Waterbury Select Board candidates on the issues
February 24, 2025 | By Waterbury RoundaboutTown Meeting Day is Tuesday, March 4, and early/absentee voting is already under way. For the fifth year, Waterbury Roundabout posed a series of questions pertaining to local issues to the candidates seeking election to the Waterbury Select Board.
This year, there are five contenders: Incumbent Kane Sweeney is unopposed for the three-year seat on the board while four others are vying for the two one-year positions.
The latter group includes incumbent Mike Bard, who has served two three-year terms and spent some time as chair, along with new candidates Evan Karl Hoffman and Sandy Sabin. Tori Taravella, who has served the past three years on the Harwood School Board, has decided to join this race as well. Sabin, who did not file by the late January deadline to get her name on the ballot, is running as a write-in candidate.
Elections in Waterbury are done by paper ballot available from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Town Meeting Day at Brookside Primary School. Voters will also be asked to fill other local offices including positions on the Board of Listers, Library Commission, Cemetery Commission and Harwood Unified Union School District School Board. None of the other positions are contested and some have no declared candidates, leaving them open to write-in choices. Any offices not filled on election day will be filled by appointment by either the select board for municipal offices or school board for Harwood board positions.
Below are the complete responses from the select board candidates to the Waterbury Roundabout survey. Contact emails for the candidates are at the bottom of this post.
We thank the candidates for taking the time to fill out the survey and share their views with the community.
~ Lisa Scagliotti, editor
At right, incumbent Kane Sweeney is running unopposed for a three-year term.
Below, four candidates are seeking election to one of two one-year seats on the board.
*Kane Sweeney
*Mike Bard
Evan Karl Hoffman
Sandy Sabin
Tori Taravella
*Denotes incumbents running for re-election
Name, age, occupation (your day job or jobs)
Michael Bard, 67, retired, former program director for U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development
Evan Karl Hoffman, 28, deli clerk at Waterbury Village Market
Sandy Sabin, 61, municipal accounting
Kane Sweeney, 31, chef
Tori Taravella, 32, attorney
Have you run for elected office before? If so, what elected offices have you held? List other qualifications such as boards, organizations you have volunteered with, education, etc.
Yes - Selectboard for six years including chair. Waterbury Rotarian, Friends of the Waterbury Reservoir Board, Revitalizing Waterbury Fundraising Committee, Development Review Board six years, Conservation Commission nine years including chair, BS Agriculture University of Vermont
No - This is my first time as a candidate. In November, I volunteered as a poll worker for the General Election. I also have volunteered at the Waterbury Public Library for several years.
No - This is my first time as a candidate. I actively participate in Waterbury Select Board meetings and the Waterbury Housing Task Force. My current job in municipal accounting has given me knowledge of local government finances, policies, and procedures.
Yes - Select Board, Vice President UE Local 255
Yes - I was elected to serve a three-year term on school board, my term is over this year. I am also currently serving as president of the Waterbury Rotary Club.
Why are you running for a seat on the Waterbury Select Board?
I wish to represent those residents of Waterbury who are not heard. We need to manage the Town in a fiscally responsible and transparent way while investing in our future. We need to promote smart growth and sustainability I wish to continue being accountable to the residents and will continue to listen to all points of view.
I've been interested in politics for a long time and have been looking for ways to get involved. I've been regularly attending the Select Board meetings for the past year and feel like I fully understand the issues facing the town. It feels like the right time in my life to start trying to solve some of those issues.
Waterbury is my home, but also my hometown. I appreciate the hard work that select board members do and the time they put into helping our community. I am not on the ballot because until recently, I thought attending meetings, being more informed, and voicing opinions or suggestions would be enough. I am sure there is good intention among all the board members, and they genuinely push for what they believe in. But as a select board member you need to address all residents' concerns and needs, not just a few. You work for ALL residents. I may not agree with all decisions made by the select board or with what all residents want, but I am willing to hear all sides of the issue and make the board make decisions based on what is best for our entire community.
Our progress on housing and affordability is far from finished.
