 Okay, it's 6.30 by my watch, and okay, I'll call me into order at the 6.30 and we do have two sets of minutes tonight, but we're missing one of our people who would make a forum for the first meeting. So we'll take up the minutes of May 3rd, 2022, first, as their emotion. I'll move to approve the minutes of May 3rd, 2022 with amendments and changes as noted. Zero second. Second. Page 1. Page 2. And page 3. Hearing no changes or corrections, then all those in favor of approving the minutes of May 3rd, 2022, say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. There are no negative votes, so we've taken care of that one set. We will put on hold then the minutes from April 26th until Ted gets here and then we can interrupt while he put that on our on our hold list until he arrives because we have two people that need to abstain from those minutes. So we'll move on then to public comment. Is there anyone in the room who has any public comment? Please introduce yourself and come to the table. And there we go. The camera's turning around. That doesn't amplify it just. My apologies. My name is Dave Westman. I'm a Williston resident. I live in Brandon Woods and I realize this is probably off topic for the evening, but I wanted to raise an issue that's important to me and my family, which has been surfacing over the last few months to a year, which is the pedestrian and traffic safety on Mountain View Road and the excessive amount of traffic that is being pushed onto that road through development throughout our whole region, but specifically here in Williston as well. I realize that again, it's off topic, but I'm looking for both advice and counsel from the select board, as well as questions about what we can do as residents of this community to improve this road and to make it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians to access it. Specifically, I just want to point out that the development review board is doing its due diligence of approving projects in the residential development zone, according to the zoning that town has approved in its town plan. But that calls for a high density residential development throughout the entire region of Mountain View Road, stretching from stage road all the way to Roof 2A. And Mountain View Road is already counting about 500 vehicles per peak hour. That is a lot of vehicles on a road without any shoulder whatsoever. It is an impediment to cycling, walking. Certainly, you cannot access, you can't bring your family along it. There's only one stretch of road with a multi-use path on it. That's the stretch between Williston Road and Stage Road to the Adams Market. It's a great resource, but I know people in my neighborhood of Brennan Woods who have to drive to the school park their car just to go for a loop ruck. It's just ridiculous. Because people, and I'm an avid cyclist, are literally taking their lives in their hands by cycling or walking or running on this road. And with all of the development that's being planned, I have great concern for the safety of continuing to use this road anytime into the future. And I realize that DRB is just doing and approving projects according to the plan that the town has set forth. And there's very little they can do about it. And I know that, and I've been working with Matt in the planning office on the town plan to, which the town map, which recommends a multi-use path along the entire length of Mountain View, but that's a long-term vision. And I think we need a short-term solution. The road is already in really bad shape and is in desperate need of repaving. I think it should be widened. I think there should be a shoulder introduced like every other major road in our region. If you look at Route 116 or if you look at 2A, they all are widened and they have like paths. I think at the very least in the short term, an improvement like that needs to be made. VTrans was given over $20 million in the budget this year to do these kinds of projects for bicycle and pedestrian safety and improvements. And I think the town of Williston should mobilize itself and put a plan or propose it together like that to fund the project that would accomplish these the short-term ends. I think the long-term end is the multi-use path, but I realize that may be out of reach at this time. That concludes what I wanted to say. And I would appreciate any insight or encouragement or follow-up. Worth thoughts on what town already has in place or what it is planning to do? This has been a problem for a number of years because of the increased traffic from everywhere. It uses Mountain View and North Wilson Road for that matter as well. Now, there are some plans, long-term plans, I think, for the circ alternative that was developed a number of years ago. And Eric, you can correct me on that, but there were some type of a scoping study, I think, on Mountain View Road a number of years ago. Yeah, it certainly identifies a circ alternatives project, I believe phase two or phase three. We've been talking with V-Trans for an update on that recently as well with the circ alternatives and where that stands. But certainly it's been something that Towns identified as a transportation corridor for a group. Yeah, let me just kind of comment on that because I've been talking to Matt about that V-Trans alternative for some time. And it came up in the development of the of the map that we were working on. And he kind of put it in the bucket of five years to never category in terms of like where it shows up on the priority list. And so to that extent it's one of those things where if the town just sits around waiting for V-Trans to hand it a project and say, here's your circ alternative, I think it's little to never going to happen. And I think that we need to have a proactive approach to it because it's the town residents that want to use the road. Right? Not V-Trans or, you know, they're not going to wait for us, basically, or they're not going to get ahead of us. So if our public director was here, he'd tell you how much this would cost in order to do this probably, but it'll be very expensive, certainly to do, which and we would certainly be looking for some kind of help from the state. No question about that. Unfortunately, it's a town road. It's not a state road. So that becomes a significant problem for us. Right, right. So we do appreciate your comments because we've had