe’ which opposes the Mayor’s monstrosity on the marketplace and am helping the opponents in their legal and regulatory challenges,” Franco said in a sevendaysvt.com comment. But, he added, he would nevertheless cast his vote for Knodell come March.
Some mall critics say the redevelopment debate was more robust as a result of the CLC activism.
“There is no doubt in my mind that many important conversations about the mall … would not have taken place without the respectful, thoughtful dialogue that I and other Progressives offered,” Winkleman wrote in an email to Seven Days. He voted against the mall-related ballot items in November, he added, but not without serious deliberation.
“Holding a different opinion doesn’t make someone reactionary — it makes them a part of a healthy democracy,” he said.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
In politics, half a loaf is better than no loaf. This is Weinberger’s justification for destruction of PLANBVT and community-enacted zoning. He is a developer so to him, like the carpenter with a hammer who sees every problem as a nail, Weinberger sees every problem as a lack of development that can be solved with more, more, more.
I am partly sympathetic in that the Tall Mall could already have been built by now, a few stories lower in compliance with zoning, had City Council and the nonprofits not objected 2 years ago and insisted on various changes when Sinex made his first application. This might have been the silver bullet that would have provided more housing, brought the Fletcher Allen Hospital back office jobs downtown & also complied with zoning with zero height violations. Nor any tax subsidies. There was a trade-off to be made and many of us were just fine with the original application, regardless of connected streets or a few extra subsidized “affordable” units (guess who is paying for the subsidies – it is not Don Sinex but the taxpayers subsidizing him and the market-rate payers who now have to pay more). When City Council & the nonprofits wanted to futz with it, Weinberger and his cronies decided half a loaf is still better than no loaf, even if it involves $20+million of fiscally irresponsible tax subsidies. Unfortunately, the voters want to pay these higher taxes or else fell for possibly false marketing from Weinberger & co (whoever heard of a SuperPac for ballot initiatives in Vermont until Weinberger).
“Genese, I am sorry to see that you have become a target by the trolls,”
Anyone who comments here in a way that the anonymous, so-called “VTPolicyAnalyst” doesn’t like, is a “troll.” Anyone who doesn’t like Ms. Grill’s modus operandi of sucking all of the air out of the room, and of engaging in personal attacks on her ideological adversaries, is a “troll.”
The “Coalition” for a “Livable City” and their candidates for City Council are part of the alt-left. Just like the alt-right they reject anything which does not fit into their narrative as part of a conspiracy. It never occurred to them that when well known and trusted advocacy groups stood up to support the mall redevelopment project they might be doing so purely because they actually believed in the project. No, to the it was all part of a scheme by the mayor to somehow profit off a project he has no financial stake it. Even when their internet comments get disliked they believe its part of a scheme against them, not that people just disagree with their reactionary and insane beliefs.
Guess what, when the Conservation Law Foundation and the Vermont Natural Resources Council supported this project it is because they genuinely believed based on what they, the experts, know about environmental effects of development, that this project was a project which would benefit the environment. When COTS endorsed the project it was because they, the experts, believed it would benefit the homeless by lowering the price of housing city wide. When AARP endorsed the project it was because they believed it would benefit seniors, and Local Motion endorsed it because they believed it would benefit bikers.
We should be weary when it comes to people who believe everything in this town is a conspiracy. Our Mayor, Jane Knodell, and Joan Shannon supported the project because they genuinely believed it would benefit their constituents. The CLC spent months yelling at them, insinuated they were doing this for some sort of personal profit, and lying to the people of Burlington about the basic facts of the project. They are fringe and we should not normalize them.
Excuse me, “VT Policy Analyst,” but if you are referring to my comment, I am not a “troll” or a “political operative,” just a citizen of Burlington who is really put off by the hypocrisy I’m seeing, where it’s ok to accuse your opponents of “lying” etc.(see below) but any criticism of you is cause for concern. On top of that, I just thought the whole idea of a candidate involving him/herself in the comments on their own articles is not cool, especially when people don’t know it’s him/her. People should be given space to think for themselves on these issues. If that offends anyone or makes my comments unwelcome, then I apologize.
Everyone should also know that bypassing the restriction of only allowing one “Like/Dislike” per person on these comments is easy. Anyone can do it. You will actually find that the plethora of “Dislikes” that appear suddenly is just one or two people.
Genese, I am sorry to see that you have become a target by the trolls, just by writing very informative postings. You and your organization have raised some very, very important issues during the last year.
These trolls and political operatives now have a giant “bulls-eye” on you. They criticize and attack you relentlessly, while usually adding nothing informative to the debate. Nor are they able to defend the actions of the Mayor or the Sinex proposal in any real way…they just spew rhetoric with no details.
This is from Emma Mulvaney-Stanak, VPP Chair.