My mom once told me that you should not complain if you are not willing to do something to change it. While I do not have any complaints with our Selectboard, I want to ensure that the town continues moving forward in a way I believe in and am proud of. I want to ensure every person in our community can feel heard, and as a transplant to Vermont I hope to encourage others that are new to our community, to speak up, and step up, to help our community. I truly care about our town and want to help; I served on school board for the last three years and learned a lot about the issues and concerns our residents are facing. While I know there is an infinite amount I could learn by continuing my time there, I was inspired to try another avenue.
At Town Meeting this year, Waterbury voters who attend will be asked to vote on whether to change the format for Town Meeting in the future to put all questions - the budget, other business items, etc. - on the paper ballots alongside elections for town and school officers. That change would eliminate the in-person meeting on Vermont Town Meeting Day.
Do you favor putting all business on “Australian” or paper ballots to allow for more people to vote on all questions?
NO - I greatly value the institution of Town Meeting. Solely using Australian ballot will not get better outcomes. Unfortunately, many voters do not stay informed on the issues. I think Town Meeting gives everyone an opportunity to have community discussion on the budget and Town affairs. There is no perfect time to have Town Meeting. Residents need to think about investing a half day if the issues before Waterbury are important to them. If we continue with traditional Town Meeting I am in favor of using “Have Your Say Day” and a potluck to expand opportunity for the public's input on Town issues.
Yes, but I don't feel very strongly about it. Town Meeting Day is a great tradition and I love the idea of direct democracy, with the entire town coming together to conduct politics without any barriers or intermediaries. But the reality falls way short of that ideal. Attendance is low, and skewed towards certain demographics that don't fully represent everyone in town. Overall, I think the higher participation with Australian ballot would move us closer to the ideal, but I'm also concerned that decisions will be made without full information, discussion, and debate. My preference would be to keep having in-person meetings, but move them to the evening or a different day when more people would be able to attend. The test-run Have Your Say Days weren't very well attended, and seeing that really made me question my support for Australian ballot. Still, if we do make the switch, it would be absolutely necessary to get the information out there in as many ways as possible, including these in-person meetings.
I disagree with eliminating in-person town meetings for an Australian ballot vote. Town Meetings are a time for neighbors to get together to debate, discuss, and ask questions on issues before they vote. When you lose our Town Meeting to an Australian ballot (secret ballot), it is a straight yes or no vote with no knowledge of the implications of the results. Voters should be empowered to discuss and question the budget and expenditures and address our town officials on our town's future. If we eliminate our Town Meeting Day, it would not be possible to make amendments and changes to the budget or appropriations. I do feel that Have Your Say Day is a good idea and should be continued. This gives voters the ability to informally ask questions and make suggestions for change. If you cannot make it to the town meeting day, you should make the time to attend one of those, even if by Zoom. Residents should be well-informed about what changes their local government could make before they go to the polls to vote.
Yes - It’s more democratic. More folks have a spare minute to fill out a ballot and turn it in than a spare few hours to participate in floor votes. I would like to see voting on the issues that impact our community to be made easier.
Yes - Businesses no longer give their employees time off for Town Meeting Day. There are remote workers working for non-Vermont companies, retail workers, people in hospitality and service, and honestly, even regular Vermont office jobs that do not give their employees time off to attend Town Meeting. Therefore, we are not hearing the voices of all of our residents, even if they care deeply about the situation. We now have a fair and effective method to hear from each and every person, we should use it.
If Waterbury voters choose to move all Town Meeting voting to paper ballots in the future, would you support holding a “Have Your Say Day” type public meeting in January before the budget and ballot questions need to be finalized for the March vote?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Decommissioned in late 2022, the Vt. National Guard armory in Waterbury has been updated for use as a family shelter run by the state with contracted staff. What do you think would be the best long-term use of the armory facility and property?
Although there is a need for sheltering homeless families the best uses for the property long term would be permanent affordable housing units. Housing would be my preference. If this is not feasible use of the property as a recreation center would be an alternative. As long as the the scope of the recreation project would be moderate and meet the basic needs of the community. Funding the project through a grant from a local business and giving them naming rights would be preferred due to the large capital investment in a project of this nature.
