 I'm sorry I'm late. I just had to leave my district meeting. You are actually exactly on time because we are just starting so I want to thank everyone for joining us on April 1 our last JCPC meeting I think as we finalize this document and I wanted the first things I want to do the entire agenda tonight is to look at the final. I want to make sure that we have make any additional changes on verbally and then get to a final. So what I want to just do because we're meeting virtually per governor's order is go around to make sure everyone can see and be heard so I'll just go around the room as I can see them so Mandy. Andy. Peter. And Tammy. Present. So everyone is here. We have a full committee which is pretty much what we've had every time which is fantastic. So we have a document and I'll ask Sean to pull it up on the screen and then you know Alex you can be the guide because you know what you did where. And the, and tell me I did I already incorporated the how do what do we call months and so we call it the same thing. So we will do that so I think we can just pull it up and then go through any additional changes and you're going to have to make it a lot bigger, I think Sean, at least for my eyes. How's that. I don't know if you'll see that or should he make it still bigger and somehow it's not going young and a year on zoom I can't see anymore. So my works, my work lab monitors very big. So it's a very big on my screen but that's okay I'll make it. Oh, pretend your grandmother wants to view it. Okay, I think for me that's good. Does that work for other people. Okay, I think everyone's seeing so, so the, the changes that I incorporated, I tried to be minimalistic and just get what I thought was the sense of what we were saying. So I didn't do a lot of rewording and Alex, I think your start right at the recommendations is that right. Yeah, the months and months and building HVAC. Maybe I, again, maybe I heard this wrong so I'm going to read it the way I rewrote it because it's the way I heard it, which is different than the way you have written so if other people didn't hear it the same way I'm happy to be shut up. So, I wrote that we recommend a budget sufficient to replace the existing HVAC system with energy efficient VRF system based on discussions that $30,000 request would be combined with existing funds to replace the system. I would agree with recommendations regarding adding insulation, ceiling fans and other measures to increase efficiency in the building. If these additional measures can be funded out of the existing maintenance funds. If there are not sufficient funds they should be added to the FY 23 budget request. So you had like 30,000 for insulation and I don't, that wasn't how I heard it so I heard it that he was asking for the 30 to get him the VRF but he also thought that was going to get him some hands and inflation as well. So, but maybe I heard it wrong. So I'm just looking. I mean we can certainly check the tape on that. And I have no problem with that rewording. So, I'm looking to anyone else. Silence. So Mandy has her hand up and he had her hand up. I think, I think they say about the same thing I think just Alex is as clear what I heard was there's 30,000 in the current request and that would be sufficient to put in a VRF system, but he believes we'd need another 30,000 on top of that to be able to do the other energy efficiency installations like insulation and fans and stuff like that. Okay. So I'm fine with it. They say the same thing but I think Alex's is potentially clearer. Okay, so we'll just do a she sent me that wording, and we can put it in. You want me to copy it in right now Kathy or just so people can see it. Sure, so you've got Alex's right. Yeah. So when it went when he was presenting the it gets doubly confusing because there's an additional amount and he's asking for because but he already has money. So that what that's what got him up to the 120. So the request is for this amount but he has an additional amount and then he needs another additional amount for the insulation and ceiling fans so I think Alex is wording, probably gets to the full gestalt of what is fine. How do we get from 30 to 120. It would help explain that. Alright, I think I just put in the new language so you want to take a look and see a fat. Alex's. Can you take a quick look make sure I grabbed it correctly. Sorry I'm muted. Yeah, I think so I assume if you just cut and pasted it. Yeah, I did. Yeah. I'm going to make it extra small in my screen because I have mine side by side. Tammy has her hand up to Kathy Tammy. I had made the comment about it, explaining about subtracting the debt service to get an amount close to the request but it seems like we have two paragraphs that are similar. Allowing us for debt service and then the initial capital press, including the one point. It seems like it's, it's a little repetitive. I don't know I'm confused. What section are you on Tammy. Okay, there you and the first paragraph you talk about the allowance for debt service total available equals 5 million but then the next thing talks about total 7 million including the 1.6 million. So it's, I just wanted to have it one place where it explains that the 1.6 million gets deducted from the total capital. So that that's where you get that these requests nearly equaled available funds. I think people reading this aren't going to understand that you subtract the 1.6 million from the 7 million. So I don't know. So you're saying this, the sentence here. It kind of, it's kind of repeating. I don't know, I don't know how to, how to do it. Unless it says, because the total requests really didn't equal 7 million mean minus the 1.6 which you've got up there. So it's