Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Yes.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So good afternoon, welcome to the Government Operations Committee meeting of Wednesday, February 18. For consideration first is the charter of the City Of Burlington, which passed the House earlier. This is H508. And we're gonna be joined today by folks from the city. We have our legislative council in as well. I don't know if anybody on the screen has time constraints. We'll take you first if if you do. If not, we'll and I'll let attorney Anderson not walk us through the whole bill again, but maybe I'll think what our concerns are, and then you folks can weigh in. The meat and potatoes Tucker, you can grab a seat. The meat potatoes of this was on the first 13 pages of the bill, which had been deleted in essence. And so on page 13, it starts again with an approval of the city of Burlington's charter. And then we have the rescue of Bill. So the question that came up in committee, and I was hoping representative Cooper would be here, but he isn't. The last section of the bill allows the city to, every five years, redesign the wards in the city to some degree. And our question, I guess, was and it says election area changes should not be made more frequently than once in five years. So every other five year period, there would be a census anyway. And I think that that would normally be the time at which most municipalities would take census figures and figure out, especially in cities where you have wards. It isn't maybe as necessary in Edin, Vermont, for instance, but in Burlington, certainly is. But there was no specific method for determining where those patterns of population might have changed or moved. So it seemed to us that that was something that either we should get involved with or we should not necessarily allow it every five years. I'm not probably setting it up very well, but, in other words, every ten years you got a census and then we can understand, you can take a look at the population of each ward. I'm trying to remember how many wards in Burlington, seven or eight.

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: There's eight wards and then four overlapping districts.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. But in the interim, in the intervening years between the censuses, whatever the plural of censuses come to that decision.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: I would be happy to start and I'll introduce myself too just for the record. I'm Jessica Brown. I'm the Burlington City Attorney, and I'm joined by my colleague, Assistant City Attorney Eric Ramakrishnan. And so for me, it's kind of easiest to think about this using an example. Housing is a big issue in Burlington right now and around the state really, but certainly in Burlington. And so if we think about building new housing, let's say an apartment complex in one of our wards, we could use census data because it is provided in between census years, right? It's ongoing data and information that we can obtain. Using census data, if we determine that a new housing development in a particular ward is going to cause a gap of more than 10% so if Ward 8 gets a new housing development and suddenly its population is going to the population of Ward 8 is going to be more than 10% greater than another ward or other wards, the proposed charter language here would allow us, without having to go through the charter change process, but with the approval of voters, to adjust the boundaries between Ward 8 and other wards or the neighboring wards to rebalance the population. So Eric, do you want to attempt to answer that as well if I'm not doing the best job?

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: I think Jessica's answer is correct. It the intent behind the from time to time, but not more often than five years, was, that we do have a number of housing developments coming online, and that could, create inequities between wards, as Jessica indicated. We wanted to make it not more than, once every five more often than once every five years so that it couldn't be abused in any way. But we wanted to give the city council some discretion to reset boundaries more often because we do expect to have housing come online, and we do expect that to generate inequities if we don't address them right away. And, generally, courts have said that, you know, you can have up to a 10% imbalance, and we'll call that good. But if you get over 10%, we we have concerns. We could end up with more than 10% imbalance, you know, in between in between decennial censuses. And the census keeps data all the time about population. They use the American Community Survey. They use projections based on past population trends, and it's generally considered to be good data. So there is census data more often than, you know, once every ten years when we when the census bureau does the hard count. So that that was the the logic behind those provisions.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. So we don't see.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Can I just clarify, maybe someone from the city council or someone else would be the person to answer that, but they're not here? So is the intent that the voters would have to approve that redistricting happens or that the voters would have to approve whatever redistricting is proposed?

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: It's the latter. Because right now, voter because it because under current law, every time we redistrict, it requires a charter change. And and I I would like to speak to the fact that that was, you know, just sort of an an anomaly of history. It was never planned that way. But under current law, we have to take redistricting first to the voters and then to the legislature. We're still proposing to take things to the voters just because they've become accustomed to that, and they they want to be part of the process. But we wouldn't have to go to the legislature, which can become an impediment to redistricting when we need to to achieve that balancing that Jessica and I talked about.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: That makes perfect sense. I what what I was just trying to clarify because the way I heard you propose the voters is that the voters would have to what the voters involved is that they would have to approve that you get to do redistricting, but what is

[Senator John Morley III (Clerk)]: in the

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: bill is that they approve the districts that are proposed. And so

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: that

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: is That's right.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: Okay. That's

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: right. That's right. Apologize. Yeah. I apologize for the confusion.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: No worries. I'm just looking to see if I had any other questions. I don't think I do for the city, Burlington. Think I buy Village Street Council.

