 So. Alright, we're recording. I'm going to make Lynn host. Thanks. Okay, thank you. So, I'd like to call the finance committee meeting of December. I'm going to call the committee meeting of March 12, 2020 to order pursuant to Governor Baker's. March 12, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of open meeting law, general law. Chapter 38 section 18 this meeting. The finance committee is being conducted via remote participation. And so we'll go around to each of the committee members. The finance committee is able to hear and we can hear them. Just by saying the word presence as I say your name. I'll start with Bob Hegner present. And Lou. Present. Dorothy. And Kathy. Present. Bernie. Present. Pat. Present. Okay, I think that we are all here and ready to go. And. Linda's volunteered to manage the screen when we need documents on the screen. And maybe we should put up the agenda quickly and just see if everybody's agreement. Has any comments on the agenda. And then we'll proceed. And I think we know what the major items are for today's discussion. Good seconds. The agenda. There we go. Thank you. So. This is what the agenda is. The item number three. The regional school budget. Assessment method follow up to four towns meeting. We may want to talk about that. As we go through the draft budget guidelines and get to the section where the regional school budget is. Recommended item number four is can be stricken from the agenda because we did not receive. A referral proposal. There is one topic that was unanticipated, which is the last item, which is really just a report of something additional that was referred to the committee that I'll make. At the end, I think that all of the counselors know, know about it, but just to make sure that the. Two resident members who are not present. Are aware of it. So, and. I think that the only other thing that. I will mention just as the introductory piece is. That I had sent everybody. The. Copy of the criteria that the GOL. Is planning to use. In the. Selection of somebody to replace Sharon, which has been the same criteria that has been previously used. If there are comments on it. Certainly are welcome to send them to. Me or as a GOL or to GOL directly through its chair, George Ryan. But I did not put that down as an agenda item because. It's really not a committee action of our committee and. That actually arose from a discussion and prior committee. Some when it was first drafted. Many years ago, it seems actually only probably two. So let's turn to the budget guidelines. If everybody's agreeable, unless somebody has an initial. Statement that they'd like to make. And Dorothy Pam, I know has a question about scheduling a future meetings and. That will, we'll get to it at the appropriate agenda item. So. I think that what I would propose to do is. To see if there are any general comments about. The way that the. The document, the draft three of the. Guidelines is presently. And then. I'm not going to take it all at once. I'm not going to take it all at once. From there. I was going to try and go through. Sort of section by section, not take it all at once, but. To hit upon. First, the philosophy. Then each, each major section going down. So let me get to my participant list so that I can make sure. Kathy, I see your hand up. Okay. I have a comment that I think I've made in the past. And it's because of the way I read documents like this. I think we should have an appendix. A that's the. Table that Sean and staff put into the. Financial indicators that showed. FY 20, FY 21, FY 22. Because I, while it's useful. I think we should have an appendix. This went up. This went down. We were lucky. This stayed steady. I think having people not have to go find the other document. And it's, it's as my memory is it's. It's two pages long. So wouldn't bulk this up very much. And it would just put it in all. Actually, you've raised that previously. And thank you very much. It was. Because you had mentioned it to me. We were in the last week or more ago. And I did actually ask Sean about that, whether when it gets to the final version. That's going to the council. And we finished with this draft, whether we can add the tables. And the were from the financial indicator report. And. I don't know if that's correct. But I think that what he said was no problem. Yeah. And I totally expected it would only be in the final version. So thanks, Sean. Yeah. But thank you for so everybody else is aware of the fact that you made the request. So. I think that takes care of that. So I want to go through just each section and see. First of all. Whether there's questions or comments about the overall. Philosophy and concerns. By 22 section. And then I'm going to ask questions about specific pieces of it. Just going through it in order. But I'll start with the general question. Is there anybody who has any comments? Seeing no hands yet. Is there any. In the third paragraph on, well, actually the first paragraph on page to. We adopt the level funding. And then we have the financial indicators. Which was part of the recommendation. From the town manager at the financial indicators meeting. And it was when all those tables are built upon. And so we should make sure that. Comfortable with level funding and. That may. This actually gets into the school discussion in a minute. Dorothy. Give your hand up. And you're muted. On a small item on page two. You said. I guess page two one or two. Somewhere where you mentioned possibility of one or two. Oh, it's on page three debt. Exclusion overrides. And I guess I thought. We'd had a lot of conversation on this and had. Come to an understanding that. One was the maximum that it made sense to ask for, and that we should not be. Juggling. I mean, the more pieces we juggle, the longer it harder is, the longer it is before a decision is made. And we're getting to the point we have to make some decisions. I, so I, I hate how including that possibility of two, because. I haven't talked to anybody that thinks that two would pass. I mean, this is all guessing, of course, but it's, that's what we do. We talk to people and we. Keep our ear open. Okay, since you've raised the issue, I think we should just go ahead and. Talk about that. I guess the reason that I put it in the way that word, and we did have that discussion is that. Ultimately the decision will be made by the council. And the council will have to vote each time. As to whether it's going to. Have an override, but. If you. What is the sense of the committee as to whether it should be. Given that the council may need to ask. To approve a. Or one. Or two. And it just to mention. Remember, I can't raise my hand. So I have to. Be obnoxious and we've. Yeah, I saw you. Yeah, okay. No, no, I saw you. I'm in favor of saying a debt exclusion override. For two reasons. First of all. We haven't made any decision. Second of all, I am of the similar mind to Dorothy that we're talking about. And the third is this is really an over time statement. Would we go out for. Two debt exclusion overrides in a year? God, I hope not. And so. I, I'm really in favor of saying a debt exclusion override. And I still want to be very clear. I don't think there's been no commitment to that. Yeah. Of course. We know there's no commitment until the council votes to put it on the ballot. It's a specific action that has to be taken. Right. Pat has her hand up. Yeah, Pat. Kathy. It looked like she was right. Pat. I feel differently. I feel like I would like to keep in one or two debt exclusion overrides in the document. I don't know whether we can pass one or not. I don't. But it seems to me that if we put in there, that it's one, and then something happens and we need a second, there will be more resistance than there might have been. And. I don't know. So that's where I am a little bit, but I can go either way. I don't know. The only possible. Capital item that could come up. In the next 12 months. That would even be considered for debt exclusion. Unless we went out for roads or something like that. Which is the library. The schools aren't going to come up for probably two years. So we're going to have a solution. For fire and DPW. In, although we are now asking for the town manager to give us some options. We still wouldn't be to the point in either of those instances in this year. To go out for debt exclusion. So I'm thinking of this as a. I don't know. But maybe that's not the right way to think about it from. The midi standpoint. Kathy. Yeah, I think. I was going to make a similar statement to Lynn. And you know, one way of drafting this, although I hate things that are drafted this way to, to say, a debt exclusion override. And then after override put the little S in parentheses. If, but I don't think. Because it's not on a time horizon that's anytime soon. And Sean can correct me, but. Because of the way the schools is moving and. The grant authority board is only meeting every other month when. You know, we're not even at the invited in to go out and get an OPM. We're not going to get an OPM yet. And that's probably not going to happen until February. So I think we're looking at FY 24 at the earliest year. You know, so it's out. Not just two years, but probably three. So, you know, raising this specter as more as multiple debt overrides in this document. Doesn't seem necessary. I think it's still going to be the right if not somebody objects, I think we just have a consensus. Enough of a statements on it and we need. That'll enable us to keep moving forward. I mean, it's, leaves it open enough and ultimately whatever counsel is around, if a second one ends up being proposed, it's going to have the right to make the decision and this document will be have been replaced by several other. I mean, I think the financials of documents and several other budget guidelines along the way. So I think just changing it to. Is fine. And making it a singular word. So we'll go ahead and do that. Track changes. I'm doing. Are there. They're just, you know, I'm not using the feature that shows them. I don't know if I want you, I will, but it means all. And I'm writing it on a printed copy. You know, fashion. We got as I go through it too. So give us a double check. There was a general statement in the, I had a little bit of a problem and I'm not sure I would ever write it this way again, this overall. But I was happy to do that. I'm not sure if I would ever write it in quality. Because I try ended up even cutting a lot of it out. Because it does get repetitive of what's elsewhere in the document. I tried to get rid of duplications as much as I could, where things appeared more than once, but I didn't. and reserve funds those and those are on page two. So Dorothy. I wanted to praise you for your many very specific statements on use of reserve funds. It's very clear and you say why and I think that's excellent because we're here at this moment and we're talking about what we think and plan but this document hopefully will live on past this us and this council. And I think that some of these policy ideas about how reserves are and are not used are major and very, very important to be a well run town. So I approve of them and I applaud you for them. Questions whether they represent the views of the committee and ultimately the views of the council Thank you. This look, I'm going to bring this up when we get to a little bit later in expenditures and take the detour over to schools and regional schools because we know that there's at least one member of the school committee who seems to feel strongly that we should be digging into reserves and getting more of an increase for schools and feels that the school funding is inadequate and that is something that we're going to have to just recognize but I was going to hold that for a minute but it does come back to reserves. And we adopted the recommendation from the town manager to not seek a override proposition to an half operating budget override for 2010, interestingly enough Northampton had done their override prior to the pandemic. Got it through. I'm not sure they would have gotten through after the pandemic hit, but... And they're overriding. They're adopting that statement. Yeah, I'm sorry. So Dorothy, were you having something on that too or is your hand up from before? Oh, it's from up from before but I just remember I was in New York City during the budget crisis and I know what it's like when a city has not used its money well and we were very paying attention while I was working in the controller's office in the years of building back up the credit to make a strong city. And we've come into this council with a strong financial footing. And I just wanna make sure that we keep it that way. So the last thing on page two and then I'll is the question of the four major capital investments has introduced for the first time and then it has continued further when we get into the capital section, capital expenditure section later in the document. Just wanna see if there's any reaction to the specific statements made on page two as we just moved through because okay. I think Andy, I'm sorry. Yeah. I think the one statement that I wanna make sure stays in this document is this last one and it really, I mean, we just cannot go through another fiscal crisis and delay these projects yet again. That's what happened in 2008, nine, 10 and we're still sitting on the same problems. And so it's really a long-term view. The other piece