just confusing to me that you get the total available cash spending is 5 million than the next paragraph that I don't know I'm just it just seems a little confusing I'm not sure the best way to maybe somebody else. Nobody else is confused by it. I just think that if somebody is reading this we want to make it really clear. Somebody goes on the, you know, the town website and says, oh, I'm going to read that that it's really clear what we're doing. Andy has our hand up. Andy. I wonder if changing the word including to just which included 1.6 million would would take care of that. Because you do refer that. I mean it's already up there with after the after allowance for debt service and prior capital projects that total available is 5 million. Well, here's the difference I mean the. That's the cash capital then we only have 5.4 and cash to spend. But if we borrow another 1.6 we get up to the seven that's that's where we can be spending that so we're doing the chiller with debt. We're doing that. You know, so those are different. They're different. Okay, then do the which includes. Okay. Okay, 6 million I think that's Andy's is. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So I'm not seeing another hand up so sustainability. Alex, you're just going to have to call out because yours. I'm not, I didn't memorize what things you. Come on. So, and again, so I'm not sure I've seen a final number I didn't know whether the sustainability actually got to 100 or not I haven't seen that so I had just changed it on sustainability fund. The sustainability fund to say, we endorsed this new fund and recommend an increase from $50,000 to such higher amount that can be achieved through closing out old articles to a purpose past appropriations and reductions in line items to the f y 22 budget for computers and copiers. We recommend an initial goal of 100,000 if achievable. This amount should be reevaluated next year to determine appropriate amount of for this fund. Fund will position the town blah, blah, blah. So again, if I've got that wrong, let me know, but that was Kerry's comment about not setting the 100,000 as like forever, and I didn't like, is it 100,000 or are we still working on that I don't know. I'll wait to see other hands a minute I had thought that we thought it was a good idea to go to 100. Well, good idea is different than like we've actually moved the money, you know what I mean like we've been able to cut it to like so I'm trying to get a balanced budget. That's why I was saying like our goal is 100 but like we're going to take we can get and put it there. Unless I'm missing something. I'm looking Mandy, you know, because I thought this was actually a recommendation to do this so this is, this is a recommendation to the manager. So, I don't know whether it's good to not set a number. You know, because we're recommending to him to re jigger the amounts in copiers and all and so we could do either Alex is wording that has something and increase ideally to 100,000 for next year or something but I think we should put a number in there of what we would like to see it at, which I said we recommend an initial goal of 100,000. Yeah, I was just trying to say, basically say like, we want you to re jigger as best as you can and your goals 100 grand but I didn't think that we were like handing him a balanced budget with 100,000 and so I just wasn't sure that that was yeah. Alright, so Kathy do you want me to put in the other version. And you can see what it looks like. I do. I guess I want to hear from anybody else. I mean, I don't mind making a concrete recommendation. I mean, last year, if, as everyone remembers was a much different year but we. We had a particular split on the capital fund, and he just overrode our recommendations, you know, you know, but, but I mean we had a recommendation was strongly considered it. No, he took it under advisement. So it's, you know, I, I don't mind softening it but I thought we thought a target of 100,000, given what we were going to want to be doing with this fund made sense and they then some of the discussion carries hands us up. Yeah, sorry, I'll stop talking. No, it's okay. I was just going to say that. I think the way I remember was that the 100,000 was a number that seemed to 100,000 seemed like a number that the town manager was comfortable with. And I, I kind of thank you for the reminder Alex about my comment about making sure that we're not setting a precedent that is something that might get us in trouble down the road as. And so I, I'm fine suggesting 100,000 and I also be fine putting in that comment here I'd also be fine saving a comment like that for if this is supposed to be an executive summary I could see that being something that maybe we'd save for later on in the document and saying just about sustainability fund later on that this is something where we'd want to potentially, you know, reevaluate it as as we move forward, just because it's such a new new fund. Okay, Peter sand is up. Yeah, I mean, I like, I'm more or less like the language as it is. I like, I like the idea of just setting a value that didn't seem outlandish to either Sean or Paul. With whatever conditional we want to put in that we're not saying that this is a locked into minimum for, you know, the next X number of years that must increase by some by some value. I think it's, it doesn't seem like that strong of a commitment because because that entire next bullet is a pretty large conditional that you know that we're going to have to do some accounting work here to repurpose and to work with the schools in the town the technology request if it's feasible so I think it's, I think it's fine like it is, but I'm, you know, certainly, I understand