[Senator John Morley III (Clerk)]: Senator Morley? I'm still confused on how they're gonna track and monitor population movement. I kind of heard two things. One was housing, potentially some housing going in and you monitor that, and then the other was you have access to Census Bureau information. I don't know if it's annually. I thought it was every ten years. I didn't know you could go get Census Bureau data like three years after the last census. And then my other question is, so you did have housing development, say it was a large one, in one ward, you don't know if the, I'm not sure you would know if the people that went to that development was from outside of Burlington, or moving from one ward to another ward. So I I I I'm a little confused though. Yeah.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: That's the legitimate question.

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: So if I may, I did, first of all, I'm not a demographer, so I may not be able to provide the, you know, best explanation. But to the to the limited extent of my knowledge of how these things work, the American Community Survey is an ongoing survey that the census does every year. Some of you I've received the survey in the mail a few times in my life. Some of you may have as well. So the the every ten years, because it's constitutionally required, because back in 1790 I forget what year. I apologize. The you know, we didn't have highly developed statistical sampling model, And so it was assumed that every ten years, we would do a hard count of every head in the country. But, you know, since then, demographers have developed really sophisticated statistical modeling tools. And so the census is actually keeping ongoing population data by by census area in between that ten years, and they do that through the American Community Survey and and other methods that are, as I said before, generally considered accurate. So we have ongoing census data. The the the measure would require the city to use census data that's built into the language. And census data, again, it it's it's constantly being updated. It's ongoing. It doesn't just come out every ten years.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Okay. Thank you.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So my question is, oh, go ahead, Jessica.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: Well, was just going to respond to your specific question about, I guess I don't, whether folks moved into a ward from outside of Burlington or moved from one ward to another, if it created this gap of more than 10%, like an imbalance of more than 10% between wards, that would be the issue that would trigger the redistricting.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yep. Okay.

[Senator John Morley III (Clerk)]: Okay.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Nielsen?

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: This is a question for legislative council, but yes. I understand the trigger that you're naming as the trigger for doing this. Does the language as it is in this bill represent that trigger?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: Good afternoon, Tucker Anderson, legislative counsel. There is no articulated trigger in the language, and to recap the discussion from last time and just to understand my charge here today and some of the questions that came up, you had asked me whether this sort of authority is available to other municipalities, charter municipalities of the state, what the triggers are for reapportionment broadly, the sort of data that might be used, And we covered some of the chartered municipalities the last time that I was in here. I would note that the language that's in front of you falls out of line with those municipalities, because it is more restrictive than the authority that is granted to every other city in the state in their charter. As I recounted last time, the authority that's delegated to the city of Barrie, the city of Saint All Saint Albans, Virgins, we can go through an entire list of, the municipalities that you use ward based voting, is a general authority to redistrict wards within the municipality as an ongoing process in response to population shifts. So the restriction, the five year restriction, is nuanced here, and I would note that in all those other charters, there's no specific trigger for what would come up. They could do it. It's similar, not the same, but similar to the triggers for periodic reapportionment at the state level. The constitution simply calls for periodic reapportionment. It requires it in the biennial session following the taking of the decennial census, but otherwise the general assembly has the ability to respond to dramatic populace shifts if they happen in between the decennial census. So what you would ask me to be prepared to discuss today is whether the city is restricting itself in a way that could actually hamper a response to necessary periodic reapportionment of the wards due to a dramatic population shift. So for example, if after the taking of the decennial census, the city reapportions the wards, there is a five year period where the city council does not have the ability, according to the express terms in the charter, to reapportion, which would require the voters, if they didn't, for example, that there was more than a 10% deviation, or that suddenly there's five new developments in a ward in a completely hypothetical situation, that they would have to go through a judicial process to compel reapportionment, right? They would make a constitutional claim that there is voter dilution because of the scheme. It was adopted after the decennial census.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: And I appreciate that. And I appreciate the problem the city is trying to solve, and I guess I am just I I think we had spoke the fir as a committee the first time we discussed this charter about maybe not doing the limit to five years, but instead putting a trigger in that gets to to what they're saying. Like, if x, then y. Right? Like, if the boards are out of balance by more than 10%, then you may redistrict. And I wonder with the city here if that better gets at the concern we have and solving the problem you are trying to solve.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: I mean, the overarching problem that we're trying to solve is that if we do think that we are unconstitutionally imbalanced, right, our wards, right? And I should have said that, I'm using 10% as a touchstone because that's what the courts have sort of identified. Like if there's this 10% imbalance, that's considered minimal, but kind of beyond that, they want to see reapportionment. So we want to be able to do that without it requiring a charter change that requires going to the voters and then to the general assembly. That's our overarching goal. And if having specific language that triggers when we can redistrict or adjust our wards versus kind of limiting ourselves. I mean, I think we were trying to address potential concern that without some sort of limitations that the power could be used, necessarily just to actually address population imbalance in wards, but to try to gain political advantage, that sort of thing. But if it makes more sense to the committee that we have specific language identifying sort of when, like what triggers when the city can redistrict versus limiting ourselves to a certain time period, then I don't think that negatively impacts what we are trying to do ultimately. Yeah,