Housing is a priority, and this is a great location for it. A large purpose-built (rather than hastily converted) apartment building could seriously help the crisis. But most of the lot is low-lying areas near Thatcher Brook that are too flood-prone for housing, but would make an excellent buffer zone for floodwater, keeping it away from downtown and out of the Winooski River. A combination of the two would be best.
Utilizing the armory as a temporary family shelter has not been an issue for the town in the few months it has opened. The initial issues faced by the town from the State against the zoning regulations were avoided by using State employees and not utilizing an outside third-party organization. If there was a possibility of converting the building for long-term housing, that would help with the current housing shortage, but I am not sure that is a feasible solution.
I want to make it clear to voters that Waterbury has little say in what happens at that facility. It is owned and operated by the state and they have no tentative plans of relinquishing their ownership of it, as far as I know. In a perfect world, it would make for a pretty sweet Rec Center.
Right now we have a need for housing and I like that families that need shelter can be welcomed into our community. I am not sure what a good long-term use would be, but I would be happy to learn more in my time as selectboard and hear suggestions from our residents.
Do you think Waterbury can/should continue to play a role in helping to shelter those who are homeless in Central Vermont?
Maybe - Waterbury should invest in some way housing local homeless individuals. Local families have ties to the community and need help. I am not in favor of housing families outside of the local area as Waterbury does not have the infrastructure to assist families not tied to the community. Larger population centers are better equipped to provide the services to homeless populations statewide.
Yes - The buck has to stop somewhere and it might as well be here. We have the ability, so we have the responsibility.
Maybe - It is difficult for Waterbury, a small community without public transportation, to create more shelter for emergency homelessness. However, using the Armory space as a temporary family shelter addresses a serious issue facing children who are homeless. Our community has been generously welcoming and supportive of the families using the shelter, and that will continue. The state must adhere to the guidelines, maintain the facilities as state employee-run offices, and not convert to a 3rd party as required in our zoning laws.
Yes - There are more people on the verge of homelessness in Vermont than there are folks about to get rich. Taking care of our neighbors whether the need work or shelter is absolutely paramount for a strong and resilient community.
Yes - I feel encouraged that our community was able to help and welcome some families that needed temporary help. That being said, I do not think the armory should be used as a way to displace homeless in our larger Vermont towns. It is unfair to put that strain on our community and it is also unfair for those individuals that would be displaced. There is not adequate care or growth opportunities for them and inadequate public transport to get them to necessary appointments in those larger cities. I am not opposed to the dialogue staying open, but there are a number of logistics and conditions that would need to be considered and carefully thought through.
Waterbury continues to contract with the Vermont State Police for local police service but public safety demands often exceed the VSP capacity due to inadequate staffing to cover its entire service area. Should Waterbury begin to explore creating its own police department?
No
No
No
No
No
Waterbury is beginning to see the benefit of new local option taxes. Criteria for spending LOT revenue are reducing debt, covering capital expenses, projects that promote community vitality and economic development, and investments that create long-term savings.
Do you think this new revenue should be used differently? If so, how?
No
No - The categories are basically good, but I'd like to adjust the priorities. I see debt as a gamble that the economy will be bigger tomorrow than it is today and paying it off then will be proportionally cheaper than paying for it now. With the state's aging, shrinking population, I don't think that bet will pay off, and I don't want to put that burden on future generations who won't be able to afford it. I want to prioritize using the LOT funds to pay down existing debt and avoid issuing more and create long-term savings. We have an opportunity to use our current prosperity to prepare for a possibly smaller economy in the future.