that I think about in all of this is we really don't know what a COVID, a post COVID Amherst is gonna look like in the next five years. There could be some serious reduced revenues and we just don't know. I mean, that's what I would even getting into the school issue. Do you think that last thing that you said about, we could have much longer-term effective COVID we just don't know yet. Do you think that stated strongly enough in the document elsewhere? Yes. I think you struck a very good balance on that, Andy. Okay. I mean, I would say I have a meeting along with Paul weekly with the bid and chamber and our businesses are just decimated. There will be, many will be closing for the winter and the real prayer is going to be that they open in the spring. And we don't know how fast you messes. Population is going to be able to return and just a bright of those things that dearly affect our revenue and can take times, take a long time to build back. And I think you've captured that, Andy. Yeah, unfortunately, I think we're all too aware of it just even from our own lives, you know, who's comfortable going out a lot to restaurants. I haven't been meeting. Time to take out, have a big one. Yeah, I'd better do take out, but that doesn't give them the same profits because I don't buy my alcohol from a Bernie. Yeah, just like to echo what Lynn was saying about keeping that sentence in me, paradoxically, this period may be provide some opportunities because if things go the way we hope they go on the federal level, interest rates will stay way down. Hammer's just got a good strong bond rating. We may be able to leverage a construction, at least one construction project, very, very favorably. And I think face this years ago as a slight one in Belcher town that we went ahead and jumped off the cliff and created a community center. And it actually was a boost for the community. People felt that finally something was moving and it really turned out to be a morale boost. So we wanna keep our options open on this stuff, I think. Yeah, no, I think that it is a, you think we should actually put something in a little bit more strongly stating that this is an historically low time for interest rates and that the major, the construction projects or capital projects in general should be. I think you have that later, Andy, when you said trying to read it, what I'm remembering is you've got it, whether you... Yeah, man, now that you say that, I probably do. Okay, so let's go on. There's two other, there's anything else as we're going through page three. I just wanna say that I think this is a extremely well-crafted statement and something that generally the public doesn't understand, but basically our reserves are our float. Yeah, it is the hard thing for people to understand. It was this page that I was thinking of when I said how well-written it is. It's clear, it's concise, and there's a common rationale through it. The money is used in places where it's leveraged and it leads to some other way of paying itself back or creating more income or, yeah, it's very good. Okay, so on page four, the first paragraph has to do, starts out with talking about the three institutions of higher education. And then the last paragraph is just encouraging, looking for new opportunities and lobbying legislature. Bernie. India is probably the only time I'll disagree about language in this document, because I think overall it's really well-crafted. I would not use the term pilots. That's anathema to anyone who's managing a tax exempt organization, especially colleges. I substitute the robust contributions from tax exempt organizations are essential or something like that, but I wouldn't use the term pilot. Okay. Thank you. So it would read something like, to use your exact words, that word that, robust contributions from educational, or tax exempt organizations are essential to the health of the town. Yeah, that puts it, now if you go back and look at the great study that the Lincoln land project did on working with tax exempts, they really emphasize that it's, you wanna talk about partnerships and collaboration as opposed to pilots which lock them into a formal legal agreement. And I don't know of any attorney representing a tax exempt that would say, go ahead and sign one. No, thank you. I used it as a way of saying that something else, but I think you have it a much better so we don't need to go back on the pop, Pegner. Yeah, the very last phrase in this first paragraph, we used to talk about, especially around creation of housing and commerce that can generate new revenue. I wonder if we should strengthen that by adding some thought about helping the, the town businesses to recover from COVID. Because I think that, we might be able to leverage something from UMass and even Amherst College that could really help the downtown more than just using the phrase commerce in general. I'm not sure quite how to word it, but maybe can generate new revenue, particularly after losses due to COVID-19 or something like that. Maybe add that. Could you do that in replacement of, especially about the creation of housing and commerce that can generate new partnerships or an addition. It's not like you can work through it and come up with a something that was right, Kathy. Yeah, I don't disagree with what Bob has just put in. And I think he was particularly thinking of, you know, it's revenues for our businesses, our local businesses. So it says commerce. And it doesn't belong in this document, but the phrase I'd like is to avoid any actions that would undermine the health of the town businesses. And the example that I was told about is UMass offering to sell Thanksgiving dinners to off-campus homes for up to six people where they're directly competing with local restaurants and not paying taxes, not paying the same wages, not paying the same. So a feeling that it's unfair competition. So I don't know, you know, this doesn't belong in this document, but I think we've got to worry about anything that undermines the local businesses as well as urge them to be supporting of it. Actually, I think that maybe it does belong in here. Yeah, I'm just, I don't have the most politic way of wording it. What I know is that Harvard tried to put the word out, not just recently, but a long time ago, don't just open up a pizza shop downstairs and invite the public to come in pizza on campus because suddenly that pizza shop is property that could be, you know, it's not educationally related. It's not in an exempt, but actually delivering food off-campus to people for purchase has... I think so often people think of the word commerce as, you know, like some mini-manufacturing. Right, as opposed to... That's one reason why I'm even suggesting we put in the words housing, retail, restaurants and other commerce. Yeah, I like that. Yeah. And I just had this, you know, if we had converted and avoid any actions and partnership agreements to avoid any actions that would undermine the local businesses, is I guess the nicest way. This is a difficult topic and Dorothy, I just see your hand up and I'll come to you in a second. The problem that you're alluding to has been around for a while because we discussed that back when I was on the select board, that the university through its nationally recognized food service was luring students to stay on campus and actually had gotten to the point of not allowing departments to go off-campus to order lunches to bring on to campus for events. That if you had an event on campus that they were requiring the use of the university's food service program. So I had to go ahead and show the track changes because of this. This is a big problem. And when you have a dining group that is as well-known and appreciated as UMass dining, you've got people who literally go to UMass to eat dinner. They pay $10, they go in the cafeteria and they eat dinner. Not anymore, but they used to. Yeah. Several hands up. You've got Kathy, Bernie and Dorothy. Yeah, Dorothy was the one who was up next because she'd been asking for a little bit. Dorothy? When I first read this, I wrote down to explain. Do we have an example of UMass doing something, providing housing and business? I mean, I know that, or is this a reference to the buildings that were built by private developers that happened to house UMass students downtown? I don't know of an example when UMass did something that created housing for the town, but I haven't been here that long. So I just wanted some examples. Okay, let me explain that and then I'll get back to Bernie. With what was called the UTAC, the University Town Vammers Collaborative, there had been a proposal that the university provide land and they had taken some steps towards actually seeing if they could find interested parties who would participate in this, who would build both housing and commercial type of uses on certain properties that were on the university-owned land that they would essentially lease the land for private development for those purposes. And that had been under discussion for a while and then I don't know what happened to it. It seems to have died as to most of the UTAC thing altogether. So- Andy, are you- That was the reference. The mixed use dorm that they are talking about putting on Massachusetts Avenue in the parking lots. It was the same builder, they were looking for a builder to do that and also rebuild North Village. Right. Yeah, those- No, those are two examples and I just don't know where North Village was 50% closed even before they came up with this idea and they were gonna close the whole thing or not admit any more people into it but rebuild on that North Village land, which is university land. But how does that help the town? It would be not free. It creates housing Dorothy. If they closed down North Village, all those people have to find apartments or houses in town. They have promised them that they have an apartment in the new rebuilt thing. Just the relocated people, not new people. So it used to house a huge number of people and it's only housing 50%. Oh, I see, okay. And so they were only gonna do, they weren't gonna bring anyone new but they were gonna build a new thing that would be dorm housing on that property. So it was university built with probably some pretty pricey dorms but dorms apartments, housing. Which meant that the graduate student families that were living there wouldn't be able to afford to rent those. So it was not helping the town in any way that I can see. I think they actually relocated all of the families out of North Village. They had some space in Brandywine and Crestview and some of the other university properties up in at least in the north part of town. Well, the other example goes back some, I wanna see what Bernie has to say. The gateway project that is now some years ago was to build along that section of North Pleasant Street between what is now the traffic circle and Kendrick Park up to campus on the, as you're going towards campus on the right side. Those were old fraternity houses that had been torn down and that land belongs to the university. And they were talking about a plan to allow development of housing which would have taken some pressure off of rental elsewhere in town. A lot of the neighbors in along Fearing Street, which is the closest area to it and we're opposed to it because they felt that it would have negative effect on their neighborhood. And so it became quite controversial and the university ended up backing out of it and that land still is now undeveloped and is actually valuable property. And I think that university would like to do something with that land. And that's an example of the kind of thing that if it was done creatively, could be a good partnership that would be beneficial to the university and beneficial to the town. Bernie, did you- The universities pick up on that. The university system has had it's taken its lumps when it's tried to use private sector funds to develop dormitories. But I think we have to keep in mind that with UMass, the tuition goes into the general fund. Anything else, any other money that the university raises stays locally. So that's been a real incentive for them to do things like what they've done with food service. And the like, the other thing to keep in mind is that, you know, when we talk about downtown, Amherst College has a pretty significant presence there and has an impact. And Amherst College, I believe, is the town's largest taxpayer because it hasn't tried to claim educational exemption on a number of its buildings. That's something Bernie, the university about five years ago, UMass Amherst went to gain tuition. They don't, it does not go back to the general fund. No, it stays, okay. Yeah. All right, well, it shows you I haven't kept current. