Burlington mayor tells council to rewrite downtown business resolution
BURLINGTON, Vt. (ABC22/FOX44) – Mayor Emma Mulvaney-Stanak wrote Tuesday that she hopes the Burlington city council will work again on a resolution they passed May 19 that aims to help businesses and tourism on Church Street.
The most contentious part of the resolution so far has proven to be a requirement for the nonprofit collective Food not Bombs to move its free food distribution out of the downtown parking garage. Originally, the resolution called for the distribution to move out by the middle of June. City council took out this requirement in a majority vote, and then added a less stringent requirement for the operation to submit a plan to move out by the middle of July.
City Council passes resolution for downtown issues
'I fully support our locally owned small businesses, and I also fully support mutual aid for those in need,' wrote Stanak in her official statement. 'I do not believe that these two things are mutually exclusive. Burlington is a City where everyone deserves to exist with dignity.'
Mulvaney-Stanak is a member of the Vermont Progressive Party. The resolution passed 8-4 in the city council on May 19, with all 7 Democrats and one Progressive in favor.
Small businesses express concern about conditions in Downtown Burlington
Downtown business owners and Democrats on the council have said that while they do not lack compassion, they've waited long enough. 'We need to be honest about the choices that we're making here,' said councillor Becca McKnight at the previous council meeting. 'The food distribution service is not permitted by ordinance in our garage.'
In her statement, Mayor Mulvaney-Stanak also criticized 'polarization and harmful escalation'. Earlier this month, business owners released an open letter calling for action relating to the conditions downtown; a fake second letter using divisive language went viral online last week.
The mayor announced that her office will be hosting a public forum at the Fletcher Free Library on May 29 at 5:30 p.m. to have a 'discussion on homelessness and mental health, and we will discuss concerns related to the downtown', in advance of the next city council meeting on Monday, June 2.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
9 minutes ago
- The Hill
Jeffries declines to embrace Musk amid the billionaire's feud with Trump
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is keeping his distance from Elon Musk even after the billionaire's extraordinary public rebuke of President Trump and the GOP's domestic agenda. Asked Friday if Musk's bitter break from Trump presents Democrats with an opportunity to form a strange-bedfellows alliance with the tech titan, Jeffries shifted the conversation immediately to the Democrats' efforts to kill Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' 'The opportunity that exists right now is to kill the GOP tax scam,' Jeffries told reporters in the Capitol. 'It's legislation that we have been strongly opposed to, and uniformly opposed to, from the very beginning. … It rips health care away from millions of people. It snatches food out of the mouths of hungry children. And it rewards billionaires and [GOP] donors in ways that are fiscally irresponsible.' Pressed on whether Musk should be 'welcomed back' to the Democratic Party after the high-profile split from Trump, Jeffries punted again. 'Same answer,' he said. Jeffries cautious remarks demonstrate the limits of the old adage that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. They also highlight the potential difficulties Democrats would face if they embraced a polarizing and nationally unpopular figure in Musk — one they've spent most of the last year bashing for heavy spending on Trump's campaign and, more recently, for his role in heading Trump's efforts to gut the federal government. Still, some Democrats say Musk's influence is significant enough that Democrats should make the effort to try to court him to their side amid the Trump feud. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who represents parts of Silicon Valley, is leading the charge. 'If Biden had a big supporter criticize him, Trump would have hugged him the next day,' Khanna posted Thursday on X, which is owned by Musk. 'When we refused to meet with @RobertKennedyJr, Trump embraced him & won. We can be the party of sanctimonious lectures, or the party of FDR that knows how to win & build a progressive majority.' Jeffries isn't going nearly so far. But he has welcomed Musk's attacks on Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' and the Republicans who voted for it. And he aligned Democrats with Musk's sentiments that the package piles too much money onto the federal debt, a figure the Congressional Budget Office estimated to be $2.4 trillion. 'To the extent that Elon Musk has made the same point that everyone who has voted for this bill up until this moment should be ashamed of themselves, we agree,' Jeffries said. 'And to the extent that Elon Musk has made the point that the bill is a 'disgusting abomination,' we agree. And to the extent that Elon Musk has made the observation about the GOP tax scam — that it is reckless and irresponsible to explode the deficit by more than $3 trillion, and that potentially could set our country on a path toward bankruptcy — we agree.' 'These are arguments that Democrats have been making now for months.'