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: That's really helpful for me to know. And I appreciate, I just want to say thank you to this, to everyone who worked on it in the city and sort of acknowledging the point in time we're at where we really need to proactively say like, we don't want to disappear. So that makes sense to me. And I and I wonder if language that sort of now that you've heard the sort of intent, if language that get that, like, if the population shifts to a point, you know, then the city may redistrict and eliminating the five year mark so that the limit and the protection is what allow what is the trigger rather than a time frame. Is that language based on the intent you've

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: heard that is craftable? I can certainly do that, and I would note that, if you eliminate some of the limitations that Burlington has put in there and grant the general discretion to reapportion, that the discretion to reapportion based on population shift is part and parcel of that. So you would there is language that I can show you from the other charters that has a clause stating, you know, as necessary to ensure equal distribution of population on rewards.

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: If I could add a point Sure. I I think this is all excellent, and I think, you know, the primary challenge for Burlington is just we we want to be able to reapportion, and we want to be able to be responsive to population shifts without having to seek special legislation every time, which nobody else in Vermont has to do. And so however we get there, I think, is is, you know, what the city was trying to achieve. But I I I do just wanna comment that some of these issues, I I feel like, are more statewide issues than Burlington specific issues. And so I I do want to suggest that to the extent we're trying to sort of solve for a larger problem, maybe that should be done through the general laws rather than necessarily working with the language the voters approved. That said, again, I I think the bottom line is the city just needs the discretion to respond to population shifts, period.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I think the concern with the language that was approved by the voters is it actually limits your ability. Like, if if next year so I mean, okay. If in 2031, you've done your reapportionment, and in 2033, a huge housing development goes and you can't fix it with the language that you sent us. You have to wait an additional two years because it's within the five year window. So I think that the problem we're trying to solve in the language is giving you the authority to actually respond without hampering on a time frame. But yeah.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So can I ask, what's the, average size of a ward in Burlington, the eighth wards? How many people?

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: We could figure that out quickly. So we've got 43,000.

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: It's 5,000 approximately.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Can you identify yourself, sir?

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: Yeah, yeah. Bergman, I'm Ward 2 City Councillor. I was the chair of the Charter Change Committee when it when this item was put forward to the voters. I was a twenty year city attorney for the city of Burlington as well and also then served as a city councillor in the 1980s.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So the language that we have before us would allow the city council to, in essence, redraw lines on a map to make all those eight words as, representative as possible.

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: I I I mean, I I think I need to to clarify that right now, you have a process which has the city council drawing lines and then putting it for the before the voters for a charter change. And this is really no different in that regard. And it is a hard process in and of itself. Anybody who has gone through that, who's been on a committee to reapportion districts knows that. And it often requires there to be certain adjustments. We did that with the University Ward, our Ward 8 when the populations came up. So this is, I think the necessary in the overarching point of view, the necessary change that we need to have to be able to facilitate our ability to best draw the lines here.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah, there's two members of this committee that were on the reapportionment board when both the House and Senate drew new lines.

