 Yes. I was wondering what is going on with the discussion about changing the speed limit on County Road. A petition was submitted maybe almost two years ago. It seems like I'm not sure of the date, but a long time ago we submitted a petition and we haven't heard anything back. I just wanted to update on what's going on with that. Thank you. I think I responded to your email, Cindy. So I'll say the same thing. You said that Rick was studying it. I haven't gotten much done yet. I'm sorry, we've been paired up with other issues. I'm hoping we can have something to say that's more along the lines of that we're making progress when Rick has a chance to look at all the traffic data. I think that's what I said in my response to you, Cindy. We need to review all the traffic data and Rick has experienced doing that. So we're very lucky. We just need to make sure he has time to do it. Do we have any idea when that might happen? In the next couple of months? I'll try to do it in the next couple of months. I mean, I've taken preliminary looks at it and it looked like the 85th percentile. I'm sorry, Rick. You're not, I'm not hearing anything. Rick, talk louder. I said, I'm taking preliminary looks at this at the 85th percentile in this site, and it's pretty high. You know, as far as the technical justification. You know, with that, it's going to be a little difficult, but I think, you know, that visibility issues on that road section, along with the fact that you've got really steep horse lengths off of that road. It gets very icy. It's shaded. There are a lot of arguments that, you know, really make that case a lot. Can you, so Rick, can you just explain to the rest of us when you're talking about the 85th percentile based on that report? What does that mean? I'm sorry. That's making big sense. The way nationally and even internationally to determine speed and safe driving speeds. Don't come coming out clearly, Rick. You can't hear me. Maybe I'll go over here. The 85th percentile. That's better. Essentially, what this is kind of a nationally and even internationally accepted rule for establishing great safe driving speeds on roads. And what they do is they take 100 non-consecutive drivers, or I should say non-platoon drivers. So cars that are free to flow on and under ideal driving conditions, non-rush hour, where it's free-flowing traffic, and the radar, and essentially what they take. Whatever that 85th, they put those in order of speed, you know, fastest to slow us. Whatever that 85th driver is it from me? That's actually the safe driving speed of that road. The 85th from the bottom. It's called the 85th from the bottom. That's, you have about 15% or a little less at a more chronic speeders. And that's what's been found because it's based on people drive, what they perceive to be the same, you know, that your brain is taking in all of these things it sees. It's over 100 decisions a second. And it's determining your reaction time. And so, you know, based on that you drive it a speed that you're comfortable that you can react to a problem. So that's what is, that's what the trans uses. They don't like to deviate by that by more than like five, you know, they don't like to deviate from that by more than say five miles per hour. You know, there are other, there are other governing conditions in there that that warrant that and that's the hill is actually to my mind. I mean, I think this, that's a place that warrants it. You know, they're, it's shady. It's icy. I'm driven. I drive that every day. I know how bad that is. You've got an intersecting road at the bottom of that slope. And there's also the complicating factor that that whole road section week you go from 40 miles an hour in East Montpelier, you jump back up to 50 then you jump back to 25 right there in, in the other maple corners. So it's not good to be bouncing speed limits like that you kind of making criminals out of innocent drivers because they're having to jump up and down in speeds and they just don't do it. So you will drive with, you know, in general, you're going to drive sending you know what the safe driving speed of a road is you tend not to just follow speed limits. Quick, I have a question for you. Yeah, two part question. First is, and maybe this is a rhetorical question at this point. I see no real difference in terms of bends and hills and road with road condition between most of East Montpelier structure and the cows. I got a wonder in my mind whether they actually did it. They just put the stuff to sign up as number one. Number two, would it help the argument to reduce speed if we designated as a bikeway. And therefore there would be unsafe conditions that where cars are traveling on that. Now, further narrow road because it or isn't, is there's a lot of conflicting uses, I guess, and it would endanger bicycle riders. I'm not sure I do that just because of the lack of shoulder. I mean, you may be setting up my village. I think we're already quite riding on it. Right. And I think the better argument is that we've got a quarter that is like, that is our, you know, connector corridor through there. And so, keeping consistent speed is actually they do that. That is a distraction for drivers to be bouncing up and down. So, and particularly there bouncing up at a point where you see if you're coming north climbing a hill that all of a sudden you go into a shaded section you're going downhill. You've got it gets icy. You go off that road on the right side, you're going down in a big pole. So I know I like I said I drive that so there's some risk there. So this is, you know, I think we're kind of justifying doing that. Is this up to us. Yes. Yeah. Okay. The, the chain that where you run into issues they, they, if they is if someone takes it has an accident and takes it to court, you know, or if we gave them a ticket, they may be able to dispute it saying, you know, I heard about that. It reduces the best. Correct. And it's consistent. Like you said, it's the up and down. I think it should be consistent. I agree. I agree with you. This is awesome conversation. Love it. Thank you so much for bringing it. And we actually have it on the agenda. Well, it went into the data more recently. Yeah, that's the plan is when Rick has time to review the data, right, is to put it on the agenda. It's been on the bottom of the agenda for a while. We need to do this. So it's not like it's off our radar. It's just, it's just not really substantive conversation. You just need to tonight to move on. So I hope that takes care of some of your questions. So stay on Cindy. Stay honest. If a date was set for discussing it, even if the discussion. Cindy, we can't do that. We have so many things that come up. All of a sudden that need to get put on an agenda. I don't know that we can give you an exact date. Maybe it's towards the end of March. Whenever it goes on the agenda, we'll be sure to make sure you get a copy. I think we can say this spring. Yeah, I think we can say spring. And the spring and sort of July, June 1. I guess I'll just, Cindy, we're trying our best here. I know you have a lot on your agenda and I know you've done a lot. Right. But it feels like it's open ended and it just keeps going on without coming to people's discussion. No, I appreciate that. And I know from your perspective, that's what it feels like. That's not what's, that's not our intent at all. I know it's not your intent. We want to get this done too. So we don't have to keep dealing with it. Trust me. Okay. Yeah. Thank you for bringing it up. I appreciate it. Thanks. Thank you. Is there anything else for public comment? It's not on the agenda. It's short and quick. All right. We're going to move on to the next item. We have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have, we have some of the background, some of the, some of the questions, some of the questions are changes. Warrants are circulating. Sandra, you're up. I understand that I can screen share documents. But the problem is. Remember now, what a close day can we. No, I would just summarize. That's my job to get her to be just to be blunt about it. I don't know if the board wants to look at the reports. I don't know if people out there. Netherlands can see, but see under what we usually do, as Mar said, is to have you summarize the report. There were a couple of questions that I had that I talked to you about. And then we want to talk about this other document you sent, which is the grant, given the grant balance to take it away. Hi, good evening, everyone. Happy Valentine's Day. That's an important announcement. Well, you're looking really good. We're in, we're over the hump. We're going into the end of the fiscal year at this point in time. Another six months to go. The news are coming in very nicely both in general government and in highway expenditures in both in both areas of the government are on track. Overages and expenditures really are due to, again, expenditures that are made early in the fiscal year, as opposed to being made evenly across all months during the fiscal year balance sheet looks good. It looks good. We've paid our school, our property taxes that have been assessed against call us. We wait for the true up in April. When you look at your balance sheet, you're going to see in the liability section and amount of money due to the school that money is. You know, when the true up comes out, it will, that is the place where we will pay whatever we may owe the school district at that time. And what we are allowed to do by statute is to pay the school district. We're going to have to fill minus our delinquent taxes at, at that date, and that line there in on your balance sheet does represent the amount of delinquent taxes that we had outstanding on both payment periods. We're in great shape. We have still have a great fund balance and I can entertain any questions you might like to have. Oh wait one last thing delinquent taxes. They look good they're rolling in, but just in a surprisingly brisk fashion. So that also looks very promising. One delinquent tax