►
Description
From the City of Burlington:
Mayor Miro Weinberger and local leaders from healthcare and service organizations, labor, and the local business community share their concern and opposition of the proposed charger change on the Burlington Town Meeting Day Ballot that, if passed, would create a new independent department of the City for police oversight.
WHO:
Mayor Miro Weinberger
Matthew MacNeil, Director of Evaluation and Outcomes, Howard Center
Damion Gilbert, AFSCME Local 1343 President
Representative of University of Vermont Medical Center
Catherine Davis, President, Lake Champlain Chamber
Kelly Divine, Executive Director, Burlington Business Association
Ben Traverse, Ward 5 City Councilor
2/2/2023
https://linktr.ee/townmeetingtv
Town Meeting TV is a free speech forum and the ideas expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the Town Meeting TV trustees and staff. If you have a different perspective to share, we invite you to join the conversation! Create your own program or cover a community meeting or event. Contact maketv@cctv.org or call 862-3966.
Thank you for tuning into Town Meeting TV! Please subscribe to our YouTube channel and visit our website for more videos and information about how we open the doors to local government using community media. www.Ch17.TV
This video belongs to http://www.cctv.org and published with permission under Creative Commons License CCTV Center for Media & Democracy Programming is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
A
Good
afternoon,
everyone
thank
you
for
coming.
I
am
especially
thankful
to
the
broad
and
diverse
group
of
Burlington
Community
leaders,
who
are
here
today
and
who've,
come
together
to
share
their
concerns
about
the
proposed
Charter
change
before
this
before
voters
for
this
town
meeting
day,
I
want
to
start
by
saying
this
burlingtonians
rightly
expect
our
police
officers
to
be
held
to
high
standards.
A
This
has
been
a
core
value
of
our
community
for
a
long
time
and
it's
very
much
a
value
on
the
minds
of
burlingtonians.
Today,
we've
done
much
in
recent
years
to
ensure
that
we
live
up
to
that
value
and
chief
Murad
and
I.
The
city
council
and
the
police
commission
have
all
committed
to
more
of
this
hard
and
important
work
and
months
ahead
to
get
this
key
aspect
of
our
policing
policies
right.
A
This
proposed
Charter
change,
however,
does
not
get
community
oversight
right.
The
oversight
structure
detailed
in
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.
A
A
A
That
specific
language
includes
some
important
things
for
burlingtonians.
To
be
aware
of
it.
It
includes
creating
a
new
control
board
for
police
oversight.
That
would
be
an
entirely
independent
Department
of
the
city.
That
independent
Department
would
be
empowered
to
hire
staff
to
investigate
any
incident
to
choose
it's
what
it
wants
to
have
jurisdiction
over
and
to
discipline,
BPD
staff
without
input
from
the
chief
or
any
opportunity
within
the
city
system
for
appeal.
A
The
board
will
set
its
own
budget
and
it's
unclear
what,
if
any
oversight
over
that
budget?
The
city
council
and
the
mayor
would
have
board.
Members
cannot
include
anyone
who
has
ever
served
in
a
law
enforcement
agency,
but
they
do
not
have
to
live
in
Burlington,
unlike
every
other
commission
and
board
that
we
have
here
in
Burlington,
the
control
board
members
would
be
appointed
by
a
Committee
created
by
independent
nonprofits,
not
by
elected
official
officials
that
are
accountable
to
the
voters,
and
that
is
just
a
sampling
of
the
many
concerning
details
of
this
binding
proposal.
A
B
Thank
you,
I'm
Matthew
McNeil
from
the
Howard
Center
as
an
organization.
We
deeply
appreciate
that
the
decision
on
the
proposed
Partner
Charter
change
is
now
in
the
hands
of
the
voters
and
we
encourage
everyone
to
educate
and
inform
themselves
on
both
sides
of
the
issue.
After
our
own
thorough
review,
we
do
not
believe
that
the
proposed
Charter
change
is
in
the
best
interest
of
our
city,
nor
the
people
who
live
here,
work
here
or
visit
here.
Thank
you.
C
C
We
have
seen
a
significant,
significant
increase
in
violence
against
the
staff
in
red.
Over
the
past
24
months,
our
SAS
staff
have
sustained
head
injuries,
lacerations
broken
bones
and
in
several
cases,
facial
injuries
so
severe.
They
required
surgery
across
our
state,
they're
healthcare
workers,
who've
left
their
careers
or
been
permanently
disabled
as
well
to
an
increase
in
violence.