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. What I wanna just mentioned you, I mean, I've been in two meetings with UMass before COVID hit and the project called the Gateway Project was never even mentioned. The project that I've been aware of, two of them. One is the project right down the street from Lincoln Ave, Dorothy. Yes. They talked about the mixed use building. And of course, one of the issues with that is the mixed use means it would be retail on the bottom but it wouldn't be our retail. Right. It'd be even less reason for people to come into town. The second one was the replacement of the North Village. And in both instances, they were looking for, and I don't know where they stand on this right now. They were looking for a private partner to build both of those buildings. Those private partnerships have been much more effective in greater population areas. And so whether or not it was ever going to be seen as a good investment and be attractive to a private partner to come out to Western mess is still unclear. And given the university's present financial situation which is pretty dire because of lack of students, I don't even know that they're even talking about those projects. And then the other conversation just in full disclosure, although this is not, again, anything confidential because it was known publicly, we did have a conversation with the university to get them to try to donate land to build DPW. And so far that has never gone anywhere that they mentioned one parcel which was just, it would have been so costly for us to even get water and sewer there, it was ridiculous. And the parcel we wanted was the one down by the old non-functioning, never to have functioned heating plant. And they have plans for that area. So I think the issue that Kathy and others are getting at is the fact that the more the campus has made their own retail and restaurant conveniences on campus, the less people come into town. And that, and in fact, the more town people go to the university. And this is pre-COVID. Just, and there have been not here but in other places and the ones I know are more the private non-profit universities. In Princeton, there were legal challenges to the part of the operation that was not directly education related, that the IRS exemption is, if it's absolutely necessary. And UCLA, I went on their website recently because of this, they've been very careful to give instructions because where it's more commercial, but on campus they pay a sales tax, they potentially pay property taxes. So it's not always willing, to make it a more even playing field with the downtown businesses who in Amherst College's copying center had to start charging sales tax because not only did it get free rent, but it didn't charge sales tax. So it could completely undercut collective copies and they're a block away from each other. So it's those kind of examples where people say, wait a minute, you can go get a hundred copies here or a hundred copies there, why? Or the textbooks being sold to the public. So they do differentiate if it's a student coming in for a textbook. But some of these are potential legal challenges if one wanted to take them on, you'd rather have the behavior change than get into a legal challenge. The Princeton settled for around $11 million. Here's what I suggest to get this moving along. And then I'll get back to Dorothy to just see if there's anything she wants to add at that point. And that is that Lynn and I can take a stab at this paragraph and see if we can come up with language that gets at the major points that we have just discussed about working with the university to make sure that we're looking for partnerships that are beneficial to both partners and that we encourage the university and other partners to not engage in activities which are detrimental to the business community and the health of the town. And to see if we can find language that we're comfortable with both of those. And then we'll just send them to you and ask for you to send comments back just to one of us. It won't, if we send you a draft of this paragraph and you respond just to one of us, I think we're okay with open meeting. It can't be just, it can't be a reply to all, however, if we can. Yeah, reply all. Dorothy wants to speak. And then I have two points on this paragraph. I do want to make sure, Dorothy. I just want to have us imagine that we are in a on again off again COVID type situation for a longer period in the future. And that the model that UMass might follow is that of Amherst College which is to kind of clamp a Stephen King bowl over the campus and say, okay, we'll give you campus life but you have to stay on this campus because I think they're going to find that people are not going to pay the tuition for total online education. That's why they're saying they're trying to get the students back on. And that would mean that the Amherst economic model of downtown, which is mostly bars and food which is not necessarily patronized that much by the non-university people in the town is going to have to change. So we just have to keep the possibility because Amherst College, I mean, I just got this notice about this menorah lighting that's going to take place at the mill, Cinda's place because they're not having it on Amherst College campus. I mean, all the activities that were done they're not happening if it involves intersection of two groups of people and it's the sealed campus and UMass could do that. And as you say, they've got the food, which is number one. So somehow we've got to think about that. Andy, there's things on this paragraph. The university has done robust COVID-19 screening but it's only been of their faculty, staff and students. And it's only as of yesterday that they've announced their willingness to do asymptomatic testing. So I think we just need to clarify that. Well, we can take care of that as we do the round of paragraph. And then the other, I just want to mention, I don't believe there's any discussion going on about a partnership agreement. Well, you had mentioned that. Yeah. And I think that I had actually modified the draft from a prior version that you would seem to eliminate that. I want to keep moving, however, because we've got a lot of territory you have to cover. So it's their... Beeping, Carol. Going into that paragraph, otherwise we'll go on to... Revenue is pretty straightforward. I don't know if there are any comments on either the last paragraph there or the paragraphs on revenue, but I'll pause for a moment to allow people to glance through. Because I think that the big thing is when we get to expenses for operations and expenses for capital. Andy? Yep. I have to say, when I got to this number, knowing two and a half, I just want to make sure that we read it and make sure that we all understand how we get from two and a half to 3.2%. Yeah, I actually checked Andy's math and he is, of course, accurate. And it's because of the adding in new growth. So that plus the two and a half, that new growth was that extra percentage. So I mean, it says that, but I said, did it really add that much? And the answer is yes. Yeah. Yeah. The other thing just to throw in there, if I'm reading it correctly is your local resources are going up for FY22 as well. What's going on? The local receipts. So if this is 3.2 over the FY21, our FY22 projections, we do have the local receipts going up because we... Compared to the year before. Or they're going up, great. You know, they're going up, I think it was 11% or 12% or something because we reduced it so much for FY21. Is there a need to go farther into that because it may be the benefit of, a benefit amongst many of the charts that you're going to stick on at the end. Because that will show how to... Yeah. Local receipts are going up 12.7% in the original projection. And then you explained the two and a half right here. There's nothing else on that. On the revenue side, then we should get on to the expenses for operations. And then in the first paragraph mentions regional school assessment. So I'm going to pause from this discussion for a moment. Bernie, did you get it in Bob? Did you get a chance to either watch, attend the meeting as a attendee or... Bob was there. What was there? Yeah, Bob was there. Okay. Yeah. No, I was not there. I tried to, I signed in, but there was nothing on the screen. Oh, okay. Nothing got broadcast. Either on Amherst media or on the Zoom call. So I sat around for half an hour waiting, but nothing ever happened. Yeah. And that's because we moved off the Zoom call to a Google Meet. And, and then... It wasn't on Amherst media either. No, it was here. Yeah. So. So I wasn't able to get it. Yeah, let me summarize several aspects of it. And other members of the committee who were there. We'll add to it. And the item that I sent you in the mail, if we need it, Lynn has it to put on the screen. But I'm going to, what we're effectively doing right now is to. Pause our discussion of this particular agenda item. And then come back to, to it in a few minutes, and then we'll start to go to the agenda item, having to do with the four town meeting. And. What basically happened in the four town meetings. Was several different things. One was it. Super intended. The finance director presented the budget. And the budget that they talked about. Was actually two different versions of a budget. But neither of the budgets were at a level. Funding. Scenario. And so that. The calculations of what our assessment would be. For regional schools under either of those budgets under any of the. Different methods for allocating amongst the four towns, the assessments. We're all increasing. Not level. So that was. One element of what was happening in that. Discussion. Another element of what was happening in that discussion was after. During the breakout and then we're each town. Not separately and then came back and made comments. Is that. It was clear that Chutesbury, which has been pressing forever. About trying to. Increase our share and decrease their share by moving towards the. Actuatory formula as opposed to a formula that we negotiate. Amongst the four towns. The, the vindicate. At least there was an indication of continued pressure. In that direction. And then the third thing that I wanted to note was is that. One member of our own school committee. We actually expressed. Unhappiness about. The level. Funding question. And didn't really say. Where. More money would come from. But. Was. Feeling that. The. Discussion that had. Taken place that's the basis of this whole. Guidelines that we're talking about. I think that's the financial indicators meeting. Had a flaw in it. Because. At least in that school committee members mind. Something should have been done differently. And the only thing that was logical. Though it was not words that this. Member said. Was. Use of reserves. To fund. Some of the operating expenses for the year. So those were. Kind of the three. Major takeaways that I had. From that discussion. Is there any. Other members of the. Committee who are present. Let's see, I think I see one hand up and that's Kathy. Kathy. Did you have something to add? Yeah, just a couple of things to add when you stare at this piece of information. I think that the people's eyes can do it on the very first line. They. Reduction of 1.4 million gets you to 32.1 million. Which is about the same. Total funding as the year before. So in that case, it got you down. It just doesn't get Amherst down to total. And there is a capital side that has to be funded too. So that's just a piece of information. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. The, the union contracts as we talked about last time are open for renegotiation, but I asked. With the steps that are built in. To the current contract. How much would the wage and set? We know that the health insurance is going up by 5%. So how much is the. Wage and Sally component going up. If you just did steps. That would be a good point. That would be the 50%. Without a cola. So that I just was trying to get a sense of, you know, how tough this is. So the, the comments that then were made is this will start to. Get to personnel. I mean this, you know, To get to this number. To make this work. during this meeting is that we've had some loss of enrollment both well in the regional school in the elementary, and it potentially puts our chapter 70 money at risk, because desi computes it and there is a discussion that people understand that we're in unusual time, but that's been a flight of some affluent people they've done a survey where did people go, and some of them bought into a product they didn't leave town they just bought into private because it was open. So if school got back to in person they'd come back, but that's so that assumption that chapter 70 stays flat right now is optimistic even if the state didn't cut it the way the formula works, if it got counted against us so so you could see the nervousness with this budget. And then last then the only other thing is last night, the presentation on the state of the schools showed what the enrollment is in the schools in the middle school and in the high school. And with the over time we're down to a very low student to teacher ratio, you know people looked at it. So that is part of what they're confronting in this overall budget so there was a protest that 1.4 really hurts. And the other one they gave us was 1 million that also hurts, you know that it's not going to be easy to juggle the way they just did for FY 21. Yeah, I just wanted to clarify two things so the, the 3% number for payroll. I just want to clarify that's not 3% of the total budget. If I don't know if you can that but it's not 3% of the total budget 3% of the payroll line which you can't really tease that out from this data but I just want to make sure that's clear. And then the other piece on chapter 70 just as a pressure that as long as the whole term list vision is in chapter 70, which it has been for many years, our chat the chapter 70 doesn't go down if enrollment. It stays, it'll stay flat and the only that does have one adverse effect which is if