that has been sent to the tax attorney, correct. Yes, and the tax attorney has written to that taxpayer, although I have not heard from the attorney as to whether or not there has been any actual communication besides that one letter that went out but I'm sure she's going to let us know, sooner than later. Yes. I don't have any right now. Does anybody else have any questions for Sandra. Thank you. You're welcome. That was John. Yeah. You do such a great job. Yeah, so we have you see for item for red cells, and those red cells represent the difference between the expenditures in a particular grant and the reimbursement. So best practice according to Gatsby practices is or the Gatsby rules is that the town that needs to bring those balances to a zero and the way we do that is in your in your budget. There is a line called transfer out it's way down at the bottom and it doesn't have anything in it so it's not showing up at the moment. And we're going to transfer out from our budget enough to bring each of these four grants to zero. One grant that $4,000 cell that's in the black, that is going to go back into our revenue stream and in your revenue stream or in your revenue section of your budget. There is a transfer in line and that $4,000 will go from that grant into the transfer in line and be then a part of our revenues for FY 22. To the proper practices for the board to make a motion to transfer out funds from the budget to each to grant 7071 and 73 to bring those balances to zero and then to transfer into our budget. The $4,000 from grant number 72. So you have a question. I do. Yeah. I should. Because I don't think I've followed the whole thing but so, so looking at the sub line 70 degree to grant Sandra. We're 2499 expenses were 20. So another word we spend for money on that program and the grant gave us. Yes, and that's that's true for these. So, and so the rest of what you said was the way that we deal with that on the books that you need us to authorize. Yes. So is this I have a question for my name is this this isn't moving forward to the next brand is essential. It's FY 22, FY 22 grant cleanup. So what's the motion that you need Sandra. So let's deal with the three closed grants those are 74. There's four. No, there, there are. I want to deal with the three that are in the negative. So let's have a motion. Wait a minute. That one is open. Okay, so that's the difference then. So we wouldn't do this until the grants are closed. And so we are that that's why we're doing this now we want to clean this up in anticipation of the audit for FY 22. So the first motion should be that the board authorizes money from the budget to bring to a zero balance. Okay, so that's the greener grant, the East Calis CLG 2019 grant and the East Calis CLG 2020 grant, something like that. Okay, so we can't. A motion was made to authorize the charge or to transfer the funds. To what's the right word. To bring the following grants to bring the following grants to a zero balance. What's your grant. Grant number 70. Give me the grant numbers. Okay, it's grant 70 and bring the funds to a zero balance. It's grant number 7071. And 71 2020. And 71 2020. And 71 2020. 71 2020 year. 71 2019 and 71 2020. 71 2021 and 71 2020. Those are the years. 2019 and 2021. Yeah. Okay. And we got numbers on that. Okay. We can reference this. So, so, so you have a little bit more ease with this sheet. The East Calis CLG grant was taken out and was applied for in 2019. And also in 2020. And it, it, it fell under this number 71. Although it, it, the 2019. Had a different. And two different and numbers than the 2020 grant. They are kept separately on your. In your funds. Okay. But they're the same basic number because it was a grant for the. East Calis community trust. So. That's why both of those grants appear under. Grant number or fund number 71. Okay. I'll second it. Are you ready to vote? All those in favor, please say aye. All those opposed. Now, do we have to do something else with this. Transfer out amount. Yes, for a grant. So we'll, we'll want to motion that the select board authorizes the transfer out. In this case of $4,000. From a. Fund 72. To the general budget revenue stream. To general. General governance. Yeah. Okay. To transfer, say that. A motion is made to transfer out. From. Fund 72. To the general fund and the amount of $4,000. I couldn't hear the phone. I don't know. The number is 72. Yeah. How much? 4,000. Transfer out from five 72 to the general fund and the amount of $8,000. It's making motion. I know. Any further discussion? I'll. Okay. Thank you so much. You're welcome. Any other questions? Not at the moment. I'm sure that Andrew, I'm sure there will be. All right. Have a good night everyone. Thank you. I didn't, I didn't hear from Jeremy that there was anything in the office. To talk about, but we do have a lot to talk about with regard to the public informational meeting that's coming up. Yeah. So, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I've read out several. Documents over the course of the last week or so. And I don't know. Gus, are you on? I don't see Gus. He said he would join us, but. Is that like waiting room? No. Is there any point in discussing it? No. There's the actual hearing. Oh, there's close. Yeah. There's okay. So there's the hearing notice that we have to do. Which is done. As you saw, it's hybrid and zoom. That's been posted and published. There is the town meeting informational document. Which is done. And has had the same thing happen. There is then. The outline. That I took from what we did last year. And I talked to. Everybody that's down at the bottom that you see is confirmed. Jamie more based on the man. Woman that show here. Providing we can get everything up and running the way it should again. I'll be here too. No, we agree that I'll select. Or be on the zoom. Well, unfortunately the zoom thing works the best before all on zoom, but you can do what you like. You can do what you like. You can do what you like. You can do what you like. If I come here, there's no one here. Oh, Jamie. Jamie's going to do the. Jamie's running the co-host. Right on the show. It's going to be hosting. Like we did last year. I mean, we have this one. You know, we do have this under our belt. We did it this way last year. Yep. There's not a lot of changes. To how it all works. So just kind of the order of. We have to be on a little bit earlier. Instead of later in the meeting. We have people coming to talk from Calabar Library, cemetery fire departments. They're all going to be on the zoom. So that anybody on zoom can hear better. That's being. I mean, that's pretty much. It's pretty much it. Do you want to. Talk to Gus. One of the times I talked to Gus. And he was supposed to be on, but I guess he's not. He indicated he'd like to maybe do. And it doesn't have to be, you know, a whole bunch of people likely did last year. Just do a. Quick check in like maybe Friday evening around. By the clock or so. Okay. Is that, does that work for you? Yeah. Just so he can re familiarize himself with the tools and whatnot. Okay. Okay. That's fine. Right. And Barbara has put together the slide presentation. Like we did last year. The slides that listed the. I've got to add some slides to that presentation. Because we will, as we did last year. Just kind of briefly explain the technology to people. And if anyone has any questions about the technology. Give them an opportunity to ask those. The element that's different this time around is the fact that we're doing this hybrid model. I'm not sure how many people are going to come into the hall to attend. Ideally, the situation would be that. I imagine we would have the table. Where Jamie sitting with her back to the large screen. That displays. And that way the people in the audience attending. Can all be facing that screen can look at it whenever the slides are up with the various items from the warning and whatnot on them. If someone in the. Audience at the hall has a question. They can raise their hand. Then Jamie will invite them to come in. And sit at an area in the table that we've worked out in advance. So that they'll be in closer proximity to the owl. So they can be heard. And seen by the other participants on zoom. And this is where it gets problematic, John, having other members of the select board in attendance there, because now we're tapping into the bed. That's available at the hall. And it's already a bit of a challenge as is. So it would really be better if you were able to attend. And a private zoom session from your home or wherever you're comfortable. So. Other than if I were here. I mean, there's less we have one, two, three, four people. Online right now. So we have three. There would be more than three. On town media. I know it would be to be Jamie and myself. And you're right. Well, you didn't know. Jamie and myself. So it would be less. No, I haven't. I do it every time. Is it. Is it that. Even when you're, when you're here. Even if there's only three computers. So we have three. There would be more than three. On town media. I know it would be to be Jamie and myself. And you're right. Well, you didn't know. Jamie and myself in town. So there'd be less. Computer. No, right. What? No, I haven't. I do it every time. Even when you're, when you're here. Even if there's only three computers. The more people. The harder. Is there more bandwidth? This is how ignorant I am. But I don't want to ask a question. Does it. Tap. With one computer. There's more people in the zoom room. Right. So, so basically the problem occurs for people who are participating. By zoom. Not there at the hall. For example, right now. The image that I'm seeing on the screen. I've got good bandwidth where I am. And the image I'm seeing on the screen is not very clear. And the audio occasionally breaks up as well. And that's really being dictated by the number of people who were logged in. On to that. Modem there in the hall right now. You know, you know, The image is going to be from the owl and the better to the sound quality. Yep. Yep. That