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: So you know.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Just trying to think

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: In '22, it

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: was terrible.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: '22. Oh, sorry. Yeah. Obviously, if you get five people in a room, you're not gonna have a 100% agreement about where those lines should be, and that was true. Okay. They wouldn't in my way of thinking, there would have to be a very large housing development which could impact to the degree that I'm thinking about maybe even more than one or two developments in order for it to really get out

[Senator John Morley III (Clerk)]: of whack. I don't know.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Well, Cambrian Rise will do that tomorrow.

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: Yes. Yes. So you have Cambrian Rise and that was a major thing. You had university developments that really caused us to have to figure out a way to create ward in the center part and our first attempt to that created a salamander effect, you know, because you've gone through it, all of the political machinations that go and people are very particular in the city, to their geographic locations. We have a new North End. You you know, those of you who know Burlington, you have an old North End. You've got a downtown. You've got a South end. But you start to get areas of the city where large development is only possible and it really does create that dynamic tension. So not only is Cambrian Rye is one of those places and the university was one, but we're gonna have, if we are lucky, a very large housing development in the South End around what was across from the old General Electric plant. Now the Hula Building and where the social security office is. And so we're looking at, Eric or Jessica, correct me, know, 1,100 units there. It's gonna it it it will be wonderful for the state of Vermont. Really wonderful for our housing issue. Really dealing with the the request that we build housing for, you know, particularly for workforce development housing. But that is going to create some major redistricting issues here because of just the size and the scope of it. So I personally, as somebody who shepherded that, who went through both as a staff person, as an attorney for the earlier redistricting and then as a city councilor. I really do appreciate that flexibility that you're talking about. And I think it is very consistent with what we put forward to the voters and what people are looking for, which is that at the end of the day, voters get a chance to say, this is where we wanna divide Ward 2 And 3. Do we wanna, you know, divide the line on Elmwood Avenue from the post office to what used to be called H. O. Willard School, now it's the Arts Academy, or do we want to put it up and down North Street so that it goes from the lake, you know, to the, to like Willard Street to Route 7. And, you know, it actually makes a big difference for people, but that's, you know, that's what we do with the with the votes and have you. And that is the most fundamental question that we have so that then we can just once the voters say, yeah, this this lot these lines make sense, then we can implement it instead of this important but hard process that we have here today and what you've had elsewhere at other time?

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So if I'm hearing senator Vyhovsky's suggestion, it would appear that we if we just left the five year reference point out Yes. And allowed the city council, I'll get to my question here in a minute, to, when they felt it necessary based on some data to, redraw lines that they could do that. I understand why you hesitated to allow that to happen on an annual basis. I really do. But here's my question. Does it make sense for us to reference census data in order for this to, take place? In other words, I don't know how else you would do it. So maybe you would do it by default anyway, but I don't know what how you would feel if we said that you had to use the intervening census data that you get on an annual basis in order to say, hey. Wow. Look at what happened in the last twelve months. Ward 4 is way out of whack with, the rest of them. We need to draw redraw redraw the lines. So how do you feel about taking the five year period out, but then making sure that there's some reference about how you are going to determine, the population shifts?

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: I was just trying to look for the statute that I had up and then it went disappeared on me on my computer. I mean, I think that we do reference in the the charter change, the the the census data. And I think that the the removal of the five year is sort of consistent with what we were the overarching thing that we were trying to do and just trying. I I don't think it's very it will be very practical to be changing districts every two years, every three years, right? I mean, it's just a hard process any way you look at it. So the removal of the the five years, I think, is consistent with the voters intent and it having a a reference to to census data because at the end of the day, that's the foundation on which we've got to figure out what parcels go where.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah, you're right. It does say in accordance with data produced by the US Census Bureau. Could it mean at some point that a polling location which existed before in Ward 5, but based on new lines, is no longer where those people will go to vote?