there's a minimum increase which they typically do like a $25 per kid increase or $30 per student increase. That'll be lower if we have fewer students but it's a really, really small amounts. Okay, one each year. But if they take away harmless then, you know, obviously none of that is valid. And, John, there was a run earlier this fall, or earlier this year, I can't remember when it was with that white paper that was released by the group in Boston. I'm not trying to get rid of hold harmless but there's like 180 cities and towns are towns that still benefit from hold harmless and so politically it doesn't seem like it would happen. I just want to speak to the enrollment trends the schools have been losing enrollment to begin with. And so this additional enrollment loss whether it's permanent or not is, is on top of an already declining enrollment problem that is nationwide and particularly bad for New England. So it's, I feel like the schools are approach approaching a serious problem in that they do not have the widespread reaches into the general population of Amherst because so many people no longer have kids in schools are never did. And they look at these numbers and they say wait a minute, how can you continue to charge that if the moments are going down so there's a. This is not a small conversation. Bob. I want to add that I agree with what Lynn said I want to add another caution in that a lot of the, the, the people that I know have enrolled their kids in private schools at the elementary level or at the preschool level. And, you know, once kids get into a school and get friends and get, you know, part of that place, there's a reluctance to move them out of there into public schools so I don't. I would not assume that the, the flight to private schools is temporary. I think it's more going to be more persistent than, than what we would hope for. And I would like to also add, there is a serious racial and economic inequity caused by that flight, which unfortunately then correlates directly to special needs. Absolutely. And private schools do not provide special needs. We had to pull our son out of a private elementary school because of that. So it, in many ways the students that will be staying and up bringing greater costs with them percentage. Absolutely. Bernie. Yeah, I'm just sort of a sort of chuckling here because my grandkids are headed in the opposite direction I think the two that are school age came out of private school and are much better served in the school system. Although I think the, in the third one will be going to the Emmer school system. I do. I do worry about the imbalance that's taking place in social and economic imbalances that are taking place because of the, if you will, or the to, to private schools. I've had some conversations with folks who I refer to as COVID refugee, who are moved into the area because they don't want to be in the big city anymore. And the first thought was, well, what private school is going to send our kids to. So I think we're going to see that. And we'll, we'll, we're not going to see it easy. It's well taken we're not going to see a reversal of this. Once kids get settled in they get settled in. The schools did to a survey of the students who left families the students who left the district. It was published about a week ago and is available on the school's website apparently though I have not had a chance to look at it. I don't know if anybody else in the committee has. There's a live link if you go on the town council's packet the last night in the school presentation. There's a live link to that. I have a copy I can send it to people to so both ways. Yeah, I mean, it's there the question is, is there anybody has any comments from it my understanding was has a finding that maybe half will come back. But certainly wasn't predicting from what I understand that all would come back. Correlates to what we have to say. I bring us back to the, because I don't know that we really can do anything right now about the four towns meeting discussion, other than I wanted to make the committee aware of it and that there will be another four towns meeting, which will be with a much more complete budget presentation than was made at this particular meeting, probably in January. So we're thinking that there may be three four town meetings this year instead of two. So this committee will be coming back to the subject. We'll get back to the agenda item of the draft and into the expenses for operations and also want to say something to we I know that we have a couple of attendees who are here. And we have a public comment period. And I may ask after is we're discussed at some point as we're discussing this next section on expenses for the operating side of the budget. There are public comments because I think it'd be reasonable to if the public comments are related to the topic we're now going to be talking about that we hear during that period of time. So I just wanted to say that so that the attendees would recognize that the public comment is coming in that I do recognize their participation. So having said that, want to at least start the conversation. And let me ask, first of all whether we should add some a little bit more to the regional school discussion just recognizing the four town meeting. Is something that adds to the concern or something to that nature. So that it's a current document, Dorothy, were you going to speak on that or something else. Yeah, I had a, a quick question. If we, if we go to the state mandated, if we, if we change the assessment method method where Amherst pays more, what is the impact of that going to be huge. So I just think maybe that should be is that clearly stated in here. I mean it could happen couldn't it or do you think it's not going to happen. It could happen because you have to remember that the how the system works by statute and is that statute provides that the statutory formula is what is applied, unless all four towns agree to an alternative method. And there's shoots period is always had divided votes as to whether they should just reject the proposed formula. And force everybody on to the statutory method. And so their demand that we move in that direction has they have the ability to enforce it. They can get a majority of their town meeting to reject the assessment method agreement proposed by the school committee, which has always been the one that's been coming out of our joint discussions. And they've been picking up a percentage of votes. I mean, it's getting been getting closer and closer over the years from what people who go to the she's very town meeting have reported. Anything else Dorothy and if not all that was just just do we have a plan to deal with it if that should happen. We really don't have a lot of choices that are available to us. And we are going to have to consider that in is we go into the future as to what we are driven to do. I think one of the things that we've always been saying is is that it goes too hard, we may have to talk to other towns about reducing forcing a reduction of the budget which would have an educational impact. I think that then the question is going to be, everybody's pointing their fingers as to who's responsible for having had that reduced forced reduction in the school budget. Bob. I would suggest following up with Dorothy that maybe at a future meeting, not to this in not too distant future we, you know, discuss like what are the options you know what are the two or three things are that we could do and what are the implications, should we, you know find ourselves in the situation where the assessment to Amherst goes way up. I mean we could cut something from the school we could cut something from capital projects, we could reach into reserves, I mean all those have implications, maybe lay those out I mean it's just a thought we lay those out. So people understand what the what the choices are what the implications are. I think we will have that discussion at some point it's going to be a very delicate, difficult conversation to have but one can't avoid. So I don't know that on the theme of what we said that there's a big change other than to recognize that put in some recognition of the four towns meeting, which I can do easily. So let's go on and to the next sections, because we're as we previously discussed adopting the level of the overall level budget, but then the question comes to the budget itself. And then the last two or three paragraphs earlier. I think the critical ones and I have had some discussion with a couple of members of the committee about those two paragraphs when it was stopped there so the people at home. And by the way, for anybody who's for now, it's up to four attendees but for anybody who wants to know that you can find the items that we're looking at in the in the packet for today's meeting, and the way to find the packet for today's meeting is to go to the town website, look under government and then town council, and then after you get town council, you go to committees, and you said, and if you got a finance committee from there you find packets and you can find today's packets and anything that's being discussed today is in the public packet. The main page of the town's website, go to the calendar, and just punch on finance committee and it's, and then go to the word here, and it's all there. Dorothy, you have something you're muted Dorothy. No, the hand is still up I had I had my thing on attendees and I didn't see. Okay. Here's where we're getting into the question of with built in recognition of the community safety working group. And that they're the community services working group is going to be looking at the community health and safety and racial equity and social justice goals for that were provided for the town manager. And was that the energy climate and action committee is going to be looking at those goals, the goal or the goal that's related to energy. We want to, we want to make sure that there's consideration given the way it's written right now is consideration given to those particular. processes as the municipal budget is developed, but we're not suggesting any more detailed statements and I will explain why if somebody asked but I'm not going to do it otherwise. Why I did it that way. So it was any comment. Looking first to the committee, and then I'm going to pause and see I know that there's at least one attendee who's asked to be recognized at this point so I want to make sure that I will pause and do at least a portion of the community of the public comment period to a lot of public comment at this stage on those two issues. I see two hands up. Lunar UA is manager of the meeting are you able to bring people in. I think I just did. Zoe Crabtree. Okay, Zoe. Hi, Zoe. Could you give your name. Just introduce yourself to the rest of the committee tell them where you live and then please go ahead. Make comment. Awesome. Thank you, Andy. My name is Zoe Crabtree. I live in district five. I checked the packet earlier this week and just saw the agenda so I haven't had a chance to read the whole draft because I've been taking notes as you all speak. But I just came across a line that I would really like to push you all on. You say at the section, the second to last paragraph in the operating expenses section on page six. And there is a sentence that says we note explicitly that adding new initiatives be it investments in climate action or racial justice will mean that there will there will have to be reductions in other areas of the budget. So we recognize that we have not provided guidance on what to reduce and rely on the best judgment of you and your staff. And I think that this is the, this is exactly what your job is supposed to be is to provide guidance in the budget guidelines for how money should be spent and not spent. I mean, you've heard me speak on this matter a lot over the past couple of months so I would really appreciate. If there was a line in here about defining the police I feel like we've made a really strong case over the last several months and you all have heard heard it. And we've heard that there is, we've heard that you say that you have heard us, and we continue, I feel, to be met with evidence that shows that you have not heard us. And it would be nice if in the budget guidelines for the next year's budget, as you told us to, you know, Paul Bachman told us to pay attention and to participate in the process. And that, and it would be nice to see that reflected in in your work going forward. Thank you. Okay, thank you. In Allegra. I see her hand up I see Lydia so. Well, let me just see if I can figure out. Now to remove. So if I remove you and you disconnect my deepest apologies. This is not my forte. Oops, that I can't do it that way. All right, maybe I do it that way. Okay. So are you still there I hope. Raise your hand just to let you hear. He's still showing up. I get it. All right. Allegra is next. Hi, Allegra. Hi, how are you. Okay, so introduce yourself to the committee please tell us tell the committee where you live and as we have a couple of resident members who are not members of the council and may not have met you from previous public comment and then go ahead and offer your comments. My name is Allegra Clark. I am on Amherst resident in district two. I am also working with the group who hopes to defund the police and move money from the police into other areas of the budget that will elevate the needs