is actually how you say it is consistent with my experience when I stand at home. That when you, you guys are all very happy. You know, we're all happy here. We're very happy. But it's, it's really hard. I just think it's important to select four members here. We're having a meeting. We're having a meeting. We're having a meeting. We're having a meeting. Well, that's a different, that's a different issue. That's, and that's, you know, I've got a question. What I might recommend John as a possible alternative is. Perhaps you could sit with Jamie. And then both of you would share one computer. Jamie would have the responsibility for. Making sure that things are functioning and whatnot, but then you're there able to pipe in as you need to. You'd be seeing on the owl. We would have to. One of the best practices that you might remember from last year is. Everybody who is a participant in the meeting, meaning members of the select board, Janet, other people who are speaking at the meeting. On the agenda to speak. They joined as participants and you could see them on the screen. And their names were visible on the screen. And we asked everybody to log in and identify, not just themselves by name, but also what their function was. So myself, I would sign in as Cliff. I'm in select board member. We imagined that in this version, the town hall would just be listed on the screen as town hall, but we can certainly modify that and say, you know, town hall with John Brabant, select board member in attendance or something like this. I will have to send unique logins to all of the participants. And I'll be doing that later this week. You'll each receive an email with your own unique login credentials. Please don't share those with anyone else because then. For example, if I was a presenter and I received this email. And I logged in under it, but somebody else called me and said, Hey, I can't log in and I sent him my email with the login instructions. Suddenly there would be two Cliff Emmons in attendance at the meeting. Oh my gosh. And only one of us would look like. So there's a little relief there, but that was the last. The, the general public who is attending, they're sitting in the audience and they won't be visible on the screen. They can use the electronic reactions to raise their hand to be recognized and then acting as host, I'll take them off mute. And then they can ask their question. Once it's been addressed to their satisfaction, then we lower their hand and take the next question. Just kind of refresher on how it all worked last year. Most of the questions came from the floor. People voicing them out loud. We also have the ability to ask questions via the chat mechanism. They'll have that ability again this year. Gus did a great job. We had several people helping out to monitor the audience of hands raised and monitored the chat boxes, but Gus did a really great job monitoring all of that on his own. So we didn't really need all the extra hands on deck. So we imagine it to be a little bit less complicated this year. If any select board members would like to participate in a practice session, we are going to schedule something probably midweek here with Jerry. She has a chance to practice there at the hall. And if any of you select boards would like to participate, you can be sure to send you the link as well. Okay, John, I got you. Yeah, I just sent it to me too. I just sent it to all of us. Now, Gus, we mentioned that you wanted to do some kind of training when we were thinking like Friday at five, but are you available to attend a training that Cliff was planning? Do you know what day it was? I think when we last discussed it, we talked about doing it on Wednesday or Thursday. But Jamie, I believe sectionally available on your day. Thursday might be better depending on what time. I have a quick question. My cell phone can turn off the panoramic view and things like that. Does Jamie have a cell or somebody who's going to be in her town hall? We thought that we probably would leave the panoramic view on because some people seem to really like it. If you think that we should not have it on, then I can talk Jamie from getting the app loaded up to her cell and tell her how to disable it. Okay, I'm just asking those questions. Do you guys have a question? Yeah. Cliff, if it's possible to do it on Thursday, that's much better for me than Wednesday. Okay, is there a time that works better for you guys? After five is going to work better. Okay, Denise, is there a time that's better for you on Thursday? That works. Okay, why don't we shoot for Thursday at six o'clock then? Okay, okay. Does that work for everyone? Does that work for everyone? John, is that on? No, you know, we're just practicing because Jamie hasn't done this before. No, it's not on the hybrid. It's not on the hybrid, man. Right, remember, I haven't done the hybrid. So good practice. John, will Thursday work for you? It should. Do you want to be here? So you can see how that works? Yeah. Yeah, because the meeting is on Saturday at ten. I wouldn't be surprised if there were fewer people in the last chair, honestly. Yeah, that's not even helpful. I'm not out of anything. I forget I said it's not in here. People might do it. Yeah, I'm curious as curious people will attend at the hall. Yeah, me too. It's a test. It's a test. I don't really want to be, I think, just to talk about cattle. But he was asking me about town meetings and what's going on, and I filled it in, and he said, well, I can't attend by computer. And I said, well, we understand that you and others cannot, so we were folding up you and an ability to attend in public. Wasn't he great? Yeah, but the issue was resolved before. So I think that's important. Well, there's several people I can think of that don't have the computer skills or even have the computer. So I think this is more of a service to the people. Yeah, I agree. I agree. Well, it also don't have that. But I like that we are generally on Zoom. On Zoom, yeah. Because that will, for the majority of people, that will make it better. Yeah, it will make it better. Exactly. Could you just speak to me? Yeah, do you have anything else you want to raise? I'm just going to tell you that for those of you, I don't know where you are. I assume John and Sharon are in the town hall. Where you are, the town is really tinny. And whenever two people are talking or making noise at the same time, at least that may sound so garbled that it's really hard to hear. And anybody who's not, John's voice is coming through really strongly. But if Sharon was far away from microphone, hard to hear. So for those of you who are managing the town hall site, it's going to be important that that fortune people don't speak at the same time. And whoever is speaking is really close to microphone. Right, man. To that end, another thing I can look out for me here in person is I'll stick a chair by the microphone to say if people want to speak here, sit in that chair and stare in the eyes of the owl and speak and drop your mask and have all the back off. Bunt to the wise old owl. Bunt to the owl. Yeah, that's what I was practicing to make sure we have a good layout in the building. We have the ability to pull that screen away from the wall and tilt it wherever we need to. And then John, if you're going to be there with Jane, the two of you sitting with your backs to that overhead monitor. But you'll be able to see what's going on because they'll have the computer screen in front of you. And you'll be in close proximity to the owl. Then we set up, just like we would at a regular telephone meeting as John has said, rather than having a podium with the microphone where people step up to it, identify themselves and ask their question. They'll come to the table where John and Jamie are sitting and be closer to the owl and be able to ask their questions. It will be critical too. I'll have to work with Jamie to make sure she has the correct audio setting because we'll want to make sure we can do everything we can to diminish any background noise there at the hall. Moving their chairs, rustling their papers, this all becomes very problematic, especially with the echo effect that we know currently exists in the hall. Yeah. Well, just people talking to their neighbor is distracting and can be heard, right? If you are having a little sidebar. Yes, very distracting. It's distracting in a person, but magnified in this version. Yeah, okay. Anything else, guys? Just to get another reminder, we need to get something on the wall. Sorry. Exactly. Thank you. We need to get grates on these walls up. I mean, ugly as a cheap crate might be. We can do that. And then the town hall crew can decide what looks better, their lines of lines are going to look better, but this is becoming a real combination of limitations for us, echoing walls. Yeah. Well, and is there any... We talked about this habitably. Is there any plan to get more microphones, more spider microphones? You guys can hear John as he has a voice. I know I'm leaning in a talk with you here. But would more microsoft help? No, just one little spider guy sitting right here on the table. Would that help, Cliff? Yeah, I mean it might help with people being able to hear a person speaking as closer to that. Example, spider microphone. But it could also magnify the problem of the echo effect. Right. So... We're going to get feedback. We're going to get feedback just from my computer. Right. One thing we conceivably do is take the shutters, that are there in the room, and lean them in front of the windows so that you don't have as much stuff bouncing off of the windows because the windows are a big part of the sound bounce. Getting the quilt that was donated up on the wall certainly helped as well. Where is that? I'm making some charities. It's not going to cord it. It doesn't have to be permanent. Stick it up on the wall for now. There's only one panel that is a lot of... And ultimately, getting the drapes on the windows be key as well. But this doesn't happen obviously before