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: Yes, which is why I think you allowed us to change that restriction last charter change, so that we could put it in a place that was proximate if it made sense. And in fact, we had to do that for one of our wards because we've traditionally put them in the Edmunds Middle School gym and then it actually moved out of the ward and there was nowhere else that it could be done. And we have done that now under the previously amended charter for Ward 6, maybe even Ward 8 and Ward 2, because my ward, the voting was at the H. O. Wheeler School, Arts Academy, and we had to move it to the one centre on North Street because that was under renovation. We needed to totally redo the school and it was closed for several years. Now we're going to go back to our historic place. So, yes, I think we have taken care of that. Sorry for all the detail.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: No. No. It's fine.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I so I appreciate the sort of concern and what we don't wanna see happen, right, where someone says, oh, I don't like the results of those elections. Let's redistrict. Do you feel that doing what chair Collamore and I have suggested protects against that adequately if we remove that five year piece? Or is I wanna really give you the flexibility and the protection protection that that that I hear is the intent of this charter change. So

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: I I mean, yes. I I I do. I think that there are institutional and cultural reasons that don't, you know, move us to be doing redistricting easily. And at the end of the day, order to figure out what the, whether you need to or not, cause it's not a pleasant, you guys have to do it like we were just talking, it's not a pleasant process to go through. The census becomes the, you know, the driving force for understanding if there are imbalances or not. And there will be imbalances as time goes on, just because of the opportunities for housing development that exists in a variety of different places in the city. There are just not that many places where you can get the type of infill development that we're looking for. And so that will then create those changes. But people are also, like I said, pretty set in understanding their neighborhoods and their communities. And you undermine that at your political risk.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah. I I know you said there are people in Rutland, we did it every ten years. They still go to the old place nine

[Senator John Morley III (Clerk)]: years later.

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: They still

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: don't how many people push places. Why can't I go to here?

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: Yeah. Exactly. Yes. Seeing it all the time.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. So this is a question for counsel that may lead to a question for you, and that is if you have had time to look and see what general law provisions there are about the requirement that this be done at least every ten years?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: So I am not aware of a general law requirement for, reapportionment, specifically because these are systems that are set up by charter.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Okay. So then that does pivot me to a question for the city of Burlington. I can't imagine, given the dynamic nature of the city of Burlington, that you could imagine this happening. But I wonder if there is what the thoughts are would be on sort of curtailing on that end too, saying you may do this if you need to, but you must do this at least every ten years.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: I don't I mean, we've talked about this because it was brought to our attention that it might be a concern. And it's hard to imagine, to your point, it's hard to imagine, like that we have the opposite problem, right? That we most likely will, that I think you've identified, like, would we limit ourselves to every five years and potentially risk that two years passes and we actually need to redistrict? So that I think is more likely than that ten years would go by and we wouldn't wanna redistrict or we But I think that your proposal, rather than limiting ourselves by a number of years, once every five years, Limiting is not exactly the right word, but perhaps including language that we may do this if based on Census Bureau data, we see that the population of one ward has now, that there is this more than 10% imbalance, provides the limitation so that the power is not abused, right? But also says, when this happens, basically you need to do it. And if that's less than five years from the last time you did it, that's okay. But it would mean that ten years couldn't go by. And if there's a 10% or more imbalance between wards, the city wouldn't be allowed to let ten years go by and not do anything. But I also just wanna sort of reference a point that Eric made earlier, because I don't think there's any language in the charters of any of the other municipalities around reapportioning wards or districts that says they have to do it every ten years. And so that maybe is sort of a state legislation consideration as opposed to specifically putting that language in Burlington's charter or any other municipal municipality's charter.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: That makes a lot of sense. And I really like the proposal and the sort of way you framed that of of sort of, if one ward is out of balance in such a way, then you will redistrict. Like, it's it's less of a may you may redistrict and more of a you shall redistrict.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: Right.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I think that that seems like the solution to get the city of Burlington the the protection of this being abused and the the flexibility to do this that they're looking for. And I'm happy to work with Tucker to figure that language out.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Senator Clarkson. I can't even imagine this being abused given how torturous the process is.

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: That's right.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: I mean, I would

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: not use the court abused in this country.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: What I heard from from the intent of the folks here, though, is they wanted to put some protection on that. So I my goal is to deliver to my constituents in Burlington what they're asking for.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So we've been joined by, representative Bob Hooper. And I'm just kind of curious. I'm not, trust me, pointing fingers or anything. Did this come up at all in the house when when the, charter was talked about, or are we chasing something that doesn't really need to be chased?