Last Sunday, Mayor Weinberger addressed the Burlington Democratic Caucus and took direct aim at the VPP. He toggled between praising current Progressive Councilors and labeling local Progressives as reactionary and fringe. The Mayor also declared Progressives as anti-environment and anti-worker. He went on to claim credit for recent pro-environment and pro-worker efforts in the city, yet neglected to note that virtually all these efforts were started by Progressives. Progressives initiated Burlingtons move towards 100% renewable energy by positioning BED to purchase the Winooski hydro plant and by creating the McNeil plant. Progressives pushed recent pro-worker efforts such as supporting the Howard Center workers and maintaining livable wage standards at the airport. Weinberger opposed both measures. Clearly, the Mayors effort to give Democrats credit for Burlingtons successes ignores 30 years of Progressive leadership.
Attacking the Progressive Party and labeling the Party as fringe based on city council endorsements represents the Mayors poor knowledge of who our council candidates are and why they are running. Progressive endorsed candidates include: City Council President Jane Knodell, a champion of the recent development projects and many neighborhood revitalization projects, Charles Winkleman, an early educator and dedicated activist looking to address affordability issues for young people in Burlington, and Charles Simpson, an academic and champion of public transportation and strengthening neighborhood communities.
There are various opinions on the development project within the Progressive Party. While Winkleman and Simpson disagreed with aspects of the mall project, they should not be labeled reactionary by our Mayor. These candidates are running on more than one issue. Disagreement and discourse is healthy in a democracy and elected leaders should expect to be challenged. It comes with the territory. Its the job of leaders to go high in these moments. The Mayor went low.
I see she’s at it again, posting accusatory and divisive comments on her own articles! Please, Genese, give it a rest and try not to act so desperate! Also, please give people a chance to think for themselves instead of relentlessly inserting your voice into every single discussion remotely involving you! Thanks. Sincerely, Potential Constituent.
You are right on the money with your questions, Genese. Thank you. Everyone should know the real reasons why CLF, VNRC, and Local Motion endorsed this project: intense lobbying by Noelle MacKay, who lobbied her friends in these organizations. For these organizations to publicly endorse this project without polling their own members, is totally bizarre.
Miro hired Noelle MacKay as CEDO Director, and Chapin Spencer, as Public Works Director, specifically for their “connections” to these groups, and virtually no other reason. While these individuals are respectable and well-liked, there were many highly-qualified individuals with more experience at the time.
This Sinex project will further gentrify the City. Doesn’t everyone recognize that Burlington is becoming a City of just “rich and poor”, with a smattering of students? Miro’s policies are actually CREATING suburban sprawl, because he is pushing middle-income earners and young families out of the City. This is over-developing our rural areas, increasing traffic, drastically increasing our carbon footprint, and requiring long commutes. Hasn’t everyone noticed how traffic has increased substantially just in the last 3-4 years? And we still have no viable mass transit other than buses, which operate only on the major routes, and must sit in the same gridlock as other drivers, saving no one any time.
As any developer, Miro’s mantra is always just build more units, and the price of rents will somehow MIRACULOUSLY come down. But housing doesn’t work that way, as more is in effect that simply supply-and-demand. In Economic terms, housing demand is “inelastic”. That’s why major urban areas often have to implement some sort of rent-control or a similar program. Rents only come down when a City has a major exodus of people and an economic collapse…think Detroit.
I see that Genese Grill is criticizing the mayor directly now, after someone caught her posting anti-Weinberg comments under a pseudonym on the first article….nice try, but this “opposition for the sake of opposition” still seems pointless. Let’s work for realistic, tangible, fair and achievable Progressive goals. That is my idea of a Liveable City.
Just because Wieiberger somehow managed to get non-profits like AARP, Conservation Law Firm, and the Champlain Housing Trust to endorse his out-sized zone-busting overlay zone (in opposition, I may add, to their members’s and staff’s opinions in many cases), does not mean that voters who didn’t support his project oppose the values espoused by these organizations!
The real question is why these organizations endorsed a project that creates a special zoning giving away leverage for more affordable and senior housing in exchange for height bonuses, includes a gigantic parking garage, does not require an obligation for LEED certification, is in opposition to community-driven Plan BTV,, plans to use 22 million dollars of tax payer money to subsidize a millionaire, and will have only 50 apartments that are called affordable, but will be $1000 a month for a one-bedroom! These organizations owe their members an explanation!
Many people who voted FOR the zoning change did so because they were lied to about the benefits and the process (any environmental changes can be made without a 14 story playground for the rich; the few “affordable” units are not affordable, and 80 of the other units are for students, the process was rigged from the beginning, City Councilors voted against Max Tracy and Sharon Bushor’s attempt to raise the “affordable” housing percentage a mere 5% because they feared breaking the pre-development agreement!).
I also hope that Council President Knodell, given the Democratic nomination during the Mayor’s attack on his citizens, will stand up for the majority of her constituents in Wards 2 and 3 who voted against the zoning change. Please tell the mayor that the people who live in wards 2 and 3 are not anti-environmental, anti-senior, anti-labor, etc. Sincerely, Genese Grill