Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger unveiled on Tuesday a “unity campaign” of city councilors — along with former mayor Peter Clavelle — who are urging residents to vote “yes” on four city ballot items.
While ostensibly about all four local issues on the November 8 ballot, the news conference — held along Cherry Street in the shadow of the Burlington Town Center mall — focused mainly on the two most controversial items: a downtown zoning change that would allow the mall redevelopment to go forward and $21.8 million in tax-increment financing for street and infrastructure improvements around the proposed development.
Weinberger pitched the coalition as a broad representation of city districts and political parties. Among its members: Progressive Burlington City Council President Jane Knodell; Independent Councilor Dave Hartnett; Democratic Councilor Joan Shannon; and Clavelle, a former Progressive mayor whose most recent term ended in 2005.
Councilor Tom Ayres, a Democrat, isn’t officially a member of the group but showed up in support, he said.
Meanwhile, members of the outspoken Coalition for a Livable City, which is against the redevelopment plan, watched the sidewalk gathering and handed out literature urging passersby to vote “no” on the zoning change and TIF proposal.
The livable-city group has been a constant presence at city meetings and at other events speaking out against the $250 million redevelopment proposal, which includes mixed-use buildings of up to 14 stories tall. They ran a full-page advertisement in Seven Days against the proposals.
Weinberger and the councilors said they encourage debate about the issues but accused the group of misleading Queen City residents.
“Claims about the TIF diverting money from Burlington schools, that existing zoning would give you more affordable housing and that we would get a better development without this zoning change are factually incorrect,” Shannon said.
Clavelle, who served as mayor from 1989 to 1993 and again from 1995 until 2005, called the current mall a “dinosaur” and championed the redevelopment as an important chance to make over downtown.
“Jobs will be created, housing will be provided, the tax base will be expanded, and it will position Burlington to remain the cultural, the economic, the educational center of this region,” he said.
Also on this year’s ballot is an $8.4 million bond — which needs a simple majority to pass — to replace aging water pipes, along with a separate $27.5 million bond for other capital improvements, like street and sidewalk repairs. The latter bond needs two-thirds of the city’s residents to vote ‘yes’ to pass.
“Prior generations have been willing and able to make the sacrifice necessary to have strong public infrastructure,” Weinberger said. “And they have also at critical times in our history taken proactive steps to make sure the city stays strong economically, and relevant, going forward.”
All four councilors in the unity campaign were among the eight who voted to put the zoning change to the voters on November 8. The TIF proposal received only one “no” vote, from Councilor Max Tracy, a Progressive who is also against the zoning change.
The group is raising money through the Partnership for Burlington’s Future, a political action committee Weinberger created in 2012 to advocate for local ballot questions. With Election Day just a month away, the group plans in the coming days and weeks to hold town hall meetings with the mayor, house parties across the city and a “telephone town meeting” the Sunday before November 8 during which Weinberger will dial up all the landline numbers in the city simultaneously. Residents can opt to participate, as if they were on a giant conference call.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Thanks Lea Terhune! It’s time we expose the fear mongering by the Mayor and some City Councilors. The city is not doomed if this project as currently proposed is shot down. It just says we need to go back to the table and make it right and in scale with Burlington. If the Mayor had been paying closer attention to what plan BTV participants, Planning Commissioners and clear-thinking City Councilors have said, he may have sought a more agreeable height to begin with. Sinex has a lot invested in the project so far, my sense it that he will work with the city to scale this thing down. Predictions of dire consequences are veiled attempts to make voters feel we are in an all or nothing situation which forces us to accept heights that are wrong for Burlington. That’s not accurate.
HILLARY STOLE THE ELECTION. We NOW have entertainment either way. Watergate,MONICA,Arkanside,wall Street,HAITIAN Ritz Carlton,Donors,Donors,Donors, In fact time Warner (CNN)8th largest donor to HRC campaign. Or Trump. We really can’t lose! 🙂 Wow side note sorry.
Vote NO on #3 and #4 if you think 14 stories and up to 185ft is too tall.. There is a Plan B: “Were the project to be scaled back, Sinex said HFF could recalibrate and continue to solicit fewer lenders and investors.” http://vtdigger.org/2016/07/30/burlington-…
Bernie Bros never existed, eh? They were created by Clinton, eh?
To the best of my knowledge, Green Mountain Boy doesn’t lie. Ass does. Regularly. He even believes there’s such a thing as Bernie Bros although everyone else realizes they were made up by Clinton operatives to hide the nastiness by Clinton Clones. “Oh, no, the sky is falling! They must be sexist if they don’t like Hillary” Hysteria that did them no good among the thousands of women who preferred Bernie to Hillary.
I’m not afraid to use my name, Mr. Ass. Are you?
Weinberger and co. have managed to package a behemoth height allowance in a zoning ordinance that has other aspects that aren’t bad, or even good in some cases. But the height is really bad and very off the mark from what people have expressed about height for years. Some say City Council nearly came to blows over the last height battle in 08-09 which resulted in our current zoning. 2013’s Plan BTV shows majority satisfaction with building heights as they are and recommends “human scale”. So where did this height come from? And why does it seem to keep going up? It was 160 feet but with the mechanicals and P&Z discretionary allowance, we’re looking at at least 175. Lately I think City staff saw an opportunity when Sinex came along. “Tell the people it’s 14 stories or you’ll walk!”. In any case, the height is wrong for Burlington. Vote NO on item 3. And we’ve gotten used to streets not being connected. Let’s use the TIF on something truly needed. Vote NO on item 4.