C
We
cannot
support
a
charter
change
that
would
have
the
potential
of
further
diminishing
the
Burlington
Police
Department's
ability
to
respond
to
violence
in
our
emergency
department
or
Hospital
I
greatly
fear.
This
measure
would
put
our
staff
at
further
risk
because
of
this
we
ask
voters
of
Burlington
to
vote
no
on
this
measure.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
Dr
Leffler.
We
we
got
next
I,
don't
think
he's
made
it
here
yet
I
know.
Damien
Gilbert
from
afscme
is
attempting
to
get
here.
He
had
a
personal
conflict
as
well
and
maybe
may
still
be
able
to
join
us
before
this
is
done
next
up,
I'd
like
to
welcome
Kathy
Davis
from
the
Lake
Champlain
Chamber
of
Commerce
Kathy.
Thank
you.
D
D
Another
important
part
of
our
conversation
in
our
mind
on
Public
Safety
is
about
building
trust
and
we
know
that
trust
is
earned
and
the
trust
goes
both
ways
and
we
think
that
excluding
anyone
with
law
enforcement
experience
from
this
board
doesn't
build
the
trust
we
need.
It
actually
breaks
it
over
the
past
couple
of
years.
D
Our
business
Community
has
proved
itself
to
be
more
resilient
than
any
of
us
could
have
imagined,
and
we
need
your
help
now,
though,
to
ensure
that
Burlington
remains
safe
for
all
who
live
here,
who
work
here
and
want
to
visit
here,
and
we
do
ask
that
residents
of
Burlington
vote
no
on
question
7
in
on
the
March
ballot.
Thank
you.
E
The
reality
today
is
that
people
who
work
downtown
and
visit
downtown
do
report
being
challenged
with
public
safety
issues
when
visiting
here
or
working
here,
staff
at
our
restaurants
and
stores,
they're
being
harassed,
they're,
being
threat,
threatened
and
assaulted
on
a
weekly
basis.
We
are
losing
businesses
like
LL
Bean,
who
are
leaving
town
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
but
they
always
cite
Public
Safety
as
one
of
them.
E
We
need
to
focus
on
rebuilding
the
Burlington
Police
Department,
not
tearing
it
down.
We
need
to
give
more
reasons
for
folks
to
come
and
work
at
the
Burlington
Police
Department,
not
more
reasons
for
them
to
leave
we're
at
a
critical
juncture.
This
ballot
question
puts
our
City's
Public
Safety
Services
at
Great
risk.
It
is
yet
another
risky
experiment
on
Burlington's
critical,
Public
Safety
Services.
E
E
A
So
I
want
to
also
note
and
thank
Kyle
Blake
from
the
Burlington
firefighters
Association
for
being
here.
It's
being
part
of
this
Coalition,
we
have
a
number
of
past
and
present
City
councilors
we're
going
to
hear
from
one
of
them
in
a
moment,
Ben
Traverse
and
we
in
addition
to
the
leaders
of
the
business
associations,
I,
want
to
thank
Mark,
who
is
currently
the
chair,
Mark
Boucher,
the
chair
of
the
Church
Street
Marketplace,
currently
and
long-time
retailer
on
Church
Street
for
being
here
as
well
and
and
Becky.
F
G
Thank
you,
mayor
Ben,
Travers,
Ward,
5,
City,
councilor
I
want
to
Echo
recognition
of
past
city
councilors,
as
well
as
current
counselors,
Sarah,
Carpenter
and
Maya
Brandt
for
being
here
today
and
agree
with
all
the
comments
you've
heard
thus
far.
I
think
the
group
you
see
here
today
is
just
a
small
part
of
a
broad,
diverse
Coalition
of
burlingtonians
who've,
expressed
great
concerns
about
the
selection
criteria
for
this
board.
It's
accountability
to
voters
the
breadth
of
the
authority.
G
It
would
be
given
the
extent
to
which
it
takes
away
the
chief's,
existing
disciplinary
Authority,
the
cost
of
this
department,
and
so
on.
It
is
an
untested,
unprecedented
experiment.
I
think
is
the
right
word.
A
couple
years
ago,
the
city
council
experimented
by
cutting
the
cap
of
officers
in
the
Burlington
Police
Department.
We
cannot
afford
to
experiment
again
with
Public
Safety
I'd
like
to
just
talk
a
moment,
though
about
process
and
public
engagement.
G
G
The
way
this
ballot
measure
has
come
forward,
however,
does
not
allow
for
the
kind
of
public
engagement.