this information meeting. So we'll just have to make the best we can. Ask the people to remember that it is a sound sensitive device. And in the background noise becomes a distraction for people participating by Zoom. Try to hear what you're speaking. Yeah. Okay. Sounds good. Anything else, folks? I'm just going to say again this little bit of practice that are on Thursday. The only person that consistently here and whatever he says right now is Cliff. And I'm getting maybe two out of three words from those of you who are in group settings. If I'm lucky. That also magnifies the fact that we need to have as few devices as possible logged in at the hall. Because the more that are logged in, the less bandwidth you have. And of course the audio quality is for anyone who's not there in the hall. And or have their coin. If they're not, then the only person that you guys can see is Denise. And nobody else in the room is able to actually participate. I mean, I'm sitting on this side. And I usually sit on the other side without a computer. I feel much more engaged tonight because I'm able to see who's here and who's on Zoom. And there is a document sitting right in front of me rather than I'm turning. Because we talked about the size of that. I'm recognizing the screen. You have to turn your back to what is the camera. That's uncomfortable. It's uncomfortable by my participation standpoint because I'm not actually looking at people in. It makes my back hurt. So, I mean, this is not... The sound alone is not the only issue, I guess is my point. Well, hopefully next year we'll be able to go back to pulling. But even for our regular meetings. Right. I mean, I would prefer to limp along. I would prefer to limp along either by everybody being on Zoom all of a sudden is from home. So, we are participating in an equal environment. Or, limping along with having these laptops open so we can participate more slowly as members of the slide. Because sitting on the other side of the table I didn't feel either of those things was... I wasn't doing either of those things. Well, that's good to know. Some of that is our fault, too. Because if it's not you, the select board, we could arrange these tables differently and some of that is concerned with already being alleviated and we just haven't given much thought to that. Well, the experience, I can tell you, the experience is different on this side. Just on this side of the table. Just sitting in that seat. Yeah. Okay. Anything more about accounting and informational piece? I want to see. Okay. So, Will, are we going to get an invitation for the training as well? Yes. I'll send out an invitation to everyone for the training and I will also be sending out unique links for people to log in at the actual session. Okay. Okay. So, the training is... Well, you and Jamie. Okay. Okay. Good. Thank you. Yeah, we're going to try and simulate what we'll be experiencing on Saturday. Okay. Good. All right. I'll ask you all to please bear with me on Saturday morning. It will be seven o'clock nighttime, so I'll just be having my first cup of coffee. So, if I'm a little sleepy, I hope you'll please forgive me in advance. Okay. We will do that. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next slide. All right. Welcome. Welcome. There's nothing else on that. Just want to check in with Alfred real quick and then you have the congressional staff to talk about. Any... Responses for broken decisions? Are you all set best? All set. All set. All right. Thank you so much. Okay. Okay. Any updates? Alfred? So, I have a phone call tonight, this afternoon before I left. I was late in the day. The young fellow that works for the state is interested in coming in and trying us out, trying us out. You mean for an interview? I interviewed him. Oh, you did? Like I said, he called late today and he was getting off work at three. They said, okay, I'll stay a little bit late. Come and we'll talk. Just to kind of get his story and he could ask the questions that he has. So, there's... He's a really good candidate. There's one major problem. He's got a restriction on his license. So, he can only drive a automatic transmission. We don't know all the automatic transmission. I guess that's the problem. There's only one automatic. That's the 1-1 model of a small truck. When you say there's a restriction he can only drive an automatic. Why is that? Because when he went to hit his license test, he drove an automatic truck. So, it's a new federal law that went into effect a couple of years ago, that you can drive a automatic truck for your test. They did not have a restriction on all your law to drive. Does it work the other way around with him? No. Can he just send you away? You have to take the test with a standard... Oh, okay. We've done that before. Let them take the test. So, it's not a total dead-in-the-water thing, but it's difficult to take the test in wintertime. He's also at a class A, which was a trailer upon the truck. So, I told Holman, let's talk. I'm willing to help him with that. But, as we all know, in the past, we've got a burn by a brake. And we want to... Some of us are committed from them. That isn't going to happen with us. We'll have to get it as proper as it is. Right. Well, and we know that... So, it's really sort of... Well, and did we have to do that with John, too? No, John came all licensed about a credit card. If we're going to have somebody... If we're going to support and get a commitment. And given that this is the second time what, six months, we've been in the situation of making concessions to bring somebody on board. Could we have Jim draw something up so we have something in writing? Mm-hmm. And could we have a commitment? I don't know if this may be a Jim question, but it's a two-parter. At least to get something in writing. But then, what is our soul? We get something in writing and they say, you know, I hear right, promise. What's the soul? What if they don't need it? Well, or could it be... Well, yeah, in that process, get something like that. In that process for taking... I mean, when we're really working... No, that's great. That's great. We're working on this. Because it's not... So, my question is, is one of these guys picked the CDL test with our equipment and all that. Who pays for the test? Do they? He would. Okay. He would pay for the test and all the need of that. Mm-hmm. I know, as it stands right now, that the town pays for renewing. Right. The employee's license. Right. But to initially get the license, it's on the employee. It always ends up on the employee. Okay. So, what is our... What is it costing us for you to... For us, the town? For our children. Well, that's good. Well, I mean, I think it depends a lot on what's going on that particular day that the appointment is. I mean, if it's a snow storm and I got to take myself and the truck off of the routes, that's pretty expensive. I thought you just said you couldn't do it the way. That's from saying that it wouldn't... It's not possible to be... Oh, I thought there was some kind of thing where you go and take the test and they don't do it there. It goes throughout the whole year as far as testing, but it would be a challenge to schedule it and then... Right. And then there's a snow storm. The nature does hurt it. So... Okay. So, I guess I misunderstood it. You said... Okay. So, they take their own license. That's only a problem if they have a storm. Well, but we still... The other thing that's lost is the opportunity to keep looking for somebody else. If we can... We still advertise and show up at another organization available. Okay, all right. Okay, all right, for now. Because the other thing we could do is we have pulled another portion of the sign-on bonus. Well, I was going to say, the sign-on bonus, is that something he's interested in? You know? Well, I guess we didn't talk about that, but he... Okay. He heard about the position on front floor form, which spells it out. Yeah, right. Yeah. So, he's aware of it. Well, we... I mean, the sign-on bonus is already paid out in steps. So, that's not... Okay, so that might actually... That's incentive right there. Right. So, much saying, we signed a piece of paper over your head saying, and the sign-on bonus doesn't come. That might... That's enough, huh? Yeah, I don't think we need to create... Oh, we're still using that piece of paper that's sort of like, if we're supporting the license. I think that it's... Oh, you're right. If we're... If you don't get your bonus, then... Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I mean, you got to think of the license. Yeah. I think it's great. I think it works out. I think that this is the last time we're looking at a disability. I think that if we're going to think that... I think it's up to... I think it's up to how many people decide when you can liberate it. When you can liberate it. Try to figure out how to think out and do it when it's stupid. When it's stupid. No, I... No, I... I think that... The P.S. The P.S. The license. The license. The license. Well, then he can... Well, then he can... Well, then he can... Well, then he can... And he's not getting his sign-on. That is... That is... Right. Do you remember, right? It's like 500... 