of the black indigenous and other people of color. In our community. I do see that you've put that the community safety working group is also a newly formed committee that is working on some recommendations and it's our hope that some of those recommendations will come up with new ways to keep the community safe but don't involve the police and that these recommendations will come with funding. So again, echoing what Zoe said, that there are new initiatives and whether they are investments in climate action racial justice. There will be reductions in other areas of the budget and we hope that that area of the budget will be the police department. Thank you. Thank you, Allegra. And last person I know is Linda struggling with handle all this Lydia. Hi, can you hear me. Yes. Same request, please. The committee and your comments. Okay, my name is Lydia Irons. I live on Jeffrey Lane and Amherst. And I hopped into this meeting late because I was helping my five year old with virtual kindergarten, but as soon as I got on the call I heard Robert mentioned that what they were not aware like where the budget could be cut and perhaps we could cut it from the schools. And I don't know if I heard that correctly or not but if that's the case and something that you all are thinking about potentially doing. I'm like looking over at her basket of supplies lovingly put together by her teacher and I know for a fact a lot of those things were bought with that teacher's own money. It would be. It would be a real disservice to the children in our community to cut money from the school when our police budget is, you know, very large and inflated. I also know that my husband is a paraprofessional at the high school and the stress that all of those teachers are going under of trying to figure out with the union and negotiating and opening and not opening. I'm thinking about going into the next budget with a potential cut to their funding just seems inhumane and would be very taxing for people who are already so are working so hard to bring the best that they can. And as we have brought to all of you before and we will continue to bring to you. Please consider defunding the Amherst police department and their budget because they have more money than they need to do a job that they don't do particularly well. And I also would like you to remember that just because there's only three of us that could jump on this call does not mean that there's only three of us who would like to talk to you about this matter. So you've been getting emails from folks who can't come to these calls. And we've been doing a lot of canvassing around Amherst and been getting a lot of support from people. And we would really appreciate it if you could name defunding the police as a priority as you move forward. Thank you. Thank you. And I'm just going to count on you just continuing to manage because. Yes. The public, there's still two hands raised. So I need to ask. Allegra and Lydia, unless you wanted to come in again, please lower your hands. I guess I can do that. I just did it. Thank you. I'm not the normal operator here. I'm still listed as panelists, but I don't think that it. I can take care. But many events. There's, there are, everybody's been now been moved back to attendee. Okay. So, going back to the group and hands and discussion. The paragraphs that we're talking about. I'm not saying that this is a strong enough statement. To fully respond to what was just offered. But the near the top the third sentence that begins. There has been public comment. And I think you'll see it. Yeah. That sentence. Was put in there so that we recognize that we have been hearing from the public and. That it be recognized in the document itself. So I guess that's the first thing that. I wanted. To just point out. I think that there's one other thing that I wanted to say, and then I wanted to see if there's reactions that come from the members of the finance committee then as a. We're back to the finance committee discussion of the document. The state law. And the charter. We're going to actually limit the council's role. At this point, and we're playing a very delicate balance. Because. Both state law and the. Charter. Provide that. You know, town manager or mayor, whatever your form of city government is. Will provide a budget recommendation. By a date specific in the charter. It is stated as made first. So that's what we, that's what we operate under. And that the council. Then. We can. Or reduce any amount from the recommended budget. That has been proposed by the executive, which is the mayor or the. In our case, the town manager. So that we. Can ask the. But if we go beyond that, we are. Getting into a question as to whether we are crossing the line. Of what the council's role is. At this period for either the. For any of the, any purposes. In whether it's an appropriate. The following of the particular rules of the charter and the statute. In the charter course was adopted to conform with the statute. The state law. So I just wanted to make that particularly. Particular explanation. So that. Everybody understands why the wording I chose was what it is. Yeah. I see two members of the committee whose hands are up and. The first one who had raised your hand was Kathy. So Kathy. Yes. When I, as I'm sure everyone. Who's on this zoom call remembers last June. I initially suggested. That point we were taught and particularly because there were vacancies. So we weren't directly affecting a person. So just not higher. And we were told that. The impact of that would to be to lose that money. And we would lose it off the base. So if what we really wanted to do. Was to shift some funding. To alternatives. That we could freeze those positions and we're due to get a lot of funding. And we're also looking at social alternatives. So whether it's social services, public health. Something that's on the safety theme was what we asked for. And looking at other communities. So what I'm wondering, Andy, with, you know, given the caveats you just meant. It's very clear that once the budget arrives on our door. We can cut, but we can't move. We can cut the budget. We can cut the budget. Within charter and state limits. Put a sentence in here that references what we talked about last year as we suggested last year, one place to look. Is the police department and whether we could. Supported at a lower funding level. And use. That to support. Particularly the safety initiative. So that's what we're looking for. That's what we're looking for that way. Can we put it in some way that doesn't. Get us into, we just can't say that. Because we did find an artful way of wording. The freeze. And make it clear what we were looking for. So that's what can we add a sentence. That's worded in a way. That's what we're looking for. That's what we're looking for. That's what we're looking for. A possible place to look or a suggested place to look is the police department. Cause I, I, the, the, um, when Lydia came on and made a comment, we, we weren't suggesting that. You know, the issue on flat budgets is we're concerned. On what flat budgets are going to do to schools, to the town in general. Um, particularly to schools. Um, but so. Um, I mean, I mean, I mean, the one response I'm going to have just real quick is that, that's why. The language is in there that we wanted him to consider the recommendations of the working group. But, uh, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, there's some issues with the working group, but, uh, is that certain? I guess what I'm saying is the council is already on. Finance committees on record and the council is on record with what we said last June. So I'm just trying to bring that back in. Um, not to stay silent on it. Pat. And I do believe that the, if we're going to do that kind of specific and I would like us to do that. It needs to be focused on the community safety working group because they are the body that is looking into the investigation of the police departments practices, etc, and services and and trying to make some real conditions. And, and progress in changing how safety services are delivered. My other, my concern is that I do want to see the freeze continue of the two positions and how we bring that forward I'm not sure. But I think some kind of more specific mention focused on the community safety working group would be helpful. Lynn has her hand up handy to go ahead. I think we went through a very, very serious discussion about this. It led to the freeze and it led to the community safety working group. The town manager increased the selection committee to select that group. When I speak with the town manager in my weekly conversation with him, I always ask about this meeting weekly. They plan to have a report to the town manager by January 15. There's a point where we as a council feel we need to come back on the guidelines based on whatever that report says we can always do that. But we've taken a big step to support the community safety working group and open that door for thoughtful recommendations from a group of seven people. We've taken a big step to come forward with recommendations and I feel as much I am open to whatever recommendations they come forward with, but I don't feel we should in this document at this time, tie their hands with the draft of course now says is the council will want the recommendations considered in budget. And sort of I think that that draft was in line with kind of the expression that Linda. You know, I agree with what you just said, Lynn, but I think what Pat was suggesting if I look at this paragraph that if we broke the paragraph into two paragraphs so the first part was the council and I'm doing this as suggestion Lynn so don't do it yet. You know want the working groups recommended to consider in the budget period and then move that next section which starts on the climate action group down to a new paragraph. You know, and since we're writing this to Paul, you know, we said, as you know last year, we, you and we and the council agreed to freeze two positions in the police department. And that is a potential source of revenues to fund such initiatives. So I just, what I'm trying to do Lynn is not a specific. I just spend it on, but to bring back in, not be silent on the fact that we took an action and want to keep that as a potential source so I'm trying to wordsmith while not having my hands on the typewriter, but I would break it so as Pat said not, you know, and then had the flow then the rest flows fine then similarly the action. And that's fine that whole paragraph still works for that. So, but just to add a sentence at the end of this safety work group, you know, one possible source is the police department. And as you know, last year, we froze to positions to make such a consideration possible or something like that. You know, so I just want to bring it back in. And that was an agreement. It's FY 21. Yeah. Just want to second that we have so many pieces of paper and so many reports. And the burden is that we should carry forward significant related facts with them so that we don't get things don't get lost. We did take an action. And we just need to state that we took that action. We don't have to say what's going to happen, but they should be there. And that's one reason I really like so much of this report is that I feel it's, it does explain it tries to put things in context. And as I read it, I say, Oh, yes, I remember that we did talk about that. So it can stand on its own. If you always have to have reference to all these other documents, it's just very hard to go forward with business. So, I think that's a good idea. And I'm just writing a sentence, and this is draft. Maybe I should stop before I get there. I think right after alternative approaches probably works Lynn, a period right there. I mean, it's kind of what we said last year. I mean, it's for health and safety and social equity, you know, it's for the whole. But something like that, I feel is acknowledging that we were serious. Yeah. And I think it's the grammatical correction comma after while the town comma through the community safety working group comma explores with an S alternative approaches. Yeah. Thank you. And I think it's the FY 21 budget. That's what Kathy comes in. You know, thank you. The FY 21 budget. I'm fine with that. And you need the S after exploring. It's, it's the, the town. Yeah. It's just the verb is explores. Yeah. Thank you. Can I just, if we're ready to move on. The climate action committee is coming forward to make recommendations. I just don't know when they haven't. Clarified that would be. So that should, so that should be changed. Climate action will make. Yeah. Okay. We'll be making works. We'll be making. Thank you. I'm not sure how I feel about this yet, but if we're just getting the wording right in the sentence we're having first. Instead of in FY 21 was in. In or for the FY 21 budget or in the FY 21 budget, because the action. Is about the budget decision. Something that happened. The year. Thanks. Tom are there. Right here. I think. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. In the FY 21. We have FY 21. That is in adopting the FY 21 budget. That is adopting, right? Excellent. Let me go back on one other comment that Pat made, and that is that I think if we, you know, hear from the working group, you know, by mid to mid January that they need more time, we can give them more time at that point, but they have evidently jumped in. They are working very, very hard. And have made this commitment and Paul, I think feels like they really want to honor that commitment of getting something to us in January. That has her hand up. Yeah, Pat. Yeah, I've been sitting in as an attending on those meetings and they are pretty clear that they are going to ask for more time. Yeah, to make a to make recommend real depth full recommendations. And we'll bring that to Paul would bring that to the council. Yes. Yes. And I don't see a problem with that. I don't either. I guess in my hesitation lies said that I wanted to get the language that we all agreed it's the right line. For the sentence. But it does seem like in respecting the roles of the chart in the charter. So we're really running close to a line. I guess, you know, I've got this, the charter is all dog ear and keeps falling apart on me because it's easier than at the end, we clearly have restrictions at the beginning of the budget process. It's silent on we can ask questions we can be making consideration so I think in these guidelines. This kind of language is not a violation of that. You know, so it is. And it is a suggestion we're making we're saying one possible thing is to continue something that we've looked at before. Bernie has his hand up. I think these are suggestions all documents of suggestion. I think it's perfectly appropriate for the. The committee in the Council to make these recommendations to to the town manager, I will voice the concern I voiced a couple of meetings ago. I don't know that it's necessarily a good idea to anchor on the value of two positions in crafting a charter. Hopefully the community working group is not feeling confined by that. This is the way folks want to go. I'm not going to object to it. Bernie, do you think this suggests that that's the total amount of money and that's all the money there is or just it just, what I was trying to do is just reference something we'd already agreed to. Yeah, if you make it as a reference, you know, well we already agreed to do this but but again I think this is a very complicated and complex problem that's going to require some fine tuning in in dancing around and Mike my concern is that we don't start to build barriers. Either to say that we're going to take all this money from the cops or we're going to just limit whatever we do in response to the value of these two positions. So that's all I, I, I think is as it's. I could read this as well you know what you're suggesting. This is what we suggest and we do this is. This is symbolic. Yeah. It is symbolic and it was symbolic. I'm not ready to defund the police. I'm ready to listen to the recommendations of the community safety working group, and have them direct how we examine police services, etc, and for their report to inform our decisions. So this is a symbolic statement I know that it and it was a year ago when we did it. It is totally symbolic. You know, as long as we're in agreement that this is a statement of what's happened in the past and right. This is what we want you to do because we don't. Yeah, I agree. Absolutely. Good point. I'm not ready to move on. So I don't see any other hands please bring in Pat. The one thing that I just wanted to explain, including to the attendees who are still on the call are still attending the meeting. My background was in civil legal aid, and I worked, I was director of the Western Massachusetts civil legal aid program for 25 years, and worked in legal aid for 35 years total and worked with a lot of people from the low income community. So I'm not using substantial obviously numbers of people of color because that's a lot of our poverty and race, unfortunately, but in reality run together. And low income people are both victims of crime and people who are accused of crime. This makes it a very delicate issue. I'm not sure where it falls at all times as to what attitudes of people who are living their lives in poverty are feeling because when they are victims they want help, and they deserve help. And so this is a very tough issue. The other thing that I know we did last year was we had some fairly extensive conversations in June with the police department, both chief and two captains about their staffing level and the amount of money that they're funding barely supports the minimal staffing level of laws for response, which is to have two vehicles available in a serious situation, because a lot of times you don't want to send one out there that can be more dangerous for everyone involved in sending two vehicles out. It's tough issues. And I just don't want to do anything that communicates to town manager that he doesn't have to look at the totality. I'm okay with the sentence and that's why I've been expressing the hesitation that I have. I've been reading the sentence over and over and over again, and, and thinking about a second. I'm sorry I had trouble with my laptop. I've been reading the sentence over and over again, and thinking about the symbolic nature. I think this is a cop out in the sentence should be removed. I think that you and Bernie or more on track. About it. Yeah. One of the things that is very complex issue and we all recognize that there is a group of people in Amherst to believe that the way to get the money that would be available for other services is to defund the police. There are people in Amherst that don't see that as the way to do this. So, one of the issues that is not clear yet is what we've agreed, we need to have an Amherst, and that's what the community safety working group is in is working on is, you know, do we need social workers additional health care workers what you know, whatever we may need. What I think happens with a budget process is it's then up to the town manager to figure out how to get back to happen. And that may not be by cutting police and I know that's not what the defund for when three people want to hear. One of the other things that has been out there in and in and among all of the messages is they want these additional more, if you will, humane ways of working with people like homeless of mentally ill domestic abuse. And that's why they want, and they feel that somehow or another, it should come out of the police budget, but in many ways what you really say to a town manager is, you've got this group they're going to come forward with recommendations. If, if we quote the town council believe that those recommendations are good and solid, then you town manager go find out and figure out how to fund it. And what this sentence does, it's symbolic, it, it echoes what we did, but it basically says, we think you should go to the police department. And I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that level of detail, and now wall towards where Bernie and Andy of them. And since I've been sitting in the middle all along on this. And I'm not sure I'm comfortable with Lynn and Andy and Bernie. You know, I really think that the community safety working group is going to craft. They've got to craft a solution, and then we've got to figure out how to, or Paul needs to figure out how to fund it and the council needs to provide some guidance around that and that's my fear that if we, we anchor on these two positions, we're going to inhibit a genuine creative solution to what people have identified as challenges for Amherst. And let me just go further and if we think that single solution is how we're going to get at racial equity and social justice then we're really naive. Yep. The problem is only a very, very small piece of the issue. So, the only other one who's spoken heavily on this is Kathy. You have any last thoughts before we would delete this. She deletes a sentence. Yeah, I'm muttering. So you probably don't want to hear what I'm saying, but I'm clearly being outvoted on this. I do think it's a shame not to cross reference that we took an action earlier if the wording on this is not the right way to do it. I can understand that. I never thought, you know, I, when I started on police, I was literally saying, reduce it by two slots. I am. I was comparing to other places in the world and the way police are trained, thinking we do have a lot of police enamors, especially when I add the UMass police to it. And the training, not through any police officers, but the police academies have not been brought up, and they will admit on mental health and the kinds of issues they're dealing with. So I was serious about this, but if everyone is saying that is it appears that two positions alone could solve it, where the police department budget is the only place to look. That is was not my intention. I just want to not ignore that we had somewhat of a discussion last time and we're starting to look at other towns that don't use just police for some of these efforts. And that that I have a real discomfort on moving removing all this wording, but I'm not going to stick by this, I just think it's a mistake, not to reference the fact that we, I always thought it was a path forward it was a beginning, not an end. It was silent last time. And I know there's a perception that we were silent. And I don't think we were silent. So, you know, this may not be the right wording for it, particularly if it's read as, if we just took these two positions we could do a whole bunch of wonderful things with it. That wasn't the intention. I'm willing to give it up. I didn't write it. The possibility is to leave it into the moment. Does the rewrite more about it and a way to refer to the past treatment. Yeah. Dorothy has her hand up. Good suggestion Lynn. I just think not to include that this action was taken discussed and voted on by the council makes the document incomplete. Certainly, we don't, I'm not suggesting it be presented as the solution, but it was an action that was taken in good faith. So, I think it should be in in some form, just so that when you read it, you can remember what we did and what we said. Kathy, it's not your turn. Okay. You didn't raise your hand. I've been waiting. You did raise your hand pat. Thank you, Kathy. One of the things that's true is we've taken many actions around the budget this year. If we're going to reference this one we need to reference all the others and I don't think that's the position. I would love to have people come away and pat me on the back and say oh good job you're trying to keep the positions frozen. I'm trying to change policing and Amherst and that feels real different to me. And I think the emphasis needs to be on this working group of BIPOC people who we have entrusted with this action. So I do think it's an inappropriate to have this sentence. Whatever the cost for me is politically I don't care. But I care about this document. I'm taking it down. I couldn't follow the reasoning on that but I'm not, I think there's no point in arguing anymore. I thought Lynn suggestion was good keep it in and let Andy edit it. I'm not sure that in the end. Mentioning the police department and spit is a specificity. Well, why don't you leave it into your writing now so we have the wording present. And I will give it some consideration and send another draft to y'all anyway. See what I, if I can come up with anything else because I think that the key thing that we really keep coming back to is we want the working group. We want to do its job recommendations to be considered and that all possible. The flexibility be retained budget development process to allow their work to be reflected. Continuing the freeze on two positions that's where it gets to. So we go on and see if there's any comments that people have about capital or anything. What's been written about capital now. Anyone wants to raise. Kathy. I just, I just have a question if I'm assuming Sean is still hanging in there with us. I think this is really well worded. The question is, do we, do we want to raise, do we want to be stronger on, we don't think we're going to get back to 10% or is it too soon to be able to say that I know, I know Sonya has a view on that. You know, so that we're, we're making an effort to get it back up to eight. You know, over the next two or three years we might be able to get back up to 10 or is it unlikely that we're going to back. So this, and I'm just looking again for sing singling signaling here and I want it to be totally accurate so if we're not ready to but everything has become tougher because of this. So, so that that was my only, you know, we're, we're, we're, we're trying to hold the line at least do 8% this year. What we just said about the new normal, if, if our local receipts and revenues don't come back up. It doesn't look to me like we're going to get back up to 910 in the next couple of years. So it's a question Andy, I don't want to write that sentence. Well, I'll look to see if Sean raises his hand to respond. In the meantime, I'll call him Bob. Yeah, I just maybe I missed it. But should we in this section just mention the inventory that will help with capital planning needs. If there's any comments on that to Sean. Yeah, so to Kathy's point. It's a really high priority for me to get back to 10% I know it can't guarantee it and it might be difficult. But I think our aim should be to get back to 10% as quickly as possible, given our needs for the four major building projects and how important you know 10% is to making that happen. And I would, you know, keep whatever language in there about really making that a strong, strong push