them before. What can a resident concerned about safety do in this context? I don't have a good answer for that. Certainly it's not a road that is conducive to walking or running I think the town, well, I'm not sure where it is in five-year plan as far as repaving it, but it seems to me like it should be on the list somewhere at the five-year plan. And I had that at home. I don't have that with me, but so repaving certainly would be nice. I'm not sure how much we have for right away on that particular road, whether or not we can do something more than just paving it and making the sets for bikers. So should the follow-up then be with the Department of Public Works? Here's the guy that can tell you the details about paving and what might be at the works. So a couple of thoughts. We don't mind if it's okay. One is one of the things that helps me, and I assume other Slack board members, is hearing from folks who are infected by an issue like this. So one thing you may want to think about is how to get the message out that that's what we need or it helps. In terms of the pavement, we have a pavement policy in terms of a projection of when certain roads are going to be repaved. And it's updated annually because the estimates of when a road might reach that critical point of needing repavement may change over time. But certainly, I think going through Bruce to get that document, I mean, I have a copy of my files at home, the last one. You know, at least that will give you an idea of when is it, it's due to be painted full. Honestly, I'm a cyclist. I like to think of myself as a cyclist. I do ride. I'm here exactly. I'm not view road and there are parts of it that are, I'm going to use the word scary. And then the last one is, and this is a request maybe to Eric is, with our partners at Chittenden Regional Planning Commission, can we at least find out what is the status of this CERC alternative project? And maybe even hopefully this is a quick conversation, find out what we can do to push for this to be a viable project. And this meaning some sort of an on road, it wouldn't be an off road, but it would be an on road. I think the term would be multi use path. Mostly for runners, walkers and cyclists. Exactly. That's the, would that work, Eric? Yeah. Would you mind? No, no, I had a conversation with the Regional Planning Commission this spring on this very topic with, with the trans trying to get some clarity on, with the state's funding and how the CERC alternative programs with the next step is going to be. So I know the state heard us and we're planning to have further conversations this summer, I believe, but this is certainly on our mind and looking for the status. There's a lot of federal funding available right now, not just the $20 million that I referenced earlier, but the infrastructure bill that was passed in Washington. It's also creating a lot of funding opportunities. I don't think the trans fully knows what they can spend those funds on, but I think it's really surprising to me that in all of these budget discussions, I've never actually heard allocations to, for the CERC alternative projects to be identified. So I do think it's, it's a need for the towns to be proactive about saying we have CERC alternative project approved as part of this process. So it's time to start funding them. It's time to start building them because all the development is happening, right? I mean, that, that, that's clear. And so I think if we don't make, start making these improvements, it's going to be too little too late, in my opinion. So I think it would be great to hear a follow-up. It would be great to understand, I guess I can be back in touch with your office. I'd like, I'll be in touch with Bruce to find out more about what next steps. Sure. Yeah. If you want to send me an email or give me a call, we can, we can look into that when we have this more information in front of us here. Okay. Great. I appreciate it. Yeah. Good. Thank you. All right. Thank you guys. And Greta. Thank you. Anyone else in the room who has any public comment? Anyone on Zoom? I don't see anybody on Zoom here. All right. We can move on then to the liquor control board applications. And Eric, you can give us a brief overview of the two that are pending. Yep. So a couple liquor control board items this evening. The first is a request for an outdoor consumption permit for McGillicuddy's Irish pub. They've obtained the necessary permits from the planning office for a permanent outdoor seating. And there's no, no staff objections to this request by McGillicuddy's. And they had, they did have an outdoor consumption permit during the course of the pandemic too. Yeah. It was through the state during the state of emergency had allowed outdoor consumption for places that didn't currently have it to be able to conduct their business. And McGillicuddy's did that under the state's regulation last couple of years. We had no issue with service at the facility. But now that that state of emergency was lifted, they would need to obtain the permit from the town, the outdoor seating, and also their wastewater application, the additional seats. They've obtained, obtained all of that. So from a, from a town policy standpoint. So the permitting is on place. Questions for Eric? Is the seating, seating remains the same as before? Or is it more or less or? Yeah. Let's see. They were adding, they added new seats for the restaurant. I don't have the exact number in front of me. That was just a curious question. Yeah. They purchased the wastewater allocation for the, for the new seats. The only question I have is, is town staff okay with how the outdoor seating has been isolated from, you know, pedestrian traffic, that type of thing. Yep. Yep. The police chief has, has a couple of suggestions for them, just for some additional barriers, but police chief in the planning office for this application. Maybe you're looking for a motion for this one. I'll move to approve an outdoor consumption permit for Miguel Lazotti's Irish pub through April 30th, 2023. Is there a second? I'll second. Who has any discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. And so we have four ayes and no negative votes. So moving on into the courtyard by Marion. And this is a change of ownership. Someone ownership changes for a hotel facility. New, they would need a liquor permit for the new ownership