500, 500... But he doesn't get a sign-on bonus until he does take the job. Right. And more. And more. You don't have to be on for a while. Well, you know, that... You get... I'd have to go back and look, but it's in, like, four pieces. Right. So, now that's... At least you can just go on and be fully qualified, which means... Yeah. Standard shift qualified. Right. Someone's... Right. And we can write up a letter of employment. To say those things. Right. Right. This is the first person that I've ever run into that has that restriction on his license. Yeah. I never even knew that. This is so brand new. It's so new. And it's because, you know, a lot of, like, states, all they have is automatic trucks. Yeah. So, he took a state truck to get his license, so it's an automatic. Right. And he'll have no restriction on it. Interesting. Okay. All right. Thank you. Other than that, I need to know what to, what I can offer. If it's not, even if it's not this person, if it's another person, are we still at the 18 to 20 range that we talked about before? Well, I mean, for instance, just up, like, Tyler's salary. I forget, I forget what it is, an hour at this point. Yeah. We have everybody's on the crew. Yeah. I guess some of it would be dependent upon experience. You know, if it's somebody brand new, we don't mind. No, that's why you gave me the range. Right. So, I just want to know if that range, now that we've raised everybody else, does that range also increase? I think it does. Well, yes, it's full of license. And then you could, I'm just looking at, I think the range, the range, what do we get? I mean, I could get five calls for one morning. Yeah. Let's say, let's say 18 to 20 starting, and then after he's been on, or she's been on for a while, then we can, you know, based on performance, all those, all those factors, gives us what a six month performance evaluation period. Yeah. That's the place to do it. Yeah. Yeah. And then they can get, and seeing that those increases, we just gave more market. What does that mean? A dollar 30, a dollar 30 an hour to the crew, as a market adjustment. So it should be 19 to 21. Yeah. That doesn't make sense. I would agree. I would say 19 to 21. So, makes sense to you? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. That makes sense. Because we did just do the crew, and the crew itself. Oh, okay. That's not very new about, but if he doesn't, if he doesn't already have the skill, then I would be surprised if we're going to hire him at the high end of that. Well, I'm not asking for this particular. Right. In general. That's fair. Or where my, where my number can be that I have offered. All right. No, I got it. We did not want to recruit the crew. That was why you're going to hear from y'all. So that's exactly what we do. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you. Um, Mark, you want to talk about the, the Russian. It's spending. Right. I want to start off by clarifying something. I asked at the very beginning of the discussions about the, uh, the dam, whether I should accuse myself. Jim says legally, I have no obligation to accuse myself, but I just did. So, um, there is a very issue here. We'll talk about that in a minute. But, um, so I would say let's just say right now, I've accused myself, but I'm testified. It's your call. Yeah. Okay. And you know what? Everybody, like, like, because you advocate for your everyday work done. Cause I feel comfortable. Okay. Okay. Okay. I, I, I, I feel comfortable at this point because all this is a habit. This really is just an imper national. Right. Well, I'm going to be a designer action. Let me talk. It doesn't matter. It's your call of judgment. All right. Because we're asking for money from outside, I'm participating as a board member tonight. OK. One. The first letter is a letter to Tom Bailey. And the reason is that every year around the time is the time when budget stuff happens. Of course, they don't have a budget. I'll get to that. But Senator Layton, this is his last round. And every time he's hearing it, his people are saying, this year is not a year to put in a request. And so I asked Tom, do you think that asking for money for the Curtis Pond dam is something that would be reasonably eligible? Tom Bailey's is one of his. He said, and I think you should put something in. The first step is there's two steps. These are across as the media was already rationally delegated spending requests, CDS, better known in the past, as earworms. So the first step is a letter of interest. And the second step is filling out a whole bunch of forms with a lot of detail that you put together. The forms of complete application are to do March 11. Then they will make up their mind which of the 50th or 16 that they get, they will pick. If they pick Curtis Pond dam as the CDS, they will negotiate their list with the rest of our delegations because they don't want the delegation overlapping. So they'll work that out. And if we were to get on the list, given who Senator Lake is, it's very likely that we would be in the budget for that amount. We wouldn't see the amount for a year at least. The client of the ointment is that Congress can't agree on the budget. And they're operating on continuing resolutions. So for example, the store, the East Calis store, got a congressionally directed spending from Peter Welch for $200,000 last year. It's completely hung up because there is no budget. So it could get hung up. But at any rate, I feel like I highly recommend the UDIS because there's no harm. It's just a way of kicking off the process. So that's the first. And you can't transmit it electronically. So if I wrote this letter, if people want to sign it, we can sign it and I can scan it and send it to them. Or I can just send it to them. Or it just says the Calis election. It's an internal chain about the general effort. But I should get it on. And then, if you want to go ahead with this, I will fill out. It's a formal, a whole bunch of ridiculous questions you have to try to answer. And I am bringing it to you before our next meeting so that at our next meeting, you can review and approve my submitting it because it has to be submitted by Margellus. So that's the first item. So I'll stop there and answer that. Well, I want to say something about conflict. And I think I hear what John is saying. And of course, it's always up to the participant whether to. But I do think that any time, any one of them is participating in something that's external, that it's a slippery slope to choose to participate in the discussion as a member of the board because the barometer is not the barometer, but the thermometer, the whatever, the decider. You get to decide whether you recuse yourself or not. But what we as a board need to be sure that we're doing, as a group, including the person who was processing the question for themselves, is that everybody outside, all of our citizens, have confidence that we, as board members, are making decisions that are best for the town. And so the integrity of our citizens making being pure and not wearing two hats is really important. And so even though this is a field that is a very important project for our town, I don't know that there's anybody who's really against it. If there's somebody out there who is against this, that starts to erode, that integrity of, well, where was Mike really thinking? Was he thinking most about the town or was he thinking about his interest in his participation in the board and the leadership that you're bringing to that other group? So still, you were a decision. But I don't want to let the discussion go without saying those things out loud, because I think it's important that we always remember why we think about that. Can I just interject and say, given that, please consider my remarks, testimony, and I won't vote on this matter. Okay, go ahead, please. So great, thank you, Mr. Testifier, for bringing this information to us. And I've used a brainer. Yeah. And I don't have anything to cross on with you. How many of you send it to them? To them. Electronically. Electronically. Rather than that, everything you all say that you don't hear on that. Do you think there's anybody here that's willing to respond to this? Not at all. I don't know. I'll find out. And my old friends will hold them with or without. We certainly have the time. Okay. Yeah, so, I make the motion that we approve this. Approve this. But, Senator Lee, how does that work? Well, it's flexible and direct to each other. Direct to each other. And we ask our friend and friend to be a member. Mark LaHawley. Mark LaHawley to transmit it on our behalf. Works for me. Hold on for my number. I'll read it for you. Okay. So, let me take it short and short. Yeah. A little bit, Sharon. Can you? Okay. So, we can work this thing. I make the motion that the Cal select board authorize the request to Senator Lee. He's staffer of the Curtis Pontan request. I guess I'm not being sure. Mark. Do you have time, lady? Just a second, Senator LaHawley's office for congressionally directed spending regarding Curtis Pontan dam. And, right. Do you have time, lady, on this board? Requesting federally directed spending for Curtis Pontan dam. And, it's congressionally directed spending. Right. Well, I want to renew a request that when we know we're going to ask for a motion, we put the motion in writing in advance and these can select it right on the agenda so we know what the motion is. We spent a lot of time crafting motion that is when you think about it. You got it? Can I read that? Yeah. Okay. The motion is that it can tell the select board make a request to Senator LaHawley's office requesting a congressionally directed spending on the Curtis Pontan dam project. I have a motion. And I second it. The insurance convention. And second, second by-laws. Yeah. Okay. And, and we've asked Mark. Mark has volunteered to recuse himself. I'm going to recuse myself. But we are asking you to send it for us. Okay. So now we're going to recuse myself. Four zero. Right. Yes. Right. We have a vote again. Yeah. All those in favor? Five. Okay. The second item. Look. Wait a minute. Hey, look. It's, he's not the same. He's recused. It's different. Yeah. Should I state that here? Yeah. He's recused. I just want to, before you start, I just want to let Alfred know if there's nothing else. Unless you're saying there's something else. Okay. So I'll go right there. There you go. Thank you. Come here. Let's call the show. Thank you. Great. You want a cake? Before you go? No, thank you. Okay. I'm sorry, Mark. You're welcome. Come on. I'll put it out on the ring. Okay. I don't want to. Good. The second item. And it does have, and I am again refusing myself in the test department. But it does have, we should have, you know that I want to talk to you. D.A. D.A. The U.S. Part of the Edison program. One program I've got at the Odeon program in part of the Center