Controversial high-wage ordinance delayed due to flood restoration needs

by Carla Occaso, The Bridge

At least three properties damaged in the 2023 flood may be on the way to getting emergency federal funds needed to pay for elevation construction. Planning Director Mike Miller announced during the Sept. 25 Montpelier City Council meeting that Vermont Emergency Management awarded $900,000 earmarked for three buildings that have been substantially damaged. Another criterion is that such properties are not in line for a Federal Emergency Management Agency buyout.

This put Lisa Edson Neveu’s property at 195 State Street first on the list, Miller said, leaving a handful of other properties on that same stretch of road and a couple of properties on Elm Street next in line. The other properties in line for the elevation funds include 201 and 309 State Street, and then 117 and 120 Elm Street.

Edson Neveu has attended multiple city council meetings to advocate for funding for her badly damaged home in the wake of the flood. She said during previous interviews with The Bridge she has been living in the house with no kitchen and unfinished walls.

Before homeowners can get the money, they need to get engineering plans prepared to detail expenses. Miller said he squeezed this agenda item into the Sept. 25 meeting, even though he just got word on Sept. 24, because people need to get everything arranged by Dec. 26, 2024.

The city council voted unanimously to approve the expenditure of the grant funds and allocate the funds based on flood vulnerability.

Council Approves Country Club Road Policy
A new policy has been approved to govern types of use and behaviors allowed on the city-owned Country Club Road property. The policy states that acceptable uses include recreation such as dog walking and youth sports, but prohibits uses such as camping and being outside for any reason between dusk and dawn (except those staying at the winter shelter at the Elks Club building, which opened Oct. 1).

Assistant City Manager Kelly Murphy said she adjusted some of the policy wording following previous discussions.
Councilor Adrienne Gil asked how the policy fits in with the mission of the Homelessness Task Force. “I don’t want to have unintended consequences for not thinking through this policy,” Gil said, adding that she wanted to compare how the Country Club Road policy dovetails with the encampment policy.

Councilor Cary Brown said she doesn’t think the two policies conflict. The encampment policy acknowledges that camping is not officially allowed on city-owned property, but in some specific cases when people have nowhere else to go, that policy allows people without alternative shelter to camp out, and it also calls on city staff not to criminalize the behavior. “I think it is okay to pass this policy to say camping is not allowed and realize it doesn’t mean people can’t camp there,” Brown said.
City Manager William Fraser said city staff members have been following the encampment policy, and they have not issued any trespass orders nor arrested anybody for camping. He also said it is important not to openly allow camping because “you could have 100 people (at the Country Club Road property) and that is no exaggeration” considering that more than 100 people have already or soon will be losing their eligibility for the state-funded emergency shelter program.

“If we make this use permitted, we have no boundaries. No rails. It would be a permitted use,” Fraser said, and noted that there are still some people camping at the Country Club Road property and some in Hubbard Park. He added that those who are still camping in those places are people who are not causing problems.

Following a motion made by Brown for an amendment to allow consumption of alcohol in accordance with the same rules as Hubbard Park, the council approved the policy.

Action Delayed on Responsible Employer Ordinance
The city council voted to delay action on the Responsible Employer ordinance until a future meeting. Department of Public Works Director Kurt Motyka said he requested to have the ordinance put on hold because it hinders contractors, who are not bidding on public works projects and thereby are holding up repairs to infrastructure damaged by the flood. Motyka said the ordinance could slow down water line replacement, paving projects, and flood recovery. “There is a ton of work to do,” he said.

Mayor Jack McCullough had asked at previous hearings whether Motyka could find out if contractors are paying acceptable wages without enforcement, but Motyka said the School Street project contractor declined to detail what he is paying workers. The contractor did not want to divulge pay rates for fear other contractors might hire them away, Motyka said. He further said it is an unusual ordinance that requires extra administrative work.

Vermont House Rep. Conor Casey, who served on the city council when the ordinance was adopted, said the reason contractors don’t want to reveal what they are paying workers is because they want to keep wages as low as possible.
“I come from a labor background, so this is a subject that is close to my heart,” Casey said. He then explained how wages among construction workers vary, and that a lower-end laborer starts at $20.70 with state buildings projects but that same type of worker doing similar tasks might get paid $17.20 on city-controlled projects. Casey further said that when they approved the ordinance, some construction workers came in and told the council, “You want us to come in and build your town? We can’t even afford to live in this town with what you are paying us.”

McCullough suggested looking at the state statute, which may have prevailing wage language attached to state-run construction projects.

Councilor Sal Alfano moved to postpone further discussion to a third public hearing, which was approved.

Republished with permission from the October 5 issue of the Bridge, the community newspaper for Montpelier and surrounding towns.