by us to get there. In terms of the inventory, I don't, you know, I think it's fine. I think, you know, we fully intend on doing the inventory. As I said, I think after this time permitting. So, you know, I don't have any reservations about the inventory being. It's a charter requirement so we fully plan on moving forward with it. I guess, I guess to your point Bob I don't know, Andy if there's a difference between the second conversation we're going to have where you make a recommendation to the council about adopting inventory. The inventory plan for this year versus it being in the budget guidelines I don't know, you know, if it would be redundant if it's in two places or not. Yeah, I don't know that it adds too much unless you're, unless the inventory makes a big difference to the development of a budget. I think it would be something along the lines of, you know, consider the inventory when developing the capital improvement program or something along those lines that would, you know, would make logical sense. Okay, let me look to see if I can give that in. My point was just to acknowledge the inventory that, you know, it's a, it's an effort I think will be very valuable, and it'll be helpful in looking at capital budgets. That's all. Okay, let me see if I can get a sentence along those lines. And the other thing is to make see if we can get I can get in something about that we feel it's important that we get back to 10% as soon as possible or something like that. I think that the one thing that I was a little hesitant towards is the exact wording, if revenue projections increase over the next months. We encourage you to consider increasing the percentage of the levy dedicated to capital we just to also recognize that their social justice needs which may be more difficult to meet them are otherwise thought and we also don't want to see the schools cut. Particularly it wasn't our idea to came out of other discussions at the four town meeting really where that arose. So I guess I would be cautious because we're putting a lot of as there always is if there's any additional money. There's going to be a lot of pressure on it. Kathy. Yeah. Andy you just flag that sentence. And as I hear you talking, I think we should just remove it. I think we need to keep a sense of good target, but not. We may well need that money for the new initiatives for the schools for other things not not have a strong, everything goes into capital. So if you just remove it it's neutral, I think. I actually disagree. Okay. I just agree goes back all the way to that sentence where we can't keep pushing these projects down the road. All right. I think that the other thing you could do is instead of saying what's here is the other version that I had just parented out a little bit that bringing to back to the 10% goal as soon as possible is an important step for the community or something like that. Right I'm not. I'll lower my hand I don't feel strongly about deleting it but it does send a strong preference signal, given what we know, we just said up above. So, yeah, there are there going to be no really good choices here. Yeah. You're saying easy choices. You got to page seven and we finally just said that. Easy choices here. Anything else. Dorothy has her hand raised on the capital. Yes, I think we should never forget that many aspects of our capital projects are related to social justice school, give me library renovation. Well I feel very strongly they are. Yeah. And if we're going to build any of them, we have to be very strict with our finances. Because right now we don't have a clear path to do it. We don't have one. We're just going to figure it out. Okay. The last section of the document talks about other budget needs and just makes reference to the policies on OPEB. For example, in retirement. And then the budget process section. That includes. Asking that certain things be considered in the budget doc as he develops a budget document or otherwise reported and that's because the budget document is actually not our document. And so I wanted to be not to not directive in it, but just say this is information that we think would be useful. And then that was what I was trying to convey. I think I'm glad it says or otherwise. I actually have to say I laughed when I read twice weekly in May. Meeting well into June last year. Well, we're in a different schedule this year. Yeah, we're back to normal. We're counting on it. I think that last year was that everybody was taken by surprise. You have to remember that when that hit. So, are we all comfortable with the draft as we've discussed it and what I will do is one paragraph that I was going to work on with. And generally try and do some others and then see if I can get a draft for out to you quickly and invite individual comments from members of the committee. Without reply to all which I will remind you of many, many times. And then we'll see if we can from there just go ahead and send it to the council in that form. And I don't know. I don't. I mean, somebody could make that a motion to make that what a firm statement or a policy. I don't think it's necessary, but because if somebody offers a motion, certainly will consider it. The plan. I move that we after review of the next round of drafts agree that to forward the budget guidelines to the town council and recommend their approval. Second, the Angeles. Okay. Before I move on to the next slide. I'm going to go ahead and vote for vote of the committee. Actually, what I think I'm going to do is just go ahead through all of the committee. And I'm going to call on both of our resident members. And then with the understanding that when I'm calling on them. That they are going to be required under the rules and it's not counted as part of the vote. I've got to go and see if this bear is really on my porch, I'll be back. That's a loaded statement. I just had a one upstairs to get the plug the power supply in for my laptop because it was running out of choice. I didn't have a bear. Yeah, Bernie, when I saw the empty waterfall and you're not there. My first unconscious thought was. Let's let's go for the vote Dorothy. Yes. Lynn. Yes. I support it. I'll say that I supported to Kathy. Bernie. Bernie says yes. Okay, so I will report this is unanimous vote and with the indications statements of support from the two resident members present. So we can move this along. Could you put up that memo from Sean about the inventory. Just one one suggestion. Can you send the next draft out with track changes so we can see what the changes are. Don't make it easier to review it quickly. Yes. Yes, thank you. And then you send it on. And then because we want to make sure that we have that one section right. This is the draft memo. Right. It was, yeah, I was. It was attached as email. I got it. Okay. So. Sean followed our last conversation about this and then he put together this recommendation forwarded to me. I was pleased with what he came up with. And. As an initial goal for the first year is something that was both providing useful information. And it was doable. So I. And I must note that if you don't feel that you've had enough time with it. Unlike the guidelines draft. We could put it off a meeting. I were carefully last night to the council of those 1130 at night. Most people will probably not listening that closely. You admit it. We. I think what I said last night was we might have two items. You can put it on the meeting on the agenda on the 21st, but I will tell you that if. Of the two agenda items coming for finance guide, guide and budget guidance will take the precedent. And if we have to move this to the fourth of January, we will. We will move it. We've got hands up from Bob, Kathy, Sean. Yeah, I lost my participant list again. So let me get back to that. Kathy. Going back in order. Okay. I thought this was great. I thought it was a really good start. And Lynn, if there is any way to get people to at least, you know, passively say yes to it. One of the things that would be. You know, I think it was a really, I think it was a goal. That Sean would be able to bring the first draft of this to JCPC, which would start meeting in February. So, you know, having it as a background document. As we're looking at. You know, the capital request, you know, whether it's right on day one, Sean, or, you know, by the beginning of March. I know you were starting to work on this anyway. So, but, but I really liked it. And I liked the, the bottom part that said. The purposes of it, you know, how, how we think we're going to be able to use it and what we might be able to add in the future. So I think if you say this is doable. It's great. I particularly the second part, the one, two, three, four, the four empty buildings or, you know, buildings we're not currently using. I think even if the inventory just yellow shades them or something so that it puts on our radar screen, the fact that we own some public land and properties that potentially might be useful in grand planning schemes when we're thinking about all of our resources. So I liked it. Yeah. Well, can I actually, Kathy, you just jogged my memory on something. On the buildings area. If it is an empty building or maybe even if it's an occupied building, can you include the acreage of. I was there. So Sean, you had your hand up to and was this that question is about acreage. So I missed part of what Lynn said that she said include the acreage for. Yeah. For each of our buildings, especially those that are empty or may become empty. Could you include the estimated ace acreage. So, so the, the, the lot size is sent basically. Yeah. We can try to do that. We can do that. We can do that. We can do that. We can do that. We can do that. We can do that. We can do that. We can do that. That would. You know, just, that would be great. Cause, you know, What is, so the purpose of that would be for. Well, When we were looking for sites for the fire station. We need to know how big the lot was. Yeah. I guess the, I don't know. And I don't know enough about this. You know, just. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know how you to know like how much is buildable, not buildable. Or not. That's another issue. I just build on what Lynn said though, Sean, if you can get it, but things like the Hitchcock center, the old one that's closed down. I don't know whether they have. A very small lot size or whether it goes all the way out to the road and backwards. So if it, you know, you get a different sense of. Alternative uses. Small versus big. I might be, I mean, with GIS and stuff like that, it might be something that's already, you know, that's easily something we can pull. So my comments were just to reiterate if possible, it would be nice to have this approved as soon as possible, at least the, you know, sort of this preliminary. We'll be able to pull this information out of the list because I'd like to try to have, you know, honor about January 1st be the date we pull the mileage information. And that'll have implications for the second year. If we want to try to have consistent chunks of time and we pull this information to see, you know, usage and, you know, just how often something is used in terms of mileage. We want to have sort of consistent. Data grab dates. If possible again, January around January 1st to be that date that I can let department heads know to go pull that information. Mostly for the vehicle side of this. If it is possible, you know, if there's, again, we can add things like acreage, we can try to do that if it's available. But that would be my one push. Bob Higner, Bernie and Dorothy all still have their hands up. I was just going to say that, you know, I think this is great. A good start. Again, we can noodle this forever, but I agree with Sean. It's time to kind of. Let it go and let Sean get working on it. And then we can see, you know, if we want to change it. In the future. Yeah. Dorothy. Okay. Again, I agree. It's really great. And I suggest the wording to do with the building would be lots. Lots size and building coverage. I had some questions on the vehicles. I didn't quite understand what you meant. We'll include two years in the second year. I know that means something, but I just couldn't figure out what it meant. So it just means that I think there were part of the requests were to see how many miles of a vehicle is used. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. During the year. And so we don't really have a consistent point in time where we can grab that information. So the first year we'll grab it at a certain point in time, and then we'll grab it at that same point in time the second year. So the next time we do the inventory, you'll be able to see how many miles that vehicle has used over the past year. Okay. And then the only other. Sorry. That I had to add was. You have a lot of very good questions on the cars. The question is, is this a vehicle which has many drivers or one or a few drivers? Because that makes a big difference in the, in the car's longevity. That's, that's too hard. Yeah. I think the frequency of use was what we were. To get. I mean, I don't know if we'll know. I would assume most vehicles have many drivers just in general. Or could have many drivers at different points in time during the year, but. The frequency of use. We were trying to give you a sense of, you know, is the lots, so. Okay. Bernie? Yeah, I just, thanks for taking the sound, Sean. This is gonna be valuable in a number of ways. I just wanna point out that most, that all the stuff that's in the building section should be able, you should be able to pull that from the assessor's records. And you may find that some of the buildings aren't insured or that there's a discrepancy between the insured value and the assessor's value of the building, depending on how the insurance company, when and how the insurance company determines the amount. My experience is they use a formula. The assessor's are probably a little bit more accurate, who knows, but again, pulling the assessor's records could give you those. And I'd really want to caution people not to add too much to this, because people can pull this information, slice and dice it later. The important thing is to get it down and get it started. Let's start. Dorothy, still has her hand up. Just a question. I know it makes sense to have each car, have its anniversary year, but wouldn't it be better to have one crazy year, but to say on January 1st, we do the mileage on all the cars. That's what he's doing. That's what he was proposing. Great, I agree. So that was the proposal. Recommend this to the town council. Is that a motion? Yes. Is there a second? Second. Okay, I was motion on the floor, and it's made and seconded. I will go ahead and do what I did last time and again, indicate that anybody, that the resident members will be called on as I go through this. So, Pat Dantelis. Yes. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Kathy. Yes. Brie Kubiak. Agreed, yes. Lynn Grisner. Yes. And I agree, and Bob Hegner. I support that. Okay, so it's a unanimous vote again with support from both of the resident members. You want to go back to the agenda if you can, because I think we're almost done then. And he does this. I had mentioned it early on, but I wanted to get it on the record into the minutes. There was a request last night at the council meeting that the finance committee consider the revenue that is coming in from the marijuana dispensaries and how that is being, what's anticipated budgeted and the uses anticipated for that. And I just wanted to let you know that it's not an immediate issue. I have posed some questions to the town manager and the finance director regarding the issue to help us jumpstart the conversation and looking for their input into the discussion as we go forward. I think that the specific question was whether it was just funds that were going to be going into the general budget or whether there were special uses for them. So I don't really want to discuss it even though we could, is an unanticipated matter, but we just don't have time. But if there are any questions about it and any comments, I certainly would recognize hands and build on some of them to go on. Kathy. I'd like to have it be on the agenda for the next meeting. And I know we have to talk about when the next meeting is and I'd like a really short memo that starts with about how much revenue we're talking about and how much of it is an impact part that's impact versus other. So we know the two parts. And where we're restricted, just identify what the restrictions are. So you started to talk about earlier that it's got to be marijuana related in some way, such as the police department or a training, something for the schools. So I just want it, not a long one. So we just have a document in front of us. And if it had a footnote or a hot link to something else I can read, because otherwise I'm gonna have to go off and learn this by myself. So just a reader's guide to what's on our table would be great. The amounts were reported and discussed when we discussed the year end report and fourth quarter report for the last fiscal year. And so that some of the information about the amount that we've received, what we anticipate going forward is kind of an unknown the effect of the fact that so many students were gone for such a substantial period of time and how that has affected sales is also unclear. I did the kinds of questions that I was asking in my email earlier today were things like, and I don't have the list in front of me, but whether the Department of Revenue, the Division of Local Services has any guidance, whether we have any guidance from our audit firm, Melanson Heath, whether we have any guidance from the Massachusetts Municipal Association or recommendations from other communities, those are the kinds of things that I had thought about would be helpful in getting the discussion as to what's being used and what can be used. And so just to, I have already sent that request away because I recognize that this is a complicated topic who we need to know what other communities are doing and what some of the professionals that we have to deal with are talking about. So Kathy, did you have anything else? No, that's just what I was saying, Andy, just gathering that kind of information and putting in a document. I know I can go back and look and I have a vague memory but I'm not gonna say the number that I saw in the last document on marijuana because Sonya's started to break it out. But I just, that we have the discussion when we have enough information so we know what we're talking about rather than generate all the, so if you get, you had a really good list of questions just then, and if we have some answers on that, getting back to us and putting it on the agenda makes sense to me. Yeah, so I think that what we could do if there's no other kind of questions on that one unanticipated item is, if you ask Sean the next question, item four is off the agenda because no recommendation was coming forward. Do we know when a request to consider something might come to the committee? Oh, not at this time. So I would say there's nothing to do with it right now but I'll let you know as soon as I know if there's something that needs to come back. Okay. It has to, it'll be something that goes to the council first so it'll, because it'll have to be referred to the committee. So. We get referred to finance and in the past CRC but I could see town services being involved this year. So the real issue is instead of making people make multiple presentations, at some point do we have a committee of the whole where all of the committees involved are try to be at the same meeting? We did that last year with CRC and finance meeting together in one meeting and then breaking into two meetings after the presentations. Right. Problem is that this year the CPA funds are really, some of them are right now recommended being going for town buildings. And some are for other things that are community based and both have financial implications. Yeah, but then we are getting to a committee of the whole council just about. Yep. Exactly. And we also have to deal with the question as to where we have crossover members because if you break in, it worked last year because when it happened there was nobody who was serving both on CRC and the finance committee. But when we get to the TSO, that's not. That's serious over mine. So I think that that's something we'll have to figure out later, which then gets us down to the meeting schedule so that we can conclude. And since there's no, the public is now departed and I gave one public comment opportunity but now there's nobody to come back to anything else so meeting schedule. The, what we had said to the council was that if they don't adopt the guidelines of the 21st and want to refer it back to the committee for either further drafting or for further consideration, that we would have a meeting on the day after which is the December 22nd. But this committee has sort of expressed a feeling that that was getting fairly close to a major holiday and that we wouldn't do it unless absolutely necessary. And so we would hold it, but that's where we were. We also had a meeting therefore scheduled for the 15th. And I'm going to recognize Dorothy who's going to explain her hesitation of having a meeting on the 15th, but that would be where we would have an opportunity. And I'm not sure that we could really come back to the marijuana thing that quickly anyway on the 15th, but Dorothy, you want to express the conflict? I don't have it written out in front of me, but it's a CRC meeting at two o'clock at the exact same time. And it has invited a huge number of other committees, planning board, zoning board of appeals. I think Kathy, isn't it, isn't CBCG, whatever the block grant, isn't that committee invited to and the housing trust? Yeah, it's on the larger zoning housing set of issues. Yeah, yeah. So it was just a really major meeting. I'm not part of it, but I attend because I find it very important. So the request goes that we not have a meeting that date. And we're gonna have to have a meeting. If we have anything that we need to get done by the 4th, we'll have a meeting on the 22nd. Or it could be on the 15th, but a different time. It could be 12 to two, or it could be four to six. I'm just pulling them out of my hat, but they're both set to start at two. I can be 12 to two. But I just asked, next, are we talking about the 15th? The council won't have met. So we're not gonna get the guidelines back until the council meets on the 21st. So the topic for the- We may not get them back at all, let me just adopt them. Right, so it's not clear to me what would be on the agenda on the 15th. I'm totally willing to switch to a different time, but it's just not clear to me what would need to be on that agenda. And if we won't have answers back on marijuana yet, and we need to meet on the 22nd, we'll have time to also address that. I'm just asking, what's the topic for the 15th? Yeah, so my suggestion is that we skip, but we don't have the meeting on the 15th. That we keep the 22nd as a tentative meeting until and recognizing that we may not know until after the council meeting, whether it's necessary that we attempt not to do it unless it's absolutely necessary that there's something that requires action and recommendation for the meeting on the fourth. And otherwise that we agree that the next meeting be on January 5th at two o'clock and that we will attempt to see if we can get the marijuana discussion and move forward from there. Is that an acceptable plan? Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Okay, hearing no objections and seeing no hands raised objections. Is there anything else that people would like to raise is some anticipated business? I just want people to know that we're interviewing for the additional candidate for income at GOL at 10.30 next Wednesday, not this week, 10.30. That will be a posted meeting and so that people, all of you can attend the meeting. Lynn, I thought it was, I thought the interviews were on the 16th. They are. Yeah, okay. And I thought you said something else. I'm sorry. Yeah. Well, they are in the 16th, Kathy. And Andy, just on the meeting on January 4th in advance of that meeting or during that meeting could you give us a rough sense of will we be meeting on the 19th? You know, will there be two meetings in January? Just some sense of January and February. I block them on my calendar. So it's useful me for me to know it. So I don't need to know it now. I'm just saying, you know, is it a kind of an every two week schedule or not? And Sean will at some point tell me when JCPC will begin to meet. But, you know, just, so that's my only request. So. Yeah. We will read, we are going to go into a period now where we don't need to have quite as frequent of meetings because once the guidelines are done, the budget kind of goes off over to the executive side and we don't have anything to do on the budget. And we just need to see what else we need to move on. On the other hand, there are some things that are coming up and I have to get dates from Sean and Sonia about them. For example, the actuary for the OPEB was going through and what they do is they look at the current population of retirees and other information about health insurance projection costs and they redo the analysis of the amount of our OPEB liability. And that will generate a meeting probably with the OPEB actuary. And we have to figure out when that gets scheduled. At some point we will also, and I don't know Sean, if you have any idea or have heard from Sonia about when Melanson Heath will be finishing up NetFi 20 audit and we will have to meet with Melanson Heath. I would think it's pretty close. So I would say that would be a good, good topics for maybe sometime in January. So I think that those are the things that are coming up but until we have indications of the completion of those documents and can work ourselves into the schedules of the professionals that the actuary and the audit firm and make them coincide with our regular meeting dates I can't give you a prediction with certainty, Kathy. Yeah, I wasn't asking for certainty. And I know the other one was to bring back, at some point bring back the Sean's magic modeling tool on the four big projects to have that conversation. So I just, it was by January 4th, if we got some rough sense that two meetings in January or two in February, just, and if you don't have it, then fine. I'm just saying, yeah, that's fine. We'll work on that but that's, anything else from the committee? Because if not, I think we're ready to declare it at the end. I appreciate how long people stuck with it today but we did a lot. We can be from the draft that we're gonna be sending. Bye everyone. All right, bye. Bye. Bye-bye. Bye. Lindsay, thank you.