group. We have these every now and then for hotels. This is changing ownership to Vista Wilson Hotel Incorporated, requesting that the current licenses held by the hotel, the first, third and after an assumption license. Staff has reviewed it, has no objections to this application. Questions? Can you remind me what is the difference between the first and the second? Thank you, Jeff. I can never read this. I think I'm going to be stoned here, but first is that. This is a replay because we ask this all the time. What do you understand? If you would think, I would remember. The first class is serving like a class beer, like a restaurant. So I think the third class is being able to, I'll have to look it up. I think I thought third class was hard alcohol. And first class was beer and wine. And then second class is retail sales, which I would say they're not applying for, but. I think it's just backwards all we were doing with things. So yeah. Yeah. Okay. So none of that is, is it's serving it. It's none of it is sales, like at a, at a convenient store type sales. Okay. Right. So it's only for consumption on site. If there are no more questions, I'd be looking for a motion. Do it. I'll move to approve the first and third class liquor license and outdoor consumption permit for Vista Williston Hotel and Incorporated Doing Business as Courtyard by Marriott Burlington, Williston, Vermont through April 30th, 2023. Zero second. I'll second. Sorry, discussion. Not all those in favor of the motion to say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. And we have four no negative votes. So we have a taking care of that. We'll move on then to the fire union contracts. Memo of understanding Eric and chief Colette are here also for questions. So Eric, you lead off with you. Yep. So we have a draft the MOU with the fire union to address a change in minimum staffing for consideration this evening. Our current minimum staffing in the contract is three. With the addition of our new nine firefighters and EMTs, the number assigned to each 24 hour shift is going to increase from the current four to seven in mid June. Once the recruits finish the recruit Academy, this MOU would increase the minimum staffing to five to reflect additional, this additional staff. We've discussed it with the union. The union finds this proposal acceptable. Chief Colette is here. What is any operational questions? And I also asked chiefly was here if you would provide the board a brief update on the training Academy and staff members. We do have the copy of the MOU in front of us. Are there questions for the chief on this? Well, just two, if you don't mind. One is, was this our, our, the town, town staff's impetus to put this together or? Yes. Okay. And I guess I'll ask it bluntly to please. What, what is the benefit to the town to, to doing this? So we have greater depth in our ability to meet the needs across the community. So right now with it sitting at three persons, that was the entire intent of increasing the staff so that the hiring of the nine persons, the nine firefighters was to try to increase our capacity. One for firefighter safety. So we actually had a defined amount of people on the, on the fire engine, if you will, and the ambulance. So what this would do was set it every shift at two career staff on the ambulance and three career staff minimum on the engine for every shift. Instead of tonight where you have one person sitting on the fire engine. So it provides that level of capability to get a hose line in operation to perform rescues. It allows us to meet the two in two out OSHA standard, which I think you actually brought up Jeff in, in some of our discussions last October about that firefighter safety. So it allows us to maintain that level of safety, deliver that level of service without, you know, trying to meet the demands. You know, just as an example today, we were running four calls, the four concurrent calls across the community at the same time. So that's a single person in like, you know, myself on one call, the deputy on a call, the engine on a call, the ambulance is on a call, relying on outside ambulances, including Richmond rescue, UVM rescue. And it's the demand has not, even though I'm not sitting here in front of you every week, as we were, is when we went through the study and we were trying to present the findings of the study, that demand for service and the number of emergencies that concurrent calls continues. So this is our mechanism to try to, you know, really get to the root of why we increase the, and hire nine new staff. Let me ask a question a little bit differently. Does the MOU, you know, the perfect storm of things happened where between sickness and, you know, people taking much needed vacation and sickness and or whatever, we can't meet the five. What happens then? So there's already a calculation that we absorbed into that, right? So the staffing for the shift will be set at seven. Right. So we will be able to accommodate the request for vacation leave, for sick leave, all of those other leave types. And then that five would essentially be the trigger where we said, hey, we're getting into that gray area where it's on, we recognize that it was unsafe. We had recommendation with third party that says, we should act on it. So then we would hire back to that. I think what article eight allows for here is that if we did recognize some long term thing, or if the town saw some financial crisis that we'd revisit this MOU and allow us to make alterations to that and the local certainly understands that as well. Okay. So if I could just, if you don't mind just here, say back what I heard using maybe slightly different words to make sure I understand it is, what the town is doing through this MOU is essentially guaranteeing that there will always be at least a minimum of five on staff that that five may come at cost to the town. For instance, if that perfect storm happens where three people just unexpectedly are sick, they can't report to that 24-hour shift, we will find folks to fill in that to make a minimum of five. Yeah. Which I assume comes at a cost. It does, but that happens today with the minimum staffing at three. So you have more depth, right? Today you only have, if you look at the actual staffing factor, you only have four and you run down to three. So we're going up to seven and running down to five. So