Yes - I searched the town website but could not find the board's written and signed policy. However, it is possible it is just not easily located. According to the “Have Your Say Day” Presentation, The Local Option Tax Policy is written as: • Reductions or stability in the tax rate through purchase of capital expenses or payment of existing debt. • Funding for affordable housing, economic development, and community vitality efforts. • Efforts to streamline and modernize municipal operations. • Improve the Town’s fund balance and create a local option tax reserve. The policy, as stated above, is vague and open to interpretation. A more defined policy should be created if the Select board can “allocate” this fund without voter approval. I believe the unexpected $455,690 LOT revenue surplus in 2024 could have been carried over as the beginning balance for 2025 and not allocated without duly warned approval from the taxpayers. The Guptil Road paving and $159K in debt reduction did result in some immediate tax savings, which is clearly stated in the policy. The 2024 approved $100K Housing Trust Fund is a separate reserve fund created by the select board (please note that this reserve fund was NOT established by the voters under 24 V.S.A. §2804(a)). This was created in advance of a proposal for spending. The allocation of $7,000 to the private non-profit club Waterbury Area Trail Alliance for mountain bike trails on Perry Hill state property has not yet been issued. These two allocations could easily have been added to Article 14 of the 2025 warning for voter approval without consequence of the use. The informational meeting presented in 2023 promoting the new charter included more police protection, infrastructure improvements, a “debt reduction of $256K”, a new firetruck, and a potential tax rate reduction of up to .08. I think all those items proposed were reasonable and should be written into a well-defined policy.
No - The buckets, so to speak, made guidelines for Select Boards in the future to follow. It makes it clear that this tax is not intended to simply be applied to the general fund but instead has a specific purpose.
No - I think these are broad criteria already that would cover a number of important things. At this time I feel the current criteria is enough, but perhaps in a few years we can revisit the option with proper research and information.
Is it time to fold Waterbury's water and wastewater departments - currently governed by the Edward Farrar Utility District - into town government?
Yes
Yes
Not sure
Yes
Yes
The town is exploring creating a recreation center in the future. Given growing recreation interests and ongoing programs and facilities, what do you think the town should prioritize for future recreation facility investments?
If the armory is not prioritized for affordable housing, retrofitting the armory makes sense for recreation. I do not think we should invest in a new pool as water based recreation can be had at the Reservoir’s Day Use area. A pool is a huge monetary investment as well as large ongoing maintenance costs. The current pool may be usable with some moderate investment. I envision more open space recreation through increased development of the ice rink lands and our existing park network. I would look at existing buildings in Town that are underutilized to be rehabbed to meet indoor recreation needs. We should explore sponsorships of all recreation development to help mitigate the cost to the taxpayers. This includes renters as tax increases affect their rent.
I don’t have strong feelings about this. I enjoy our parks and trails, and anything that brings people into town will be good for local businesses, but I’m open to any reasonable options.
The study that addresses the costs of recreational facilities as budgeted for 2025 should give us a more precise cost of creating a new facility. If the study results in a reasonable cost, and we can justify it by potential revenue, it will benefit our community. Waterbury’s recreational areas (as are our fantastic restaurants and shops) are a huge draw to tourists. We must support local programs and activities, as they benefit our current residents and visitors. Revitalizing Waterbury helps promote Waterbury’s tourism and recreational projects. Supporting RW and working closely with their organization and committees should be included in our use of LOT revenue allocations. We have a large recreation budget and a great recreation committee that should work with local clubs and organizations as needed. Funding these will directly help our growing recreational community and tourism.
Waterbury is a recreation paradise. I think it is in our best interest to explore any option that is feasible for a new indoor facility.
With the education funding in the stage it is currently, town recreation centers and programs are going to become more and more important to our future generations. These centers and programs provide valuable developmental support for the kids as well as vital support for the parents. I am currently unaware of any debate between which facility to prioritize. However, I will state that I have personally enjoyed having access to the pool in summer, especially since it is the only public pool available in the surrounding areas.
With the continuing demand for affordable housing, the town is working to make publicly owned property available for new housing development such as the former Stanley-Wasson lots at the State Office Complex and town-owned land behind Brookside Primary School. Should town government guide new housing development plans or should developers be asked to present projects that comply with zoning and other land-use regulations?
All the alternatives mentioned need to be pursued as we have a affordable housing crisis. I do think we should use the expertise of both not for profit affordable housing developers as well as for profit developers. Outside professionals have the expertise to develop these types of projects. Many are created with the use of various tax credits essential to bring these projects online. The syndication of tax credits is a skill which town officials do not have. These organizations traditionally work in partnership with town government bringing projects to fruition.