Our
Burlington
Community
is
used
to
Charter
changes
almost
always
go
through
a
careful
deliberative
process
before
the
city
council,
where,
over
the
course
of
multiple
public
meetings,
we
work
together
to
come
up
with
a
measure
that
hopefully
has
broad
Community
Support.
G
G
This
is
not
how
we
should
be
legislating
and
regardless
of
how
you
feel
about
the
content
of
The,
Proposal
I,
think
the
lack
of
public
process
and
Community
engagement
on
this
is
reason
enough
for
people
to
vote
no
on
question.
Seven
I
do
want
to
acknowledge,
though
the
city's
mission
towards
Equity
I
think.
We
should
note
that
today
is
the
second
day
of
Black
History
Month.
G
G
We
will
be
introducing
a
resolution
before
the
city
council
asking
the
community
to
vote
against
this
resolution,
but
also
opening
an
opportunity
for
us
to
continue
to
hear
from
the
feedback
from
the
community
for
us
to
continue
to
listen
to
the
public
and
for
the
ordinance
committee
and
Charter
change
committee
to
act
over
the
coming
months
to
see
if
we
can
come
to
a
proposal
on
accountability
and
oversight
that
has
the
more
broad
support
of
the
folks
here
and
the
rest
of
our
community.
Thank
you,
mayor.
A
F
I
have
some
really
major
concerns
on
the
committee
that
the
Progressive
Party
is
bringing
forward
on
due
process.
I
believe
that
every
worker
that
is
part
of
a
union
has
the
ability
to
have
Fair
due
process
and
go
to
arbitration
I.
Don't
think
it's
wise
to
support
this
agenda
for
this
committee,
based
on
the
fact
that
the
individuals
and
even
the
officers
alone,
that
are
part
of
a
union,
already
have
a
disciplinary
action
process.
The
city
already
has
a
progressive,
comprehensive
policy.
F
Their
CBA,
which
is
pretty
current
probably
to
ours,
has
the
same
disciplinary
action
too,
and
it
can
be
Progressive
and
you
can
jump
the
steps
on
that
as
well.
I've
read
the
agenda.
That's
been
put
forth
for
this
committee
and
even
to
be
the
mayor
himself
or
the
city
council,
let
alone
directors.
They
have
to
be
a
city
resident
in
order
to
be
on
that
Council.
Any
part
of
any
other
committees
in
this
agenda
that
they
have
there
does
not.
F
F
F
I
will
not
be
in
support
and
I
will
talk
to
my
members
and
make
sure
that
they
know
as
well
not
to
be
in
support
of
ballot
seven.
So
I
really
thank
you
for
your
time
and
I.
Think
every
voter
should
really
take
the
time
to
read
what
they
put
together
and
I.
Think
it's
egregious
and
I'm
here
to
support
the
other
union
workers
to
make
sure
that
this
doesn't
go
forward.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
thank
you.
Mr
Mayor
I
appreciate
it.
Thank
you.
A
A
A
A
Sure
Courtney
and
you
know
I-
do
wanna
just
going
back
to
your
first
question.
Certainly
there
are.
There
are
additional
opportunities
to
to
speak
to
the
Chief
and
Union
directly
I
think
it
can
sound
self-serving
when
it's
coming
from
from
the
officers,
that's
feedback,
I've
heard
so
I
thought
I
thought
it
was
important
that
we
hear
today
from
a
really
broad
cross-section
of
burlingtonians
and
Burlington
organizations.
A
Another
example
is
just
that:
the
lack
of
accountability
that
that
this
board
has
is,
unlike
anything
else
in
our
in
our
system.
This
is
instead
of
being
again
appointed
by
the
city
council
and
the
mayor
as
we
do
with
all
of
our
other
boards.
The
way
this
appointment
process
happens
is
that
individuals
are
put
on
the
sport
first,
the
selection
first,
the
council
and
the
mayor
choose
a
group
of
non-profits
that
nonprofits
then
gets
to
create
a
an
appointment
committee.
The
appointment
committee
then
creates
this
board.
A
There
is,
then,
no
recall
provision
or
ability
to
remove
members
for
cause.
It's
it's
a
completely
unaccountable
on
accountable
board,
so
I
think
it
disciplinary
matters
can
be
depend
a
great
deal
on
the
details.
They
can
be
controversial,
they
can
be
a
tough
judgment,
calls
to
make
and
there
are
no
protections
in
place
in
the
way
this
Charter
language
is
written
to
ensure
that
fairness
standards
are
met
and
that
you
know
that's
the
heart
of
of
my
concern.
A
We
are
in
a
position
where
we
have
lost
more
than
40
percent
of
our
Police
Department.