there is a greater buffer in there when you look at the staffing factor. And you would necessarily, if you, you know, your perfect storm of three absences per ship, you would hire back one person. Right. Okay. Okay. All right. Good. Thank you. Yeah. Regular questions for the trees. So the date, I noticed the commencement date for it is on or about Monday, June 13th. So that's the day we expect the nine to graduate from the academy. Thanks for the question, Greta. So the, our plan right now is to have a graduation on Friday, June 10th. And that's going to involve an informal luncheon where we'll invite the recruit firefighters, families, the town administration out, and certainly you folks to join us if you're available to see what's happened. And if I could just take a moment of personal privilege to kind of explain to you what this academy is, they've reported for duty on April 18th. They were met by the town manager and greeted with Shirley and Lynn and the other staff. And this group, I'll say this, it's been so exciting to see this transformation. They have come in, they have bonded, they understand their role. The academy is led by Captain Natto. That starts at 8 a.m. They run a 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. glass shift every day. At 8 a.m., they're doing PT for an hour. You will see them out and about across the community. In fact, I think we dropped them off at 8, something, 10 this morning at Catamount and they had to run their way back to the firehouse. Right, and so they've probably been running woods. They are out and about. And so part of that PT, we did a baseline assessment where we partnered with a local physical therapy group and said, all right, here's where you're at when it's the start of your academy. And at week nine, we're actually going to come back and do that assessment again to see how well they've done to improve their physical fitness, their stamina levels and all of that. The subjects range from the basics of donning PPE to self-contained breathing apparatus, hose streams, fire behavior, advanced fire dynamics, emergency medical services. This week we have a guest lecturer over the pediatricians from the University of Vermont. We'll be down Friday. So every Friday we commit to EMS. We'll have that doc in our station working for a couple of hours with the folks. Tomorrow morning, we head to the State Fire Academy where we've got a little bit of work with them. We're renting out their facility for two days at a reduced rate. We'll be down there tomorrow. They'll be overnight down at the academy at a very reduced rate because they have normal stories down there. So we get the entire use of that facility for $430 for all of our staff that are down there. That's not per person. That's the entire use of that facility. So they'll be down there through Thursday. We'll continue that out. They finish up, Greta, to your point. On the 9th of June will be when they essentially finish all of their psychomotor cognitive process and we'll test them out. We have some folks that need to go a little bit beyond that to focus on hazardous material certification and then we'll present that firefighter for a challenge with the state to get their certification. But the other eight of the nine already have certification in fire and EMS. So we were very fortunate. The work of the incumbent firefighters, they are the people that are teaching these programs. So yes, maybe I've had a couple of opportunities to teach in front of the group, but it's really been a grassroots, all hands-on effort from the membership to make sure that every person, all nine of those folks coming through are successful in their academy. So kudos to the members of the department, to Captain Natto and the rest of our staff. It's been absolutely exciting and outstanding to see the group come together for that. But thank you, any questions for the retrieve others? I'll ask this question, but I think you've already answered it, like the morale of the department. I know you have been so spread so thin and new recruits coming on deck. Maybe, I don't think relief is the word that's probably most efficient to use, but what is the vibe of getting new people on board and actually maybe having somewhat of a normal schedule if I could even use that phrase? Yeah, I think with the growth pains comes even more work. And that means that they're having to commit beyond the regular shift because they are the instructor. So we've asked a lot of our incumbent staff, are they excited? Absolutely, but they're committed to it. And I would say that they're sacrificing a little bit more even right now to make sure that this group is successful so that when they come on, that they actually do have that person riding on the other side of the fire truck or riding in the back of the fire truck. So we have that added depth because they know how risky it is right now with one person. So the energy, here we are four and a half weeks in and it's been draining because there's a lot of people in the firehouse and these are very exhausting days. Last week Kudos to the staff that did rapid intervention company work, but that is really four solid days from 0800 to 4 in the afternoon of physically demanding work. I think town manager Wells got to see that in just a 15 minute period to show how much they're in. When we ask for 100%, they're given 110. So chief, I'll just say, I know leadership comes from top down and I know how much this is needed, but you lead by example and I think it's spreading. So I just appreciate your commitment and what you're bringing to the town. I can't take breaded for it, right? I mean it's... You're a piece of the puzzle though. That's a group of things. And I'm just proud to be associated with them. Thanks so much for the opportunity to see the party tonight. But thank you. Other questions for the chief? No. I'm looking for a motion then on the MOU. Thank you. Gordon, you're doing such a good job. Great, Jeff. Yeah, just the reader over here. I'll move to approve a memorandum of understanding with the Williston Professional Firefighters, IAFF, local 4611, addressing minimum staffing as presented and authorize the town manager to sign on the town's behalf. This is your second. Second. A discussion on the motion. Did we lose Gretta or is she... Looks like I hear about Gretta. I heard that, Scott. She's not going no longer