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Or yeah.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: The five year we fight them? Yeah. Apologize for being

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: late. That's okay. You can take the chair, Bob.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: We had a conversation about it and oh, sorry.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Hooper.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: We had a late conversation about it and recognized that information on being able to actually draw the lines was probably pretty much consistent and contingent upon what Census Bureau would put forward. There are a couple areas in Burlington, particularly where Vero was building out in the New North End or on that dividing line, where the population probably should shift pretty quickly. Before you got here we talked

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: about Cambrian Rise and Bulleup.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Say again.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Before you got here we did discuss the population impact of Cambrian Rise But

[Representative Bob Hooper]: I mean, that's gonna have an impact on three or four words possibly by balloon everybody. So waiting for a census that takes in most of the city would probably be advisable for that also. What we also heard before you got here is that there is yearly census data available. Yeah. And

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Since it's every year? Right.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: And the the the language as is being proposed is that they shall do this if that data indicates. Yes. Basically unconstitutional, regardless of the timeframe. Yeah. And so I was just wondering that, yeah.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Can you give me, or maybe the whole committee, a sense of how long has Burlington had eight wards? Did it start with just four? And as the city continued to grow, it it created new wards? Or do you have any knowledge of that? Or anybody else?

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: 2012 or '13 is when we create, we went from seven to eight awards. And then in the last go round, which I think was in '22, Yeah. We we created the districts and and part of that just relates to the number of city councillors and the debate as to how many city councillors to have, you know, is 12 enough? Is 16 too much? Is, you know, is eight the right amount? It's it's

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Well, on our level, there was consternation in some areas about what we used to call the six pack from Burlington or from Chittenden County. And in the end, Chittenden County wound up getting an additional senator, Chittenden North, that didn't exist before the reapportionment. So it's obvious that Burlington is continuing to grow. I'm from an area that unfortunately is seeing the opposite happen. So I I mean, that's way things go. People move for different reasons and good for them. Yes.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Can I ask just a logistical question? Sure. If I craft language with, our legislative council to do what we all talked about, who would be the best person to send it to, to take a look at? I don't wanna do something that you all haven't gotten to see and look at and be like, yep, that that does what we want it to.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: Please send it to me, and I'll share it with my colleagues in the state attorney's office. We'll review it, and certainly can share it also with any with the council president and maybe the caucus chairs for the council.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Perfect. Thanks. Logistically, we wanna know who's Oh, yeah. To do the work with.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: If we amend it, go back to ops committee.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: May I

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: ask you a clarifying question? Given the number of counselors that's gonna refer to, how many city councilors are there? 12.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Right.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: So There are 12. Each board has one and then all and then two wards combined to make a district, and so there are district counselors as well. Eight ward counselors and four district counselors.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: How often do you have split folks that are exactly split? I mean, that's awkward to have an even number.

[Gene Bergman (Burlington City Councillor, Ward 2)]: There's seven Sometimes.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: Five progressives right now, so we hardly ever have split

[Representative Bob Hooper]: votes. Thanks.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Any other questions from the committee? Okay. Help us. Anything else you'd like us to know on screen?

[Eric Ramakrishnan (Assistant City Attorney, Burlington)]: There is one point. I I almost feel like I don't need to make it because I think you want grasp what we're trying to do. But, one that I did get into the record in the house and just wanna explain here. The the the whole reason why we a question that came up before the house committee was, you know, well, what was the intent behind requiring a charter change and going to the legislature, in the first place and and and what brought that about? And just to clarify that in case that's a question in anyone's mind, it's in 1949, we didn't have one person, one vote. That was a constitutional principle that was announced in 1964. And so it was it was sort of now now we take it for granted, but at once point a time, it wasn't really heard of. And so the idea of having imbalance population imbalance between constituencies was an accepted part of life. So when the with the original word boundaries and the locations of polling places and things like that were written to the charter, it was expected to be like that for all time. And so it wasn't an intentional thing that we would have to go to the legislature when we wanted to boundaries. We just didn't think we were ever gonna change them. So, anyway, thank you for letting me, point that out.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I really appreciate that historical knowledge. Thank you. And I think it sort of speaks to why it's important to get the language right because where we're sitting at at this point in time may not be where we're sitting seventy years from now. You know? We're talking about a Burlington that never thought they'd have to change the district lines. And now we're like, oh, you might have to change them every two years. We don't know. So

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: thank you.

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: Thank you very much for having us back.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. We'll, send something along, I'm sure.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Great. Thank you. You have

[Jessica Brown (City Attorney, Burlington)]: a good Take care.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So, committee, we also have the Essex charter to, consider. But why don't

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: we