We
have
put
millions
of
dollars
into
attempting
to
rebuild
that
department.
We
put
great
energy
and
effort
into
that,
and
we,
if
we
are
going
to
be
successful
in
that
effort
and
there's
some
early
signs
of
momentum
of
this
rebuilding
effort.
If
we
are
going
to
be
able
be
successful,
we
need
to
ensure
fairness
and
I.
A
So,
first
of
all,
yes,
I,
Chief
Murad,
the
administration,
the
city
council,
the
existing
police
commission
are
are
all
committed
to
a
strong
system
for
ensuring
accountability
for
our
police
officers
and
I.
Think
it's
important
to
not
be
lost
in
this
conversation
that
many
steps
have
been
taken
since
2016
to
and
even
before,
to
improve
to
ensure
that
our
officers
are
held
to
a
high
standards
to
ensure
accountability,
to
name
just
a
few
of
the
major
examples.
A
A
I
I.
We
are
working
under
an
executive
order
now
that
I
issued
in
in
late
2020
that
ensures
that
on
use
of
force,
innocence,
use
of
force
incidents
of
of
significant
public
interest
that
I
get
to
weigh
in
after
hearing
from
the
city
attorney
from
the
racial
Equity
inclusion
and
belonging
director
from
other
key
members
of
the
administration,
I
get
to
weigh
in
and
make
a
recommendation
to
the
chief
I've
long
thought.
So
those
are
just
three
examples
of
how
this
system
has
changed
recently,
maybe
the
most
important
one
I
haven't
said.
Yet.
A
Let
me
just
say
is
this:
we,
our
officers
today,
are
bound
by
a
new
use
of
force
policy
written
in
2020
that
goes
Way
Beyond.
What
the
former
policy
did
to
require
officers
to
attempt
to
de-escalate
and
use
only
the
force
that
is
necessary
to
deal
with
whatever
in
certain
they're
facing
that
was
such
a
strong
and
good
policy.
It's
become
actually
actually
Statewide
policy
in
many
ways
now
for
the
whole
state
of
Vermont.
So
many
many
steps
have
been
taken
in
recent
years.
We're
not
done
with
that
work.
A
I
would
support
going
farther.
One
thing
I
welcome
about
this
vote
is:
it
has
been
very
challenging
to
move
forward
with
any
possible
Charter
change
and
I
do
think.
Ultimately,
a
charter
change
is
necessary
to
get
the
right
balance
that
we
want
in
this
community.
It
has
been
very
challenging
to
advance
that
conversation
with
the
this
concept
of
the
control
board
being
out
there.
Gathering
support
from
petitions
there
has
been.
A
There
were
several
attempts
that
were
made
to
advance
a
conversation
about
Charter
changes
and
with
this
hanging
out
there
we
weren't
able
to
get
anywhere
with
that
conversation,
it
is
true
that
there's
also
there
was
a
use
of
a
a
new
ordinance
for
the
police
commission
that
would,
within
our
existing
Charter
language,
refine
and
detail
the
roles
and
responsibilities
clear,
give
them
some
additional
formal
Authority.
It
was
actually
Dan
Richardson
who
drafted
that
ordinance.
A
There
were
concerns
that
we
haven't
been
on
able
to
reach
consensus
on
that
and
I
do
in
some
ways
Trace
that
back
to
this
outstanding
question
about
what
the
charter
is
going
to
say
so
following
town
meeting
day.
If,
if
this
ballot
item
is
rejected,
I
think
there
will
be
a
new
there'll,
be
some
clarity
from
that
and
there'll
be
a
new
ability
for
us
to
attempt
to
find
a
consensus
on
what
further
changes
are
needed.
A
A
I
I
am
opposed
to
that
that
Charter
change
as
well.
My
concern
there,
you
know-
maybe
I,
don't
feel
quite
as
strongly
because
I
don't
think
quite
the
same.
The
stakes
are
not
quite
as
as
high
as
they
are
with
with
the
control
board.
Chart
change
where
I
really
do
feel
that
our
ability
to
provide
the
public
safety
that
burlingtonians
expect
is
is
hanging
in
the
balance
on
on
on
the
outcome
of
this
decision.
A
I
really
so
I
have
not
put
as
much
effort
you're,
not
finding
a
memo
from
me
on
that
today.
I
do
I.
Do
I
am
concerned
about
that
I.
You
know,
I've
been
in
this
role
for
11
years
now,
we've
had
a
number
of
instances
where
I
would
say,
usually
when
petitioners
organize
put
in
the
energy
to
bring
forward
some
kind
of
petition.