on the screen. Yeah, Scott. Scott, I'll get her back here just a minute. Mr. Chair, if I may, just while we have a moment. Yes, please. We have a way to address Gretta. We've also partnered with Burlington Fire Department who's also running an account at the same time for some cost savings. So we're sharing resources between the two organizations and actually pairing up both group academies together when we can to train together. And the two academies have built this esprit de corps between them where they are challenging one another across the academies and they've even sent each other kind of gifts just to build that esprit de corps. So that was something completely unexpected but it's been, again, fun to watch. So on the ninth, when they... We have this celebration. Do they do something similar to the Gatorade that goes over the coach's head? Gosh, I hope not. I'd pay to see that. The wonders of technology. While we're waiting, I apologize for being late. Here we go. Okay. We're back. We're just waiting for... Can you hear us, Gretta? Yep, I can hear you. Can you? So we have a motion made and seconded regarding approving the MOU for the Fire Union with the Fire Union and that's fine. We're past the discussion stage and all those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. There are no negative votes. So we have done that. Thank you, Chief. Thank you, Chief. And I'd like to back up quickly to the minutes of April 26th. Now we have the three people who can actually vote on this here. And so I'm looking for a motion to approve the minutes of April 26th. Move. We approve subject to modification. Is there a second? Is there a second? I'll second. I'll second. Sorry. I forgot I'm getting rusty at Zoom. Phase one. On item number five, I think it should actually read the park has been renamed to the Allenbrook Community Park. Yep. You had a question on that? Yeah, the park is Allenbrook Community Park. Now it states Allenbrook Park, but it's now Community Park. Yes, good. Thank you. Page two. And page three. Hearing no further corrections then. All those in favor of approving the minutes of April 26th, 2022, say aye. Aye. Aye. Take care of the three and abstentions. Jeff and Gordon. So we've taken care of the extraneous business here and we'll move on to the Chittin and Sallow-Glaze District Update and fiscal year 2023 budget. Eric, hopefully our folks are on the line. I think Kelton is here in the room if you want to come up to the table, Kelton. I've got Sarah Reeves, Executive Director. See you, Sarah here. Okay. So Eric, I'll give it to you to lead off and then we'll go directly into the presentation. So the annual update and budget presentation for the select board from the Chittin and Sallow-Glaze District is before you this evening. We've got Executive Director Sarah Reeves on Zoom and our town represented at Kelton-Lagosky here in person. Just to remind the board on process, you have until June 11th to vote on the CSWD budget. If the board does not support it, then a written statement to the CSWD board of commissioners identifying specific items change would be important. But with that, I'll turn it over to Sarah Reeves to walk forward through this budget proposal. Welcome, Sarah. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. I'm good to see you all. And seeing if it's, Eric, is it okay if I share my screen for the presentation? Yep, one second, Sarah. Great, thank you. Appreciate that. That should work now. Great, thank you very much. Is it possible to turn up the volume at all? Yes, Sarah. Having difficulty hearing me or? A little better. A little trouble, Sarah. Sorry, there's some in the back of the room. No problem. I will do my best to be clear and please let me know if there's anything that is not coming through or needs repeating or further explanation. My time is your time. And again, thank you for having me tonight. My name is Sarah Reeves and the executive director for the Chittin and Sallow Waste District. And for those who may not be familiar with CSWD, we are municipality created in 1987 by our members to oversee and manage the waste generated in Chittin and County. And because I'm here to talk about our budget, I like to always start off by talking about how we are funded and how we are not funded for those who aren't familiar. So how we're funded is through three main sources of revenue. One is from user fees, which are the fees that we directly charge to customers who bring us their material for us to physically manage, like at our drop off center or at the mountain compost or at the materials recovery facility. Otherwise, I was tipping fees. We also charge a solid waste management fee and that is a per ton fee that we charge to haulers for every ton of trash that is brought to the landfill and Coventry for disposal. And we also receive revenue from material and product sales. So the sale of compost, paint, and commodity sales from the from the MRF. Where we do not receive funding is from income tax, sales tax, property tax. We also do not send our member communities a bill. We do not assess any per capita fees and that does make us a bit unusual and different from other communities and other waste districts in the state. So I'll go on to sharing the screen here. Thank you. And as always, I like to start with the bottom line. And just like every other municipality, we do need to get to zero for fiscal 23. We are anticipating revenue of just over $14 million after you subtract out the cost of goods sold, which is literally the paint buckets we use for our paints. Some materials we mix in the compost to make garden mix, things like that. We are left with revenue of $13,859,528. We are budgeting expenses of $13,808,706, which leaves a very, very tight margin, probably the tightest margin of any budget that I brought to our member towns. I do believe we have some leeway on that revenue and I'll explain that further down in the budget. The rest of the lines are either capital contributions, transfers to or from reserves, some allocations, and with the bottom line being getting us down to netting zero. As I mentioned, the solid waste management fee is that fee charged to haulers when they bring material to be disposed in Coventry. We are proposing, again, keeping that fee at $27 per ton, not raising that fee. It's been the same for about nine years now. We are budgeting a very slight