The Hill
10 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump administration issues rule undermining Biden car fuel efficiency rules
The Trump administration on Friday took a step to undermine Biden-era rules that tightened fuel efficiency requirements for cars and trucks. The Transportation Department published an interpretive rule that says that the Biden administration improperly considered electric vehicles as a way to make vehicle fleets more efficient While this determination does not formally end the Biden-era rule, the Trump administration indicated that while the rulemaking process plays out it may not enforce the Biden-era standards. 'Pending the rulemaking process for the establishment of replacement standards, [the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration] will exercise its enforcement authority with regard to all existing… standards in accordance with the interpretation set forth in this rule,' it stated. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, in a written statement, accused the previous administration of trying to push an electric vehicle 'mandate.' 'Under President Trump's leadership, we are making vehicles more affordable and easier to manufacture in the United States,' Duffy said. 'The previous administration illegally used [Corporate Average Fuel Economy] standards as an electric vehicle mandate.' The Biden administration issued a rule requiring cars to be about 2 percent more fuel efficient each year while heavy duty pickup trucks and vans would have to be 10 percent more efficient each year from 2030 to 2032 and 8 percent more efficient in the years after. President Trump has long talked about getting rid of the Biden administration's efforts to promote electric vehicles. He has argued that these efforts harm consumers' freedom to choose what kinds of cars they want to drive and could lead to strife for autoworkers. Democrats, meanwhile, have argued that shifting toward more electric vehicles would mitigate air pollution and climate change – and put the U.S. at the forefront of an emerging market. While Trump has long lamented the previous administration's electric vehicle policy, the release of the administration's determination comes just one day after an explosive feud emerged between the president and Tesla mogul Elon Musk. The Transportation Department rules came alongside a separate, more stringent regulation for vehicle tailpipe emissions from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that in practice has a greater effect on the vehicle market's fuel efficiency and is not impacted by the Trump administration's latest maneuver. However, the department's fuel economy rules would act as a backstop if the EPA rule was to be overturned. Republicans are attempting to eliminate that rule through their 'big, beautiful bill.'
The Intercept
11 minutes ago
- The Intercept
Democrats Hate Their Own Party. The People Can Take It Back.
At a recent rally at U.S. Steel in Pennsylvania, Donald Trump stood in front of a row of workers in hard hats and safety vests and proclaimed, 'We're right now on the verge of passing the largest working class tax cuts in American history.' He framed his 'Big Beautiful Bill' — a massive tax cut for the wealthy — as a blue-collar blessing. The sleight of hand is classic Trump, and what makes his appeal to voters enduring. 'The Republican Party is building the multiracial working class coalition that the Democrats have always said that they want to build,' says David Sirota, founder of The Lever and a former Bernie Sanders speechwriter. This week on The Intercept Briefing, host Jordan Uhl speaks to Sirota and politics reporter Jessica Washington about how Trump has successfully used culture-war grievances to win over working-class voters, and why the Democratic Party continues to hemorrhage support. The episode also features Ilyse Hogue, the former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America and the co-creator of a new $20 million project called Speaking With American Men, or SAM. The initiative aims to understand — and win back — young male voters who've drifted to the right. ' A lot of what we heard from people is that they feel invisible to the Democratic coalition,' she says. The plan has sparked skepticism, but Houge says the data is clear: 'We're losing young men of every race, ethnicity, educational background, and economic class in every state we looked at.' ' Trump is constantly trying to exploit and demagogue any issue,' Sirota explains, 'and really ramrod any issue into a culture war battle where he portrays himself as the Archie Bunker defender of middle America — silent America's values — and portrays Democrats as mostly interested in talking about advocating for and protecting those who are not part of so-called middle America.' According to Hogue, voters SAM have spoken to say, ' They want affordable housing. They want access to health care. They actually feel like Democrats can't get it done.' Sirota believes it's not just lack of faith in their ability to get it done. 'The average rank-and-file Democratic voter does not like the Democratic Party, does not like the Democratic leadership,' says Sirota. And that, he argues, is an opening for change. 'You cannot serve the donors and the voters simultaneously.' Washington, who has covered the SAM initiative and broader trends in the Democratic politics, points to a central and persistent contradiction. 'You can't serve two masters,' she says. 'You cannot serve the donors and the voters simultaneously. You cannot serve the average American and the person who has $100 million in the exact same way.' If Democrats want to stop hemorrhaging support, particularly among disillusioned voters and younger men, they'll need to do more than tweak their messaging. They'll need to pick a side — and start naming villains. As Sirota argues, ' Economic populism is not just the government will strengthen or make more robust the safety net, but that the economic powers and villains in the economy will be limited in their power.' You can hear the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.