the idea of not wanting to set the precedent. Okay, one thing to what Peter said here. I think the, the two versions is essentially say the same thing, except for one sentence that maybe we can just add which is this amount should be reevaluated next year to determine appropriate if it's the appropriate amount for the fund. Maybe we could just add that to the version that's here. Other than that I think most of the things in both for it may not be said in the same way but I think it's said throughout the document. Okay. Are you okay with that Kathy. I'm okay. I'm, you know, I shouldn't be a final say here I just was a first drafts person. But I'm going to put it in there and let's see if it looks. Is that the right spot or should I put it at the end. I'm looking for anybody else on this. I think it's the right place. Yeah, I think that works. All right, so we go to move on to the next bullet point. So the next one I just thought for, I know this is for the town manager but if somebody in the public reads it I thought it might be helpful to just add a clarifying sentence at the beginning that says you know, due to computer purchases made under the cares act and lower usage of certain equipment due to building closures we recommend working with departments to reduce school town and library technology requests as feasible and placing those funds into the sustainability fund. I'm fine with that wording. Did everyone. I mean, Sean's got Sean's go. So whatever we change here will change the internal one so it's, we only have to change it once. I was thinking where to put it and I guess I could just. Yeah, I've got Alex is so like we can do it later. You know, I do, you know, this is also, you know, a slight difference in writing set styles. I'm often criticized for being too brief. I'm always criticized for being too long winded so. You know, and I, you know, I have this background where I was told the executive summary could only be 150 words so I word Smith the down to one, you know, like had to get it down. So, but so it's the so just at we'll just put that wording in. Okay. So I'll just go back to the original request. This, this one I reworked a fair amount from last time to try to capture, particularly Mandy, you wanted to make it, you know, clear that how would it, you know, that there was money over in the regional pool, and that this all should go first for grants and then come back to the sustainability. So that was the rewrite here. This is different from what you saw last time but Alex you had rewords on this one too, I think, yes. No, I just changed by first seeking to through but that's really not like, yeah, that's stylistic. So I don't have any edits to that one. Okay. And I just want to make sure everyone's comfortable with that at that point I mean I did see Peter and Kerry that it is definitely in the regional school budget now that 15k. So it's not just a maybe. Well, it gets approved. Oh, right. It's, it's in the proposed budget. The 60 days have started so it's in your request that is on a countdown. Okay, Alex, why don't you just let us know when you get to your next changes. So this school band for special needs, I was just changing that allocating funds from the sustainability to seeking additional funds from the sustainability fund because I, I mean, I don't know, like, I guess I was, I was trying to give the town manager like options but again, you know, that's I'm sure it's just me trying to be friendly and maybe we need to be more like, this is what you should do I don't know. Are people okay with seeking. Yeah. So North Amherst intersection, I took out the we recommend town manager delay the request and just said we recommend financing the study and FY 22 only if there is evidence that spending money would significantly enhance the likelihood of getting a grant based on information we received proposed interest proposed intersection construction would be 1.8 million. I mean, that was what I heard I'm just sort of reducing the edit reducing the editorial piece and just making it factually like we said, you know, if it's going to help get a grant. Go otherwise no and so. So that just goes we recommend and then it goes right down to, right, we recommend financing. I think that makes total sense that's much better. So I think it's, it's basically those two sentences right. Yeah, Alex. Yeah, and then you don't have you don't need the further anymore. You know what says we get it goes. People okay with those. I think the between financing and study now. Yeah. So I did have, you know, I had a question of you Sean on, but I think this is where you everything that we're putting in this document is as proposed to us. So one of the things I saw that is if we don't do. 1.8 was assumed not to be a grant but was resumed to be debt, which Sean said it was then the out years. Our budget is more balanced than we think, because if we would only do that 1.8 million with a grant. We're not incurring debt for it so Sean you'll I just I'm assuming that you'll work with Paul on that. Yeah, we haven't finalized what we're going to do but I think I mentioned before, my thought was, maybe pulling the big chunk of this project off the list and putting it down in one of the sections that we create where it's on our, you know, in the planning phase. And that way it'll take the debt out of out of the plan so we're not sort of artificially reducing what's available. You know, and that's, you know, Peter was going to your point about what happens in out years to operating costs it's a couple hundred thousand dollars in debt that we won't have if we can get a grant for this. And so if we're only going to do it if we get a grant, you know, so you'll you'll just address