increase in the ton subject to that fee. This is down from the calendar 2018-2019 when the tons were growing fairly steadily and then COVID hits. And then we also, at the same time, just not far along after, the last bit of Act 148 really kicked in. And so we're seeing a lot more residents keeping food scraps out of their waste, which is fantastic. And we're also seeing people, I think, still maintaining that adjustment from when we had COVID shutdowns and things were hard to find. So we are not seeing that growth, in fact, we're coming back down. And that's a good thing. This is not an area that we want necessarily to see growth. At the Materials Recovery Facility, we are not increasing the tip fee. Again, we're keeping it at $80 per ton. And again, that fee is charged directly to haulers when they bring blue bin materials to us for sorting. We are looking at significant increases in our expenses. And these are related to two things in particular. Our contract with our operator, Kasella, expires next month. And we are anticipating a fairly significant increase in the processing fee, as well as we're, just like everyone, are experiencing increases in trucking and shipments and moving materials. So that increase in hauling costs and disposal costs ripple throughout just about everything that we do in this budget. And that is those two things, most of the contract on the MRF is accounting for the very, very large increase in expenses. We are budgeting for the revenue side from the MRF very conservatively. And that is, has been our ML as long as we've managed to MRF. We are budgeting $80 per ton. So the average commodity revenue that's the average blended rate for all of the materials that we sell, that's the average value. It is up significantly. The markets have rebounded quite a bit. Part of it was due to COVID and the Amazon effect. But part of it is also due to some significant investment domestically in the U.S. and in Canada in processing capacity, both at mills and at process facilities. So we're seeing that capacity come online. So there's a greater hunger and demand for material as well as demands for recycled plastic content by major brands like Coca-Cola and Pepsi. They're looking to get more of recycled content into their packaging. So there's a huge demand and not enough supply. So that is good on the pricing. So even though we're budgeting conservatively at $80 per ton, I do think that we will see the average come in higher than that, possibly at about $95 per ton. So when I talked about some wiggle room on the revenue, I think this is where we would see that. At our Organics Diversion Facility, we have been experiencing no subsidy or very little subsidy over the past couple of years. And this was due to a lot of the efficiencies that we put in place and also due to switching our business model, getting away from selling bags all over the region and going wholesale. And the reason that you're seeing a subsidy amount there for the upcoming fiscal year budget is because our anticipated inbound tons has been reduced significantly. And that was a direct result of the de-packaging facility that Cassila put in right next door to the Murph, Harry Williston, and we saw about a third of our tons diverted away from our facility, you're not composed, to the de-packaging facility, whether the tons needed de-packaging or not, all of the Cassila tons were diverted for a period of time. We're seeing some of that material come back, but not nearly up to where we had been, just prior to the pandemic and into going into fiscal 2021. So our sweet spot that we want to get to is between five and 6,000 tons. So we are coming back up. We're about 25% below where we would like to be. And that reduction is being shown in the anticipated revenue. Also, again, we're looking at increases in materials management or hauling. And we're also going to be experiencing or anticipating experiencing a leveling back of sales of the compost products away from the COVID levels. When folks were home during the beginning of the pandemic and even into last year, many, many, many people either built new gardens or expanded existing gardens to grow food at home. So those gardens are in place and now they're in maintenance mode. So everyone who produces compost products is seeing a leveling off of their sales back to pre-pandemic activities. So this is anticipated, but it is a reduction in our revenue. Onto our drop-off centers, we are also looking at keeping those fees the same. We are not getting any increases here. Oh, I'm sorry. I would like to dimension the amount in compost. We will be increasing the fees, the inbound to fee from $60 to $65 a ton. And again, that was part of the multi-year plan to bring that facility to where we did not need to subsidize and keep that market base. At the drop-off centers, we will not be increasing the bag fees. Those will remain the same again for this year, as they were for the current year for next year. We are undergoing a DOC fee structure analysis. We began at this year. We will continue it into the next fiscal year. So one of the reasons that, you know, we're seeing kind of a, I think a slight reduction in our revenue. Certainly we lost some revenue from turning over Richmond drop-off center to Cicella and for not being fully open at Burlington. So we're taking a look at the fee structures and looking at our system over the course of this next year. And we do anticipate or I'm expecting to be recommending a revision to the fee structure in fiscal 24, but that will be up to the board to decide if they want to go forward with that. We do need to take a look at all of the items that we manage and some of those items we are not allowed to charge for, but some we have chosen not to charge for. So we just need to look at the full fee of what we're managing at the drop-off centers. We have realized significant efficiencies and materials management flow. But again, those efficiencies that we were seeing have kind of been offset by the increases in movement of materials and the loss of that revenue from Richmond and from Burlington. And then just looking again at the subsidy announced by program, I do want to point out subsidies are not always a bad thing. And case in point, the environmental depot. Our board has for decades now been extremely supportive of subsidizing the environmental depot. Do we see the grant