If
there's
a
request
for
a
ballot
item,
that
is
something
the
city,
council
and
I
take
very
seriously
and
the
great
majority
of
the
time
we
will.
We
will
resp.
A
We
are
we.
We
will
act
on
that
effort
and
and
put
the
the
item
on
the
ballot.
There
have
been
a
couple
of
instances
where
the
timing-
the
circumstances
surrounding
the
that
particular
issue
have
meant
that
it.
It
was
either
too
late
or
problematic
timing
for
for
going
going
to
the
voters.
A
couple
examples
of
that
I
can
give
you
are
with
City
Hall
Park.
We
had
spent
a
decade
of
work.
We
had
spent
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars.
A
We
had
gone
through
enormous
amounts
of
public
process,
Jane,
Odell
and
I
spent
much
of
the
summer
of
2018
sitting.
It
was
over
at
the
police
department
right
I
was
in
the
community
room
over
there.
Maybe
it
was
in
the
old
conference
room
11,
but
we
went
through
Tree
by
tree
to
determine
which
trees
we
removed,
which
ones
we
would
keep.
We
had
done
an
enormous
amount
of
work.
We
had
reached
a
political
compromise
that
there
was
broad
support,
for
we
were
all
out
to
bid
on
trying
to
build
renovate
City
Hall
Park.
A
When
the
petitions
came
in
saying
slow
down,
wait,
let's
wait
until
the
voters
get
a
chance
to
weigh
in
here
I
thought
that
was
I
thought
it
would
be
very
problematic
if
the
council
didn't
have
the
authority
to
do
what
they
did,
which
is
to
say
you
know
this.
This
is
coming
to
us
too
late.
We've
invested
too
much.
We've
literally
spent
too
much
we've
invested
in
too
much
energy
and
time
it's
time
time
to
go
forward
and
build
and
I
appreciate
it
very
much.
A
A
A
You
know
I
give
you
just
one
example:
I
mean
it's
it,
the
the
the
the
deficiencies
that
we
normally
see
as
I
try
to
detail
before.
There
are
many
things
that
we
typically
see
in
required
and
disciplinary
processes
that
are
required.
That
are
not
here
an
example
of
that.
You
know
I
think
we
think
of
an
appeal
right
as
a
basic
due
process
right,
there's
no
provision
for
an
appeal
within
the
city
system
in
in
this.
A
In
in
this
language,
the
only
appeal
possible
is
to
go.
You
know
to
is
to
to
go
to
court
to
go
to
Superior
Court,
there's
even
a
similar
provision,
and
you
know
something
I
heard
you
know
I
think
Damian
was
but
merge
math,
but
I
heard
there's
real
discomfort
on
their
sustainability
of
this
board
to
suspend
individuals
without
pay
for
for
two
weeks
with
no
opportunity
to
to
grieve
that
decision.
G
Sure,
just
from
my
perspective,
in
reviewing
it
and
I
do
sit
currently,
as
the
chair
of
the
ordinance
committee
I,
think,
there's
certain
Central
tenants
to
due
process
that
you
don't
see
in
this
measure
the
board.
The
proposed
board
has
incredibly
broad
Authority
with
respect
to
those
incidents
of
misconduct
that
they
can
take
action
on.
For
example,
the
board
can
take
disciplinary
action
on
any
misconduct
in
an
officer's
private
life
without
providing
any
guard
rails
around
what
is
misconduct
and
and
what
is
the
bar
over
which
the
board
can
take
action.
G
Another
important
part
to
due
process
is
that
you
will
be
heard
by
a
neutral,
independent
Arbiter
when
you
go
before
a
court
you're
heard
before
an
independent,
neutral
judge.
Here
we
have
an
unelected
board
selected
by
selection
criteria
that
we
don't
see
for
any
other
board
or
Commission
in
the
city
and,
as
the
mayor
pointed
out,
the
appeal
right
is
to
the
Superior
Court.
There
is
no
longer
the
kind
of
appellate
mechanism
that
you
see
right
now
here.
G
So
those
are
my
concerns
around
due
process,
but
I
do
think
the
concerns
even
go
well
beyond
the
due
process.
Rights
of
folks
here
have
laid
out
the
the
breadth
of
the
authority,
the
selection
criteria
that
goes
into
this.
The
fact
that
the
board,
unlike
any
other
board
of
commission
in
the
city,
is,
is
not
truly
representative,
I,
believe
of
our
community.
There
are
lots
of
concerns
there
as
well
foreign.