that we don't I figure we don't need to talk about that. Yeah, that's one of the, one of the things that will be, I'm sure will be updated in the final version of the capital improvement program. Okay. Next. So my next comment is on the, the committee observed that the five year plan, wait, oh, the choir support. Yeah, so the committee observed that the five year plan illustrated in appendix a. So, this is really poorly worded by me, for which I apologize, but the, what I wanted to get at was. There's been a plan right like it's not like we're suddenly like oh my god there's projects and we have to like change how we're spending money and you know every JCPC capital reports since I've been on has sort of consistently talked about shifting money to roads and sidewalks and eventually to shift it back so when I first started on JCPC we were spending basically nothing other than chapter 90 on roads and like $30,000 on sidewalks and we were bumping that up to a million. So even, even in FY 24 through 26, like dropping down to 750 and 500 is still like miles better than what we were doing previously. So I just wanted to add some kind of language that like, you know, as part of the planning for the four major capital projects the town manager has continued to make roadwork and sidewalk repair a priority and JCPC agrees with the continued higher levels of spending to address the backlog of unnecessary repairs. The five year plan illustrated in appendix a reflects the anticipated return to lower levels of spending on road sidewalks and equipment and again just trying to remove the editorialization that I perceived in the document and just kind of stick with being consistent from JCPC to JCPC in terms of like we have a plan. This is the plan that we're doing and that may not be the right language but that's what I was trying to tweak that paragraph to. I put the sec, I think this is what Alex just said, above, and it would replace the paragraph below it. If you guys want to make that change. You know, I am okay with it the one. It's certainly it's certainly accurate. The one thing that was. I do think the town manager, when he talks about this. He wants to bring this up to people. You know, whether you we see it or it could be seen as a return to lower levels. When we're told that we're not beginning to eat away at the backlog, and the people are asking when is my road coming in. So I think just, you know, Paul just needs to flag this when he talks so I think this is accurate. I mean, so the one sentence I had that, that that we recommend that town manager highlight this when he presents the budget, you know, was the other sentence. Are people okay with Alex's paragraph and then keeping the last sentence of the original. It would look like this. Peter's goes hand up. Peter. Yeah, so I guess I'm just confused about what it is we say. Whoops. Sorry, you're moving all the words around on me. You want me to go back. I'm sorry. So this, this phrase JCPC agrees with the continued higher levels of spending to address the backlog. I don't know about that. And it's not just because I love to bash the sidewalk. It's not just because it's my favorite whipping course. It's, it's because if the whole document right we're going into excruciating detail about what we do support and approve for this budget. And then we talk about the F the five year plan in general terms. No, if we need to opine on what the town manager has done recently and what they've done has been doing FY 21, with regards to the spending, I mean that that stuff has been, you know, adjudicated by past JCPCs and town councils and town meeting for that. So, but I do like the general point that Kathy and Alex were making that. This has happened, and the town manager needs to highlight and emphasize emphasize this to the public when presenting the, you know, what what the ebb and flow of the relative spending of the capital backlog including the roads. I'm happy to be overruled but that was that that's just how I read that. Sean just took this he's he's being very clever here but he just took the sentence about day to be a crease with this he took that out so instead it now says the town managers continue to made a priority, the five year plan is we'll be going back to lower levels. So it doesn't have us weighing in on this, it has us just stating what's in the five year plan. I mean, so that that that version feels feels good to me, but I'm fine. I think that's fine we certainly did not have a long discussion we had it last year, where we talked about roads being a priority but we didn't this year so I think this is accurate. Yeah, this is accurate. I think that's fine. So let's see if it makes sense. And many Joe and Tammy and Tammy. Yeah. Tammy, I didn't have a problem with the original one. But I'm happy if you're going to take out the that we agreed. Okay, read up something with my computer so as I said I was fine with the other one. This one's okay now that you took out and we agreed with it. Because I don't. I think it's fine to have this new one. I wasn't unhappy with the original one that Kathy wrote, because I also like to be spare in my writing. So I'm in agreement with that. So Mandy. I'm fine with this except for the last sentence now doesn't seem to make sense with the manager make these choices clear I like the word highlight highlight this plan when presenting the five year capital plan. Yep, that sounds great. Highlight this plan. That's what I said, I don't know whether that's the greatest wording either. We can, we can, we can make sure the wording works. I like these choices. Anyway, trade offs maybe trade offs. That works trade offs works. Yeah. I mean these, it's these trade offs and it goes with