from the state but it is not nearly enough to cover the expenses? We want to make sure that residents are able to bring their household hazardous waste to the depot at no charge. We want to continue to encourage that habit. We do charge small amounts for some of the small amounts of commercial material we are allowed to accept. But we are committed to keeping the residential fee at zero for the environmental depot leading to a sizable subsidy. And again, the board has chosen chosen to make that its policy and its practice. The administrative programs, you'll see that the anticipated draw on that reserve is more than adequately covered by the fees coming in from the Soloway's management fee. The abbreviation O and C stands for Outreach and Communication and that is a sizable budget in the administrative program. But it is also one of our mandates. This is one of the items that we are required by the state to do for our materials management program. And we love it. We really feel in its calling and we dedicate a lot of resources to that program. In the fiscal 23 compared to fiscal 22, I really wanted to point you down to that last budget, that last bullet item. We have changed how we are managing the presenting of the community cleanup fund in this year's budget. We in prior budgets had only budgeted for each year's annual allotment to our member community. And our auditor said, no, actually you need to budget the full liability in the event that every member community uses every bit of money that has been banked into their their own fund. So we did that and then some. So what we decided to do instead going forward and this will be subject to board approval as we go forward, but is to each year provide what would be a five year value of the annual allotment. So right now each year you can per population you get an allotment and you can bank up to five years so that if you have a product in mind but it isn't quite enough each year to do that project you can save up to five years and then use that on one fell swoop. Instead we want to fully fund those five years each July one. So we no more carrying over and no more banking but each year you'll get that larger allotment. And the hope is to get this money out into the community and to use it for cleanup projects. Some communities use it to augment cleanup day. Some communities have used it for entire roundups or appliance roundups. For getting carts into public spaces there's a host of different things that you could use it for and you would work through through Kelton and for those projects and we're happy to assist with that as well. But we think that's pretty exciting and we really hope our communities are going to take full advantage of that change. Our capital plan for the next several years is going to just continue to be pretty intense. We've been talking with you over the past couple of years about how we're looking to change up some things on Redmond Road and I really want to say I appreciate very much the openness and the willingness of the staff of Eric and his team to be working with us. And I think we've really developed a good relationship and I really value that and I just wanted to make sure that the slide for you knew how much I appreciated it. So the next few years we will be looking at a drawdown on the capital reserves with the caveat. So this is coming up to be a pretty heavy capital year. The big investments are looking to be for a new administrative building which we have not yet brought to the DRB. So we still actually haven't had our board approve the final number yet but we are hopeful that they will do so. So that would then pick up that process doing some improvements to the Milton Drop-off Center site preparation for a new MRF. We are also looking at getting compost square to help us with some of the plastic contamination that gets into the compost. And the $3.9 million also includes $2.4 million for improvements to the infrastructure of the current MRF. However, we are planning on bringing a new MRF project to the voters in November. And so if the voters approve that new MRF project then lots will not need that $2.4 million for the existing MRF. So that will significantly help that $3.9 million and will help the reserves and speaking of the new MRF. So the select board may recall that Josh Tyler and I came by a few times to talk about the different project of ways that we were thinking of presenting the new MRF to the voters. And so our Board of Commissures did say that we could bring that to voters in November at the general election. And you may recall that what we're proposing is a new MRF on Redmond Road basically doubling the size of the existing MRF over in the industrial park looking at a completely modernized facility right now. As you very well know we sort most of our materials by hand. And there's no MRF, modern MRF in the country that does that, that is said from us in Northern Rotland. So we're looking to build new MRF and what we're not looking to do is to assess our member towns for any portion of the project. So we will be paying for operations, capital, and debt service out of the revenue streams that I described before to fees, minor revenue. And if we need to for some reason depend to the cell where it's managed and fee we have that available to us as well. But we will not be assessing any of our member towns any fees to cover cover the costs of the new building. We are seeking funding from a variety of sources. We are very excited to at the possibility of being able to apply for a grant to the EPA through the infrastructure money that is coming to them to manage for recycling programs. But it's brand new they've never had that before. So I'm actually gonna sit on a webinar tomorrow to learn how to apply for that. So that's very exciting. There's also zero interest municipal loans available. There are other non-profit grants that we have been pre-approved for as well. And then obviously bonding. So once we have the full financing package we'll bring that to our board for for the information. And then we will come out to the communities with a series of public forums. Lots of public information information on our website direct mailers. You know just really getting in front of each of the slide boards at the end and talking specifically about this project. So we're very excited at the possibility of having a new facility. And