for Properties and Dependency. And they handle all kinds of things. Part of them is NRCS, Resource Conservation. Natural Resources. Conservation Services. And in that is a watershed program, plant protection program. When I talk to Tom, he said, where is the infrastructure money in Washington that's been appropriated? The landing where we could get our hands on it. And he referred me to this program. So it's not the same pipeline. She said, Not the same pipeline. Ah, that's a good one. So, well, here we have it. So I spent several hours with the NRCS people. And I will say they are, the bad news is their process takes forever. It is federal bureaucracy queued. It is the people who are running it haven't been through this process with the new bill and they can make no guarantees whatsoever. That's the bad news. The good news is they have a lot of money. They're desperate for applicants because they don't have any and they're not spending it. And they don't have any money. I will teach you. Wow. Also the good news is that their processes, they have the status of limited that they hire out the consultants to run their process. Their process basically a forever process consists of an early, maybe just a year, determination of are we eligible? It's called feasibility analysis. Then they do a watershed plan. And in the watershed plan we do throw the kitchen sink in anything that's in the watershed, you know, a road, erosion, the town. The town. Can we get something to drive on? What? Can we get them to drive on? I have no idea, I doubt it. But at any rate, they do physical, they build things. So anyway, so they use outside consultants. The outside consultants they use are a panel of five engineers, only one of which is in the Vermont. And that's what, that's a boy and a king, boy and king. And the boy and king, we hire, we hire here, right. To do the 2020, all the prior, prior, and science degree 2013 plan. Yep, okay. So the way you kick off that is you send in what's called a request for assistance. And that's what this letter is. And this letter basically says, yeah, we'd like to give up the process. It is, that is, as long, during the year long effort that goes through to determine whether we are, we have no obligations whatsoever. I have asked them five times coming and going, is it okay if we get your wheel slowing? And then we decide we don't need you because it's gonna be 20, 30 before we get your money and we're gonna get other money locally or whatever. And they said, yes, absolutely take us in because they're desperate to show that they have a project. However, a year and a half from now or sometime like that, two years, if they think we're eligible and they start, they're told by the director that they can start spending money on us on planning, they're probably gonna wanna know, hey, are you going with us or aren't you? But right now it's just starting a long process. So the reason that I went to Tom Berry back to Tom and said, what about congressional you don't need direct spending requests? Because I told him that this one, the one I'm talking about is like a four or five year process, he goes, oh my God. I said, what if you guys direct them to spend because a correct congressional direct spending is directed at federal agents without accelerating? He said, you better be accelerated take two years off of it. So this is standing on the first thing you just approved stands alone, that's fine. This one kicks off a process and like a year from now or a year and a half from now, we can decide what do we wanna do. The only thing that's in here, which is important for you, you have to guess the name of a person that they can talk to. And what I did is I put my, this by the way is a little bit long on this, so we can talk about this and do it next week, next time. But I wrote it with me just because I figured I don't know what I'm doing, all this work. But I'm not, if I'm accused myself, it's not appropriate. So, you know, some, you guys, you know, to where we're delegated, so if I can put your names on it, then I could tell them, okay, talk to me and then when appropriate, I'll open them in or whatever. I was kind of thinking, I shouldn't put my name, I should put your guys name because you two were delegated, right? All the three of ours and then you can convince yourself, if you want to do it, I can say, how about I put you two in as members select board. And then put yourself in as this member of the, member of the public. Crime association. Crime association, yeah, no make sense. And primary point of contact. Yeah, that's fine. Okay, all right, yeah. I will, I will redo this and this one I will bring back to you because this one we want to sign. We do want to sign, okay. So we'll need to put this on there. So I'm gonna put it on stationary, put it already down. I'm gonna, I'm gonna put signature lines. Okay. Put it on line. So, so you said this doesn't happen then, it doesn't happen, so we put it on, they put it on you and that's fine, that's fine. Okay, I'll bring it back, I'll send it, I'll send it to the appropriate court. Can we, can we make a motion? Can we make a motion to raise it, so we don't have to raise it, so we can fill it on this round. So I make a motion that we, that we, select board, submit a letter to Mr. Tuckle from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service and that we sign it at the next meeting. Second. I've got to get this, sorry guys, didn't throw that out. Share me the motion that we submit a letter of application, do we follow that? A letter of interest. A request to say about. A letter of request. A letter of request to the NRCS, is that correct? Watershed Protection Program. This is what happened when you hire someone based on their good looks rather than their skillset. Yeah. I was gonna say, yeah. I would be happy to take my turn. I have made a lot of money with my damage, I couldn't put a lot of money in it. This is a comment, okay, a letter of request, okay. It'll just be my motion, it'll just be my turn. Then we submit a letter of request to the NRCS. For assistance. One with the supply. For assistance, then. Sorry. If you want to testify, you go with otherwise. No, I'm just. I'm gonna do the rest of the motion, you guys, I'm sorry. For assistance for a potential project in Calis, being Kurdish public family. Somewhere in there working that we're asking for money. So first, for assistance and funding. Right. For funding assistance. That's good. Planning assistance and funding. And I have testified as part of the Kurdish Fund Association that we'll be here to help Mark with filling out all the application information and, good. That's it. Yeah, I'll do that. Yeah, I'll do that. I'll do that. I'll do that. I'll do that. I'll do that. I'll do that. Okay, I'll read it back to you. I'll read it back to you, okay. Let's see, let's see. Sharing it with the Kurdish Association is not going to address that a bit. To the NRCS for planning assistance and funding for the Kurdish Fund and project. Yeah. I'll be back in a minute. All right, are you ready to vote? And Mark will choose himself. But let's do that in the items. Yeah. All right. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. And Mark, would you recuse yourself? I recuse myself. Thank you. 4-0-1. Yeah, I'll just make sure you put recuse, Mark recuse yourself. Yeah. All right. It's just 4-0, there's no one. Yeah, the one is in the state. If somebody or they vote in any, it's 4-0, okay, I'll take that one. Yeah, yeah. John, you're up next. This has to do with the... Wait, does he emerge? Oh, yeah. You can say it a little bit, thanks for a little bit. So, not a great event. I was looking forward to that. I contacted the chair, requested that she consider placing on our agenda tonight. And I'm on short notice. The idea of our select board, evaluating an application that's presently before the Worcester Select Board, under consideration, I should say, by the Worcester Select Board. And also the Centralmont Regional Planning Commission Project Review Committee, which is a subcommittee to the CDRPC Board. I, as a town representative on this Centralmont Regional Planning Commission, also serve on this project review committee, subcommittee to the Board. And that committee evaluates development projects that either see Act 250 or Public Utility Commission reviewed and permitting and by our definition, have the potential for regional impact just because of the nature of those scaled products. There's a cell tower, a cell tower project that's been proposed. It's been proposed in Worcester on private property by a company called Dust and Gale Strylde. Dust and Gale Strylde. I'm gonna take you through something like that. And it's in the very early stages that folks here might remember there was a Wi-Fi telecommunication tower that had been proposed in the north end of our town. And as these projects go under state law, they are not reviewed under zone. Our state representative was one of the sponsors of the bill that made it all the more difficult to participate in this process. So I feel we'll put that on the record yet again because it's an important thing to note. So on the applicant, the applicant because of the size of the tower, not to get all the nitty gritty, will be filing at some point or anticipates filing at some point in the future an application of the Public Utility Commission for their review and permitting of the project that they passed muster. The process at the Public Utility Commission or PRC involves consideration of town plan and the criteria intended out to 50, which is part of their review, the regional plan for conforms to the public plans. So folks, constituents in town sent to me emails and I forwarded them to the rest of the select board members. And they are some of which are in the audience tonight on our Zoom meeting and at this juncture, our project review committee has had a meeting to review this project and the applicants lead representative stated that frontier, industrial is still engaged in negotiations or conversations