what we don't really talk about specific trade offs though, but we could just say highlight trade offs. Okay. Right. Yep. Something like that. That looks good. We're only on page one. Like a five minute meeting. We got a vote tonight. You're going to mess up a budget calendar. And in the next they just carry has her hand up to. I just had a nitpicky change, which was maybe you did you already fix it by taking off in the future. I don't know what it's flying by. I don't, I don't see it. I caught it in mind so I think it's already been removed. I'm working off a paper copy. I don't have another comment till page three. Thank you very much. Okay. I'm going to last when the words in the plan may be unnecessary, but it's not a big deal. Okay, I'll just, you know, I will read it really carefully when we get through with this. I think it's going to be hard enough time seeing when the hands go up. So I'm glad I'm not typing. Okay. So I think it's going to be, you know, Peter. Peter sent. Thumbs up on it. So I think it's going to be mainly you, Alex, because I got Mandy small. Mandy's got a couple of comments later. Those blue ones were mine. These are, these are Mandy's. Yeah. Are these okay to accept or do we want to talk about. Yeah, I did. I left anything that was actually word ending in that wasn't just missing a period and missing a. Seems they seem like they're fine to me. Yeah, I like these additions a lot, Mandy. Yeah, any, any, I'm like waiting for, you know, I thought one of the things this change did is that. It was what Carrie had said about the, the band. You know, we, if we want to hybrid, but we don't. It might be more expensive than we think. So this is where this. Fun can come in and be useful. John, right at that cursor right above there. I think you mean fund other capital projects. Not fund capital other. To and to fund other capital projects. Sorry, I should raise my hand. That's okay. You should have. I think at this point, shouting out will help because I'm missing the hands. Okay. Your faces are all very small right now on my screen. My only comment in that section was I, I found the use of a long time town resident to be like. Oh, I didn't. Why is that relevant? No, I didn't know how to describe it. Okay. Okay. Oh, just a town and a town, right? You know, I mean, what is long time? No, I was more mature. They're two high school students and a more mature town. And a resident, because the high school students are residents also. I literally didn't know. Residents because they might be from one of the other three neighborhoods. Yeah. Thank you. This one Kathy must have been left over because this number has to be updated. So I'll fix this number. Okay. For the final version. Okay. And I'll talk about my comment. I just didn't remember. It being, we've been told that the police station would be closed if it was closed, but it was highly disruptive. So if we were told it was closed, then the wording is fine with me. If we were told that it would just be hugely disruptive. I would change the wording. I just couldn't remember. So maybe for this one, Kathy. Unless people feel strongly one way or the other, I can just check with Jeremiah. Probably tomorrow morning and we can. We can make sure it says whatever you wanted to say. We can adjust it based on what he says. And Mandy, your wording would cover closing. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. A major disruption could be interpreted as a temporary closure. So I'm fine with this. I just, you know, he said it so nicely. And by the way, we'd have to close the building for a while, but he might have said, you know, and the building would be a wreck. But I think that works. The only thing I would add is it was an electric chiller. So we didn't completely like back out on like doing. You know, I mean, I just would put in there that it is an electric chiller. Proposed purchase of an electric electric. Yeah. And to be financed by debt, you need a D on financed. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Comments on page three. And then this section would just be a cut and paste of whatever we did at top. Total copy and paste to the other. Yeah. Yeah. That should probably be marked. So it's not forgotten to be done. It's okay if I just do it right now real quick. Sure. We can have a nice clean document. This is. I mean, after watching Sean edit the document like this. I know. Yeah, my first experience for Sean was when he still was working through the schools and he was doing this with cost estimates where they were magically changing in front of our eyes. You want to see it a different way. So. So recommendations are good. Page four. So Alex, you were, you had a removal of a whole paragraph and I'm fine with taking it out. It was, as I explained earlier, it was in. You can point out people what, what your. Where it comes on this page. So I think you removed. You have removing everything about the detail in the library. Well, I had. So I'm trying to track like where things are with where mine is. I had. Hold on. In the paragraph, the proposed five year plan. If where it says, last sentence, if accepted, the town share would be as much as. It's not as much as it is. Okay. So just take out as much as. Okay. Okay. And then in the funding for the library sentence. I just wasn't sure why we were calling out funding for the library. And instead I just put funding for four major capital projects. That's fine. Yep. What was that? I'm sorry, Alex. The next paragraph says funding for the library and three major projects. Just to say funding for. Funding for the four. I don't know why we're calling out the library. They're all funding for the library. But they all need funding and they all