If we turn the reigns entirely over to for-profit developers, they'll just build the projects that make them the most profit, which means multi-million-dollar McMansions that are out of reach for working-class people. There needs to be oversight and direction from the town, but as long as we give clear goals for what we want out of each project, and hold developers to those goals, I don't think we should be too involved in the details. We don't have the expertise for it.
The town government should only be involved, so proposals should be within our town regulations, planning, and zoning guidelines. Town government officials are not developers and should leave the design proposals to those interested in the property. I worked in Stanley Hall until we were flooded by Irene. At that time, the Vermont State Colleges invested tens of thousands of dollars to clean up and ensure that the building would be usable for us to return. When they decided to vacate the building, I was upset that it was torn down instead of converting it to housing. I now understand the cost would outweigh the value. The vacant property should be used to create new housing. The development of multiple single-family housing units would be a great way to increase the housing in our town while encouraging new home ownership. I am listening to the proposals for the property behind Brookside Primary School and am unsure exactly what direction they will take. It was suggested that a portion be sold for development and the proceeds to aid in creating more affordable housing.
At a time when 50% of Waterbury’s renters are cost burdened, businesses can’t staff properly and options for housing are essentially non-existent, the town should absolutely be prioritizing affordable and safe housing for folks. Adding more market rate and above market rate housing would run counter to making Waterbury an affordable place to live.
Developers have been asked to comply with zoning and land-use regulations for years and unfortunately we still have a housing shortage. I think it may be necessary for our local government to become more involved in guiding new housing development plans to assist in meeting the need for affordable housing.
Flood mitigation is of high interest and concern for many town residents. However, federal and state funding for projects that might lessen the impacts of future flooding seems tenuous. What steps do you think Waterbury should pursue, even if it means having to pay the bill itself?
An aggressive flood mitigation plan needs to occur. Our town cannot continue to rebuild after each flooding event which is likely to occur in future years. We need to work with adjacent communities and look at basin wide protection projects. Waterbury cannot stand alone in these efforts. Projects that mitigate flood damage via increased culvert sizes, altering water corridors to improve water flow, stimulating property rehab that helps water dispersal and proactive planning and zoning changes are all needed.
I think it's possible to actually prevent floods, not just mitigate or recover from them. But it's a bigger problem than the town can address on its own. Rather than waiting for the state or federal government to come up with solutions, I want to coordinate directly with other towns along the Winooski watershed. This is a problem we're all dealing with together, and the water doesn't know about town boundaries – projects in one area will affect the entire watershed, upstream and downstream. We should plan projects accordingly, and share the costs between towns. Obviously that should be coordinated by the state government, but there's no reason to wait for them.
Addressing the housing issue also means maintaining our current housing inventory. We are not moving forward if we lose more properties to flooding because of our lack of flooding mitigation. Using portions of revenue dedicated to housing from local options tax to protect our town from further loss is warranted. The current committees are working diligently to develop new ideas to address mitigation needs. I look forward to continuing efforts by the committees and hope that we create viable solutions as a community if we cannot rely on the state.
Any mitigation is good mitigation. The town has contracted out to acquire data about our flood plain so that we may better understand exactly where to mitigate. Otherwise, we’re throwing darts in the dark. However, the cornfield behind Randall street seems to be the popular project. I hope that we can work out a cost effective solution with the state that will benefit the folks downtown.
Flood mitigation is multi-factored. I think for now we should continue supporting the flood mitigation study that is currently being researched. Once we have that information we should take the recommended steps. It is not worth tax payer money to try a solution without the proper data to support it, especially when an ill-thought-out “solution” may make it worse. In the meantime, while we wait for the study to be completed, we can assist residents to find funding if necessary to move their utilities out of their basements and emphasize the importance of keeping culverts clear.
Do you support Waterbury's Declaration of Inclusion that's on the WaterburyVt.com website?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Waterbury is the only community with four seats on the Harwood Unified Union School District School Board. All four seats are up for election this year with only two candidates running. Last year no one ran for two openings. Should the Select Board try to help generate interest to ensure Waterbury is well-represented on the School Board? Why or why not?