with the Westerselect Board. So the application is still in flux. The normal, I forget how many day timeframe, I think 45 day timeframe where they have to get the town notice and then after that they have to get the PUC to form an application. They get extended, the applicant under own initiative is working towards their select board. Extended is extended. I need to read that in that timeframe. I think another 15 days or something, I can't remember, I'm gonna get that wrong. So let's don't quote me on that. But it's still in flux. So despite the agenda item saying consideration of a letter to the Central Marine Regional Planning Commission and the Public Utility Commission, one, that would be premature to even draft a letter because the application has not been finalized based on what we heard last week. And two, even if the application were finalized, the Public Utility Commission has yet to receive the application, so it would be premature. But I would like for us all at some point to, well, Fred, keep this on our ARR and anticipate that we're gonna need to set aside some time to evaluate the project and hear from public. Can you let us know when you're going to do that again? And so just so you know, the Regional Planning Commission, which is the staff of the CDRPC, we'll be looking at regional impact. So because this project, even a state-of-the-art developer, will have the potential impact positive, negative impacts to neighboring towns, I believe they said, not only Worcester, but Calis, and Middlesex, and there may be at least one pillar in there are some other towns. So there's regional implications, and so they would be evaluating those as well as the local impacts. To be brief, that's almost it. What's really important, and Tom will actually, the head of our Trails Committee. Yeah, he's on. It's a committee of the board, of this board. He wrote an email concern as did a number of people. So the concern, one of the primary concerns that there's Tom out there in TV land. I am sorry. The tower site that's been proposed is at the end of the Ellis Bruce Trail, which is an inter-minicipal trail that's been set up on private properties. And when any of you folks were fortunate enough to hike or bike or horseback ride or ski that beautiful trail, when you come out on the Worcester side, when you travel it, traverse it from Calus, it's a grand finale, the music comes up, the trees and the leaves and all that noise goes into the background, and there's this incredible view of the Worcester range. Chills up your back view, and this tower is gonna be right there. So you have to put your blinders on. So my perspective is very, how tall is it? Hundred and... 90? John K. John K. Who's a kid? He's like four members of the board member from the town of Worcester. I think it's a hundred and eighty-nine, John. It's a one hundred and ninety-eight. Ninety-eight. Oh, that's right. Just under two hundred foot FAA trigger for increase. Well, you remember CVRPC when they were doing the tower in North Calus? CVRPC was helpful. They did write a letter. Right. Saying that it didn't fit in with the... So I would think that, you know, this is something similar, only even taller. Concerns were raised by the number of project committee members, myself included. Who's on that committee? A bunch of people. I'm not gonna get to that tonight. Can I ask a question for the notes? So the Calus select board should be prepared to write some letter of order to the CVRPC board. Well, Tim, you got at this point to evaluate and decide whether to draft a letter. But that's down the road. We were just asking that you put this on your radar and I'm asking that we continue to maintain kind of a spot on our agenda. Burn up the agenda. Gendai out in the future. Yeah, sure. Yeah. Did John, did you want somebody to... I think Tom will actually want to speak. Tom, or can I see Larry? That would be great if Tom... Larry's up too. Larry Bush, yeah, he's sent one. Sue Killarin, Tim Maker, James Wilder, all Calus residents raised concerns. Yeah. Hope I didn't leave someone else, someone else. But maybe Tom could speak and then if there's any other questions, John Keating knows a lot too. Yeah, I'll just second what you said. I mean, it is the culmination of that wonderful trail through the woods. I remember when I first walked in and you have no warning, you're just walking through these beautiful woods but you have no idea what you're coming to and then it just opens up with this phenomenal view. And from everything I've heard and seen this cell cover right there front and center, I mean, I can't think of anything that could deflate that experience more than to see that. So on behalf of the Trails Committee, I just want to make sure that the town is on top of this and John, I appreciate your role in this too. So whatever the Trails Committee can do to aid the town and providing information and information. Well, when it comes to my writing, what it means for conservation, conservation and drill, everybody to write a letter. Well, yeah, I think we can all say the same thing, but it would have a lot of signatures if it comes from the various different groups. Or we can all sign the same one, I just think. For the purposes of the Public Utility Commission, yeah, I think three individual letters would be fine. Or one signed on by all of them. Well, you can do one and then we have all different groups. All signed on. That would likely be fine, but that's down the road. Yeah, and you'll let us know. Did Larry or John Keating, do you want to speak at all? I simply say thanks for your consideration. It's, I'm glad it's on your radar. Thank you, thank you. Yeah, it is. Larry, oh, now I see Larry must be gone. Oh, there's Larry. Larry, you want to speak? No, no, I just, following this carefully and I appreciate all the work that John has done on this. Did I ask a question? Yeah. This is not, is this subject to Act 250? This will go for the Public Utility Commission because of the height of the tower. Right. It's only 50 feet. Yeah, it doesn't go to the PUC. But the PUC, the Public Utility Commission is obligated by law to run the project past the end credit period. Has anyone looked into the question or asked that anyone look into the question of whether there are alternative locations for the still tower? That is one of the many questions that have been asked of the applicant. Have they considered other locations, different or lesser tower heights? You know, all that is kind of, in the list, very long list. The only suggestion, the last thing I did in my law firm in California was successfully kill a $200 million tower line. And I did it, not by arguing, which was true, how devastating it would be for views, not by arguing the danger of radiation. But by successfully showing that it wasn't possible. And the reasons was, it could really give it the amount of views. What they care about is does the network work? So one of the things that I would urge is that if we do send a letter, that it can say everything that you were talking about and then say that this means that it's particularly urgent that the Public Utilities Commission conduct its own alternative analysis. You can't let the applicant define alternatives. It's the PUC that has an obligation to look at alternative locations. Well, that's kind of having been witness to probably 50 PUC hearings at least in person. They rely on the applicants. In this law process, I will say that the legislature's continually looking at trying to improve. They rely heavily on the applicants. It's full disclosure. I worked for Vermonters for a clean environment. And one of the entities that we dog is the PUC and we've been really pressing them and they have been responsive in improving the process and making it more friendly and more responsive to public representation and public input. But that said, they are heavily relied on applicants and what applicants representations are in terms of meeting the criteria that the PUC has to review. And it's really up to opponents to rebut. And it's not always the case, but it's common that if there's no public interest, these things tend to sell through, which I think is not good. And I'm not trying to malign up the PUC, but it's just they're swamped. And so I think so many things if you have good legal representation, competent legal representation and deep pockets, you see a better result oftentimes out of this. And in our course. It's fair here in the state. What is it called? A citizen, it's like there's a staff entity that's supposed to represent the public interest. Yeah, that's the public service department. They have an office of public advocate or something. Yeah, public advocate. But I'm not gonna comment on that. Yeah. What I will say, the most important review criterion or criteria are the, for our purposes, are the, there is the PUC's evaluation of whether the project fits within the Worcester plan and the language in Worcester plan, whether it is directive enough to decide whether or not, for instance, this is a good location or whether this thing should propose it happen at all. The so too with the regional plan, same kind of review. So. Good, thank you. Okay, sounds good. Well, keep us posted. And when we need to, we can put together a letter. Okay. Sounds good. Thank you. Thank you, John, Bill and Town Blastery. I want to know them here too. Just put it down in your place all the way to the agenda. Well, we might actually be able to finish up before 10 o'clock tonight if, maybe. I don't want to jinx it. So I have a suggestion. You know, there's a lot of new folks on the DRV. The DRV and the DAV recently had projects where the DAV makes a recommendation to the DRV. There's been some questions about conflicts. You know, DAV is advisory only. DRV issues decisions. I just think it would be helpful. So like I said, there are several new members, which is great. And then I'll take the training and jump in. I think there are still, I think a question and answer and answer. I'm trying with Jen. Ask some of these