need back then. And then on the. JCPC committee members discussed. That the five year plan. JCPC committee members discussed the five year plan I took out the is ambitious. We didn't discuss its ambition, just discussed it. So JCPC committee members discussed the five year plan will result in pressure on operating costs. Again, just trying to take out the editorialization and just keep it fact based. And you don't need the word likely, it will. Exactly. Yeah, it will. Exactly. Okay. Okay, with those changes. And this is Mandy now a temporary 20 to 30 increase. And this is yours, Mandy. Yeah, it was just trying to clarify it's higher taxes, but not permanent higher taxes with a debt exclusion override and the 20 to 30 years is because I don't know. I know there's a plan for. I don't know what the debt exclusion plan is for how many years. It's 30 right now, but you're right if interest rates are coming really low or something and we can keep it the same at 20 we might consider that. I don't know what you wrote it is right. Alex, did you have anything in these, you'll call out if you have any right. Okay. Yeah, I've been blurting out all meeting so I will stop now. Okay. You had an edit I think in this new this process, right. Oh yeah and five, I, because I do because the asset maintenance table is still under construction I was just changed to staff is further developing, because we're not going to have anything attached and. That way it's like we are working on it. We have started, I don't know, whatever language people want. And I changed when you get to the. Yeah, I think Mandy had suggested the Mandy wording that she gave us last time is in here on when you get to the bottom. This is the. This was the section where I kind of again I was sort of commenting on before we started the meeting which is that I feel like, I feel like this committee has specifically not discussed or really opined on the major capital projects and I feel like this language was in the context of JCPC reports because we did used to discuss them but we're not now so I don't take issue with mentioning the appendix, or, but I just, I felt like we were getting into details about things that really aren't under the purview of this committee anymore because we're not talking about them. I agree with Alex I mean I don't know why we need all this stuff about the mass board of library commissioners. It's a copy and paste from the old one so I'm fine taking it out so Alex show where which was, where does it start being the delete. My, the bigger question to the group is, what, what do we need here, if anything, like, are we, we're including appendix a, which is the switches a is it be that I don't know I don't have anything in front of me to know what's what is the five year plan. I think in the second paragraph, I would argue to keep the first I think it's three sentences. So the five year plan is noted above that your person's kind of amounts for major if we're just trying to be informative major building projects the projects have not yet been approved. And the plan hasn't been approved but a realistic plan must include tentative amounts. Okay, then take that was precisely put in. Yeah. Yeah, that's what I was thinking that if you take everything out then. Maybe the next paragraph as well in the schools or I don't because again, I don't know, like, although I need Peter and carry. It might be worth putting that FY 25. It's there, because that's within the five years, but maybe just the first sentence of that. Yeah, so you could take you could just say new scout FY 25 take the next sentence out and then go DPW and fire shown as 22 and 25. Right. Yeah. And then the amounts of timing will need revision once a project plan is adopted. Right. Okay, we'll just take out those sentence. Okay, so which ones am I doing. So after the new school is shown in FY 25 of those those uncertainty take the next sentence out. And then the next sentence out the table includes 40 million tentative and then we say tentative amounts for new DPW building does that work are shown in FY 22 and FY 25. Yeah, I think that paragraph makes sense now because it's all about timing. The library the only one of the four projects we're not calling out in that section. I don't mind putting the library in but the library is, I know, like, like the language that was there before was sort of the old language that was unknown so I don't have a problem, putting it in I just wanted to be consistent with like this is known this is tentative or whatever I just wanted it to be. I thought we had somewhere, maybe it's earlier that the library is shown but maybe we don't. I do, it says it up you know I can we don't everyone doesn't have to, we can all focus on the words if we want but we can make this work with the library up above is saying we were going to spend 15.71, you know, that amount is shown, and we can just press it up above. So maybe this last sentence you know the library is shown for FY 22 and then so we're, we can make that last one work so because what we have is the big point is they're all coming in in this five year period. That's the main point that this is why. So we'll make we'll make that work that it's not missing it, Peter, and just say you know the five year plan has this sequence. I don't see strongly about it I just was reading the list and then. This was an ad from last time that's why a yellow highlighted it because you had said you were not showing the what we've delayed but refer to it that by necessity some things have been delayed so this was my wording that I added. And then we suggested that the list be realized and Mandy did some edits on this but I think we said just two categories and somehow. I think I