Yes. We have problems with elected officials to the School Board. People who serve are routinely attacked. Individuals do not want to serve as school budgets are a hot button topic. The Selectboard can only encourage qualified individuals to serve. The current movement toward a regional governance makes sense. I have advocated this for years. If this happens some of the divisive issues such as finance may be taken away and the Boards can concentrate on what is best for educating the kids.
Yes, and I think this gets to a larger problem with communication about what local government is doing and opportunities to be involved. There are several vacancies across the town's various boards and committees, and attendance at regular meetings is low. I want us to do a better job informing the community about town business, outside the circle of a few dozen people who regularly refresh the town website.
I think the school board should try to help generate interest. Our town represents most of the students, and most of our tax bills are school-related. Representation should include a mix of parents, facilities, educational backgrounds, and financial backgrounds, which could help create a more reasonable and obtainable budget. I admit that until I attended a few school board informational meetings, my understanding of how the actual funding was received was not what I had previously thought. There have been a lot of write-ups that explain the system a little more in layman's terms. If they are backed up with facts and references, these statements can help educate us on budget questions we can address with our school board.
I believe the school board should generate its own interest. It’s the governing body that decides how our community’s children are educated and what the bulk of your property taxes will look like. I also believe that the School Board is an incredibly hard job given the current circumstances. It may behoove those who have children attending district schools to do some digging and see if they’d like to serve!
YES! The school board makes vital decisions to our community that affect our children and our taxes. The more people on the board that we have, the better understanding and representation our community can have. They are a good group of people and the meetings are organized and respectfully done. I know they acquired a bad reputation years ago but anyone that attends now would be pleasantly surprised and extremely welcome. It is important that the Selectboard supports participation in all boards that can affect our residents.
Fill in the blanks:
The best thing about Waterbury is ____________________
Great people.
Our thriving downtown. Look at how many new businesses have opened up just in the last few years. This is a place that people want to be.
The residents, business owners, and visitors, who make this small town one of the most sought-after locations in the state.
Our community’s volunteerism.
The people.
And, Waterbury would be a better place if ______________
Our community was more affordable.
I could afford to keep living here.
We were more affordable for current homeowners, future homeowners to purchase, and renters to live and work in this community.
Folks could afford to live here.
We did not have flooding issues.
Please add anything else you would like people to know.
Thank you for Waterbury Roundabout for presenting this survey to hear the candidates views. I wish to continue to serve my community by being reelected. As a Waterbury Rotarian I believe in Rotary's motto “service above self.” As an avid outdoorsman and conservationist involved in many organizations, I feel lucky to live for the last 38 years in such a beautiful vibrant community. Please feel free to call me directly at 802-244-6292 with any of your concerns. I will always be here for you.
I grew up in this town and have spent nearly my whole life here. This is a community that I know and understand, and have always been a part of. You can find my contact info and more about my views at evankh.com.
I would appreciate your write-in vote for me, Sandy Sabin. Please know that regardless of the outcome, I will continue to help you in any way that I can with issues that you feel need to be addressed.
While I did not grow up here, I knew the moment I arrived that this state was Home. When I saw how our community came together to help each other in the last few floods I was even more encouraged that this was the right place for me. I want to support the work that has been done to make this town such a wonderful place to live and ensure that it can continue to attract people in the future. While I hope to do so by serving on the Selectboard, I will continue to be involved no matter what, to ensure that anyone that visits this town can see the magic blend of community, tradition, and progress that I get to experience every day. I am an attorney, and part of my job is to think of the worst case scenario, and how to avoid it. I think this could be a useful skill set to have as a Selectboard member and I know it has proven useful in my time on school board. I hope the voters of Waterbury also see that I can be an asset to our town as a Selectboard member and support me on Town Meeting day.
For more information, contact the candidates
Michael Bard - michael.bard22@gmail.com
Evan Karl Hoffman - evankarlhoffman@gmail.com
Sandy Sabin - sjsabin@hotmail.com
Kane Sweeney - kane.sweeney@waterburyvt.com
Tori Taravella - vtaravella1@gmail.com