questions. Ask some questions. Yeah, what about this? Yeah, what about this? What about that? It might be really helpful. It might be really helpful. And, you know, so this is something that has always, always loved me about the DAV, you know, probably gonna get hate mail from this. But as a selector, we are so concerned about conflict of interest and perception of conflict of interest. Yet we have defined in the DAV membership eligibility criteria that the makeup of the advisory board, which evaluate the process in a sort of different context, in a sort of different, that a majority of the members, three of the five, if I get this right, four of them, not three of the five. Three of the four. Well, you guys might be talking about something different. You're saying what's in our, are you gonna say what's in our, like, requirements? In the zoning, in the zoning. It says that basically a majority, majority to live, to reside, I can start to start to describe. So, you know, that sets up a concentration of people with a concentrated interest and not a broad view of the greater interest of the town. And then the DA, DA, DA, DA, DA, DA. Design advisory board. And so I would like this board to seriously, seriously evaluate that. We have select board member, who lives on Han feels personally at some level conflicted because he's got concerned about the future of that pond, which is a piece of whatever. Topographic architecture within our town. Yet we have folks on the board, the majority of the folks that have been appointed to this DAB that live within the village. The village, they have an insane market. For their bills, for their bills, not a water. It's not a water, water-based, water-based, that's not a conflict. And if it is a conflict, we are forcing that conflict by definition. So I think that needs to be evaluated. I think it's a big issue. I think it's problematic as development pressure continues and we start seeing pressure. Okay, I think we have. I agree with you. I think what has to happen, and I'll have to look at the design. The design advisory guidelines probably need to be updated for that and specifically speak to who should serve. Maybe it's okay if there's like one person. As long as it's not a majority. Because right now, for the DAB, we have John McCollough, who is also zoning administrator. Kirk Jansen, David Sheets, and Ryan Edwards. So I'm only count, yeah. So I think there's only, I don't know if there's somebody else on there or not. I can't remember, but anyways, it doesn't matter. But I think that would be a good question that we could give to Jim ahead of time for all the training to figure out. And then we could look at the guidelines and see if it, if it says, does it say anyone in those guidelines, who should determine the score? I think it's in the zoning. I think it's in our zoning regulation. We would take the change to the zoning regulation. We're gonna be working on zoning regulations. Yeah. And you know. I mean, that's down the road, but I just want to get that on your screen. But the DRB and the DA, so it would be DRB, DAB, ZA, and any select board member that wants to attend. I mean, like I said, Jim did this training all year ago. Anybody who did the DRB has to take it. But I think that there's probably questions out there that people have that everyone would benefit from hearing the answer. So you're raising a different issue. And you're saying, let's get everybody trained on what it is. You're saying we should consider the fact that we're actually requiring people who serve on the design as an advisory board to be creative within the districts that are affected. Right, except for Ryan, doesn't. Well, but as an attorney, we should be saying the minority, but that's a whole nother issue from what I'm talking about. Right. It's an interesting question, and I want to think about it. But I hear what you're saying too. Yeah. Okay, so we'll get that rocking and rolling. So this is going to be like a, remember we didn't get that one before? Yeah, I mean, what I was going to suggest is this, is that the price of an admission fee that you mentioned that you actually have done with the blue screen. Well, we only require DRB. Okay, I'll do that. Well, then we can try to do it. Well, I think that here's why, because people are going to come in not having watched it and ask a bunch of questions that they're not all going to be in the same. I think that was not discouraging people. Well, I'm aware of that, so, yeah. We need to encourage, we need to encourage. Right, I think that we can require this new training for everyone on the DRB, DAB, ZA. They don't have anything. And moving forward, why can't we require the movie for everybody? We could, we could. We just never thought about it, for the DAB. Right, why don't we encourage everybody to watch the movie before they come to the stage? Right, I think that's good, but I think we can require all the other folks to attend. Does that make sense? Yep, yep, yep, yep. Okay. Or what do I put in the notes? I'll write them. Okay, I'll write them notes. Okay, so, other updates. We have a slew of minutes that are outstanding. You've reviewed them all. I've reviewed them all. Would you take it on? I would put your comments, if you have any problem with them. Can we just approve a slate of minutes? Yes. And these would be, let's see. All the ones in the folder. All the ones in the folder. So that's, November 27th, 27th? November 27th, how long do you think it will be? I don't know if it will be, but we will put a slate of minutes in it. Being, being, November 27th of 21. I mean, I mean. And 12, 6, 21. Can I add? 12, 9, 21, 12, 13, 21, 12, 27, 21. 12, 9, 12, 13. 12, 9, 12, 9, see 12, 13. 12, 27. Okay, and then January 10th and January 24th, 2022. So move. 12, 12, 12, 27. 12, 27. One, 10, 22, and 124, 22. So I made the motion. Are you seconding it? Oh, that was okay. Yeah. John is seconding it. Give me a second. I'm still putting one, 10, 22, and what's the last one? 124, 22. Okay, and all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay. Any opposed, hearing none. All right, that's it. Hang on though, one more thing under old business. Do there was some email input from people about the town highway number seven and the site visit were upcoming? Yeah, I haven't circled back on that yet. Are we, my question is, my question, and I wanted to give enough context that it means something for Rick and for anybody to watch this, but do we have to, in order for us to go to that site visit with anything being possible, do we have to reopen the motion that we already made? I have to look at it again. That's the question. That's the question. Well, we agreed to do the site visit on, and I just looked at this quickly today. In April, is it like the 10th or the 16th or something? Because Reed raised a concern about changing the classification to something, not being discontinued, but being a trail or something, a change of view. So I think it might be true that our motion was around discontinuing and that what we should make the motion on maybe at the next meeting is no, no, no, we mean we were going there to look at it and consider a change of use that could be broader than, yes, uptown. Did you read Jim's email, Jim Barlow? I didn't read it. If I did, I forgot. So Jim Barlow advised that the language was correct in our point of notice and that if we wanted to, if we wanted to do this in a trail, because discontinuance, you need to, he said that discontinuance, discontinuance, like if this road is through, the road is through, the road is through, so we would go up, say to them, say in their decision to discontinue, to discontinue, designate it as a trail. And we would make that, the first part is the first part, the members all right, the memory moved to, say to discontinue, to discontinue, to discontinue in some part to that, we could say, and after discontinue, to designate it as a trail, it's a trail, and they're not seeing it. Or as I said, Aaron, the other one was just, because I was kind of on my mind of an S in the point, that discontinue, yes, no, no. Change the use from road, from class three or four to a trail. When you discontinue, and then after it's discontinued, you then designate a new use for it. You resurrect it, it's not the opposite. It doesn't suddenly go away, we haven't conveyed it. He said to do it, we're reading it. Okay, not really. Yeah, so. You're a lawyer, it's what you've been speaking about. No, I'll be it, I don't know. I get it, which is, so one way or another, however Jim parses the stages, we could still do it. We have his, okay, so I just want it noted that, that according to John's interpretation, we have done nothing to compromise that being what we do. We don't have to revisit them. That was the notes, that's right, yes. Yeah, I didn't do it, I can't be clear about it. I don't want to focus into it. So, John, John, could you, send Rick an email with kind of what you just said? I'm just going to resend Jim's email to us. Well, that doesn't help, I wouldn't, I wouldn't do it. I will write a paragraph, because I was the one with the question. And I, because I don't think we need to get into it. This guy didn't say, but because Jim, what Jim said, according to John, old business, is we don't have to revisit the motion that all things are possible. Here's how we can conclude this without ever anybody helping to circle back. How John interprets Jim Barlow's email on top highway seven, and me too, and Denise, and the motion that we made is all things are possible under the existing motion, we don't have to change it. And it doesn't limit our ability to. That's the same as all things are possible. All things are possible. Right, it doesn't limit our ability to turn it into a trail. We haven't, yeah, that's all the business advice. All right, anybody want to make a motion to adjourn? Yeah, so that if you need the exception, you don't have to go into it. That's a long time. All right, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. And we'll zoom, see zoom of you on Thursday.