tried to capture them. But I came up with three. The categories that some of the grant content grant dependent and if we got the grant would be ready to go some have been discussed in our priority we're just not ready to do them, and some that we haven't done any analysis yet but will be on the radar so I just said three groupings here. Can I say something real quick. Yeah. I think the groupings are good. I don't have any issues with those groupings only sentence I thought we might want to reconsider is where it says this plan delays some other projects, and it, like the senior center so I don't know. So just so I don't know if the senior center has been delayed I think that's an example of one where it's still sort of being discussed when you know if and when kind of thing. I think just then get senior center out because we heard specifically from Dave on dredging purpose. Right. So just has been in the plan. offers or the senior center Andy offers. Yeah. Okay, next turn neighbor who's going to be very upset about this but it looks like if we don't do the North Amherst intersection that borrowing could just be moved to puffers. That's for the FY 23 JCPC to discuss. Or the fire truck will just put Dave against. Well, anyone who hasn't been to puffers I walk around there a lot because I live up here. It's going to desperately need dredging because of all the trees that have been falling into it. You know it's whatever was there before is now got more. Yeah, no we are considering some grants for that project there was one that we were trying to do this year but they limited how many grants we could apply for. Priority. We're about to be at the end am I right. Yeah, because then that's the end right there so we're close. Yeah, so I had last time, I wanted to revisit one thing about the appendices. Last time we agreed to just do the consolidated five year that shows the totals and not put the line by line items and each of the five years. And I personally feel like if those are missing from this report. I will never know where to find them. And I find them useful to look at to see what was tentatively planned for when. What was tentatively planned for when. So I didn't know whether what people want to reconsider that or just shown figures finds an artful way to have them sitting right there whenever we find this report. So I put a link into the original draft because the draft is what we were working off of but then indicate X, you know, the future projects is on page X, and the vehicle inventory is on page why and the full five year plan is pages. So I can talk with Sean about a way of doing, you know, the, as you know, the, the Excel spreadsheet that does all of them goes on for multiple pages so it bulks up the report. Quite a bit if there's an easy way of having it be freestanding. And I do have this extra appendix way at the back. And again, I, Alex and Andy, this is just copy and pasted from the old JCP that defines what is capital. Peter. Peter's up or Alex's hand is up but whether we want to have that at all was a question I asked, and Mandy said she could live without it. So those were the two things did we want to have the Excel spreadsheet in here at all and this was should just get rid of the short history in the back, which I just moved out of the document to the end. So Alex. I just had one quick the very last sentence of the document on page six. Okay, sorry. Go back up. All right. Close our eyes again. Sorry. Let's try not to shout out. Okay. Okay. Go down one more. It's on the next page I lied on mine at six. Yeah, here. So it says we recommend increasing the funding level for capital projects to 10% in subsequent years. And not fall further behind in preserving and maintaining our capital assets as we take on major building projects. That's not wrong, but again, like I'm just really sensitive to the fact that these aren't new ideas that we're recommending I was just going to say 10% in subsequent years as recommended in previous JCP reports like this is what's been the plan all along so say per our financial policies. Exactly. Yeah, exactly. And this goes back a long time if you want to know 10% back when I started on the finance committee in the beginning of the decade or giving you the century to be honest finance committee created 10% goal. Okay. That's fine. Peter's got his hand raised. Peter and Andy I don't know if he's Peter and Andy. I mean, if you're looking for opinions on the last couple of questions, then I do like making it as easy as possible to see those projects in the in the out years. So either forcing Sean to have some make some really creative way to link there that's like incredibly easy. I just try to think of like, if you're a resident right and you go to the trouble of finding this report and finding it, and it's it's it's yet another. I know it's not hard to click on another link and then have Excel launch and then scroll down and then find the page that you're talking about but if we were able to, you know, I guess I'm going to take a little bit more length in this file, in order to easily see that that what is, you know, I'll be at a static snapshot but as a helpful stat snapshot of those, those out projects. So, I think that's Andy's hand is up and Mandy's hand. Yeah. Yeah, I was just going to say the same thing pretty much as Peter said of these Excel spreadsheets exist. I believe they do then we should make them available as links. So I think it was pretty much something Peter said. Mandy. I think Peter wanted me in the document. And I guess my concern about the document is if we put it in the document, when this goes to the council and when Paul's plan goes to the council that looks different. The council and the