by Carla Occaso, for the Montpelier Bridge

Money previously directed by the U.S. Congress to the city of Montpelier, known as “earmarks,” has been cancelled, according to the May 16 city manager’s report following discussion during the May 14 city council meeting. The city was notified that $2.5 million for water main replacement and $1.5 million to elevate a 20-unit building on Elm Street damaged by 2023 floodwaters will not be funded. 

The requests have been resubmitted to U.S. Sen. Peter Welch’s office for fiscal year 2026. The city is also seeking $100,000 to replace faulty water system valves and $5 million towards Community Center construction and renovation. And, applications were submitted May 2 to U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders’ office to accelerate water main replacement, replace sewer pump stations, and extend river melting systems.

Federal Building Update

City councilors voted unanimously to send a letter supporting the state of Vermont’s involvement in the sale of the federal building, 87 State Street, former home of the Montpelier post office. Peter Walke, of the Commission on Resilience and Recovery, said he has spoken to members of the Agency of Commerce and Community Development, who may be open to being involved in the purchase. If neither the state nor the city secure a purchase, then the building and its surrounding parking lots known as “the pit” will go to auction.

Planning Director Mike Miller said the building comes with deed restrictions pertaining to historic preservation. However, someone wanting to renovate the structure could present ideas to the Historic Preservation Commission and the Design Review Board. The first floor of the building suffered damage by being 42 inches under water during the flood. Historian Paul Carnahan said the state has interest in filing a letter of intent. Councilor Sal Alfano said the city should do what it can to control what happens to the building. Councilor Jim Sheridan said he would support such a letter as long as it does not come with any financial obligation.

City Council Extends Public Speaker Limit, Discusses City Plan

The council unanimously agreed to give the public an extra two minutes to address concerns not on the agenda at future meetings. The current limit is three minutes per person, but sometimes people overrun their time, or get angry when some people are cut off at three minutes while others are allowed to speak longer, The Bridge has observed. The five-minute-per-person limit “might mean we devote more time than we do now to general business and appearances, but it could make people less frustrated,” said Mayor Jack McCullough.

This proposal got support from the other councilors, with Sheridan thanking the mayor. Sheridan said this is something he thought should be done, and recommended it earlier in the year. Councilor Cary Brown suggested eliminating a rule that limits the time that can be spent on any topic during general business (held at the beginning of each meeting before agenda items are discussed) to 10 minutes because the rule is never mentioned or adhered to. This was unanimously agreed to as well.

This conversation about time limits grew out of a bigger conversation about how to run meetings, specifically, how to run the meetings concerning the city plan, or strategic plan as some alternately called it. Several councilors expressed a sense of urgency in getting this year’s annual priorities spelled out before budget season.

City Manager Bill Fraser said some people don’t like calling it a “strategic plan,” but that whatever it is called, it guides the priorities of the city council and the work plan for the city staff, as well as council agendas and the budget, he said. 

Brown said the plan should be kept simple, and the city council should target a few priorities. Sheridan said priorities should have been set during the second meeting of the year, which allowed the city staff to get started on the year’s priorities right away. He said he thought having a retreat was unnecessary, and that this year’s council has already “wasted a couple of months or so.”

“We are spinning our wheels,” he said. 

Alfano suggested putting time limits on priorities and goals, such as one-year goals, three-year goals, and 10-year goals. Councilor Adrian Gil suggested holding a special meeting to accelerate the process, so they don’t wait until July. Alfano said they should review the whole plan in detail, but Peter Kelman, a member of the public, said they should not go into details, but rather they should pick and choose where to start. “If you start looking at the specifics of the city plan, you will go crazy,” Kelman said.

Steve Whitaker, also a member of the public, said the municipal plan has a lot of “wishful thinking and pablum” in it, but lacks deadlines and milestones.

The first two public hearings to further discuss the plan will be held May 21 and May 28. The first meeting will be dedicated to public input on the plan. Meetings will be held at 6:30 p.m. at the Montpelier Senior Activity Center on Barre Street. For those who cannot attend in person, city councilors should be contacted directly or comments sent to Planning Director Mike Miller at mmiller@montpelier-vt.org or Communications Director Evelyn Prim at eprim@montpelier-vt.org and they will be forwarded to the council.