public could be really confused about them not agreeing, because this one they may see and say oh that's the plan that's not a draft. Now we do that whereas if we just link to it, we might be able to be clearer that this was the plan as of X, Y, Z date, February, whatever it was. Okay, so we can do a show, we can, what was shown to put a label on it that this is what we were looking at as of it's actually as of February 2021, you know that it never changed. And it goes with this detailed table that in appendix a, I mean, it will be a match up. And that at some point Paul's Paul's report has the same five years, all the detail in it right, Sean, it will. It does but the final like to Mandy's point the final version will likely be will have, you know, some of the recommendations maybe other things I've come into play since February, whatever date we started. So that five year version may be a little bit different than the five year version that's in this document. I mean honestly that was one reason I thought it may make more sense to include it in this document so it's sort of self contained in this document we could date this document. And then when the capital improvement program is finalized that will will make sure that's dated as well and that'll have a different version with an updated date, but either way, I mean we can link it or attach it. So, you know the, if the manager does what we're recommending, at least a couple of things will change the sustainability fund will be 100,000. You know, and something, you know, so there will be, there's potentially a change, even from what we're recommending so, like, putting it in this document only, it bokes up the document if someone wants to print out the whole thing if they just want to see a few pages of appendix like the other night in the school committee it's what what was recommended by the elementary school she can go to the school section and see it. So, I don't really care. It's just, I'm going to probably make my own copy that has it as an appendix so I don't have to figure out where to find it. It's its own PDF. At least it was presented to us at JCPC as a PDF. You know, there's this chart on this first, I don't know the first one and then the appendix. I don't know what our appendixes are anymore. You know, but maybe just attaching the PDF with some note that says, you know, and when you convert this document into a PDF. I don't know whether you'd call an appendix into attachment and just say the full draft report or plan as of February whatever is attached as appendix be or whatever it is. Okay. We can try doing that. And just have it. Yeah. So it's two documents but posted in exactly the same place with PDFs. If you, if you say, you tell Sean and me, mainly Sean to figure out how to do this, then we can see try to make something work. So we already have it as a PDF so when you convert this to PDF Adobe should be able to just attach the other PDF on to make it one document. Mandy are you saying just just attach the whole capital improvement program as an attachment the draft version document that's probably what you should do. Well that's pretty long because it has all our meeting notes. No, it's the one we were presented in February is 35 pages. I can easily, you know, extract the five year plan from that and just attach that piece to this PDF. If you don't want to do the whole document either way. I'm going to put the vehicles back into you, Mandy. I don't need to. Okay, good. All right. So are we. Do we have a report that people are happy with. Are we going to vote. Are you guys going to vote not me. That's what I'm looking. I'm looking we could. We can, we can take it down from the screen and went and make our faces bigger. If we want, want to go that route. So would someone like to make a motion. I moved to, I don't know, are we approving. Is it an approval. To ACPC report as modified amended on April 1 2021. Peter seconds. Okay. I think I need to go around and get, do an actual vote. So. Mandy. Hi. Alex. Hi. Andy. Peter. Hi. Tammy. Hi. Jerry. Hi. And Kathy is a yes also. So we. Are unanimous. We are unanimous and we're a good team. Thank you. Kathy, thank you for all of your unsung work as chair. If anybody's ever seen a committee before, you know, 90%. It's an iceberg, right? So thank you for all of your. You're slogging behind the scenes and interfacing. Mr. That's really difficult. So it's not that hard. No, it's actually, you know, and if. You know, and you all are great. So I'm going to just check to see if we have any public, public questions or comments. I'm not sure that it's been, no, we don't. So, but. This, this actually. Like a real collaboration. And I like what you Alex did. You know, I'm pulling it back. And we didn't discuss this or, you know, I'm doing this. I am my other world before I became a counselor. Was working with people who had often very opposing views, and we did it. We did always did it. So one of the things was trying to listen as closely as possible. And this was great. And having people who can read sentences down to. What you just found. Tell me it's missing the, the past tense on that word. I mean, it's, it's really, because after a while, word perfect just doesn't pick it up. So, or, or word doesn't pick it up. So thank you. Thank you everyone. And we'll, we'll work on this and get it final, send everyone a copy. And I think we then submit it to the town manager and put it in the council. We submit it to the town manager. It goes directly to him. But it goes to the council, just as document with it, with a, um, it has been submitted. So. So I want to thank everyone and wish them a happy rest of their Thursday night. Thank you. We're adjourned. We're adjourned.