I know you know but not all of my member towns remember that I do require adoption of our budget the system D budget. Unless you feel as Eric mentioned that there's something that you disagree with and you want to reject that. So that isn't an option. I know you guys know that. And that's a lot of information. I'm going to stop sharing now. And I would love to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you very much. Ask Kelton to weigh in at this point if you have anything to to the discussion. Yeah. No I'm definitely very supportive of the budget. I think I think you see a lot of new infrastructure coming to Wilson with the cream up compost all the work they're doing over there to just improve their process. You're seeing the new admin building come here in Wilson Redmond Road as well as a new Murph coming down the line that is needed. You know there's been a lot of studies of do we need to be a Murph does municipality want to be in that business and really everything the district has done all the studies they've done say yes that the district wants to be you know wants to do this. I think the big thing as part of this budget is you know there's a lot of inflation a lot of increased costs but you're not seeing them pass that along increases in the Murph tip be increasing the trash ton fees. I think that's that's very exciting that you're not seeing or drop off center fees for residents. I think that's that's very positive. A lot of it is being you know you have very strong recycle markets right now it's definitely help you know to offset those increased costs elsewhere. And I think you know Sarah didn't mention it but they're also doing right by giving good raises to all the employees to represent inflation. So I think they do a great job providing providing good jobs here in Wilson. I think that's very important. They do a good job you know making sure they're we did a whole revenue and sufficiency model with it went through weeks of looking at looking at the study of like do we do we need for our for the employees you know where we off market range and I think you know they've really done their due diligence to make sure that they're offering competitive jobs here in Chittenden County. Yeah overall I'm definitely very supportive of the of the budget. I think I think you will see revenue be higher. I don't see the recycling markets crashing anytime soon but you never know I mean it's could have said that back when everything shut down but I think a lot of the differences you know we're not relying on outside the country a lot a lot of materials sitting here domestically going to more domestic mills so I think that that's very positive for the recycle markets so another country can't just shut down our capacity. Yeah I think there's a lot of exciting stuff. I think the the district will do a great job taking magic grants all the federal money that's out there so right now is the time to make all these investments in these you know in the new murder in the new admin building there's a lot of money out there. They've identified a lot of sources in our meetings that that they're going to look to take advantage of so they're kind of getting this project ready on the silver platter so when this money becomes available they're like here's our project can you help can you help fund it so that's a lot of what I have on the budget I don't know if you guys have any questions. Good thank you. I'll open up to questions from the board. I guess I'll start I may be the only one Sarah and Kelton. I'm on page one of the the cover letter that went to Eric and the first question I have is I'm not disagreeing with it at all but it mentioned a mid-year three percent cost of living increase and my question is is you know if that were to happen in Williston would be like are we going to get the money to pay for it where does how does the district end up paying for that cost. Hi Jeff, you froze momentarily I think at a very key point so you're asking where does the district get the cost for what it notes there was a three percent COLA given to the police is mid mid-year yes and my question is is I know would if the town were to do that I mean it would be a difficult question to answer where does the money come from what pot of money is it would be available and is that the priority use for it and I'm sort of asking that same question of you folks yeah thank you that is a good question so we tend to just as we are conservative with our revenue forecast and expectations we also are very conservative with our wages and benefits expense line so for example we always if we have new positions in the budget and we haven't hired yet we always assume the family plan for example um we will always look for ways to to to save as far as you know oh can we save anything on the benefits Kelton mentioned that we do oops it looks like I caused a ripple effect you're frozen up on us oh of course Sarah is still talking away I just under a note in the chat yeah yeah yeah I I don't sit on the finance committee but I do I do know we have had a lot of conversations about this through the finance I mean I've sat on the finance committee meetings and listened to them but no they've had a lot of conversations and there's been a lot of back and forth on the COLA I think Sarah will be better off answering not as in-depth on where is it to come from yeah welcome back yeah thank you you know I'm sorry I just kept rambling on and then thank you for the note Eric in the chat so oh bottom line so we had some positions that we did not hire in this fiscal year one because we went to more of a managed service with our internet provider that provided significant savings we also had a nearly mid-year retirement so into the third quarter so we knew we would have some savings there and then we had another employee that actually moved on to another for the company and so there was some savings there as well but really it's because we kind of over budget on the benefits so we always know we're going to have or we hope and assume we're going to have some room and when we did the forecast out at in December to see if it was possible you know when we budgeted the budgeted COLA for this current fiscal year was 1.11 percent we knew last June we were already behind so by the time we got to October, November and Social Security was saying they were going to increase COLA to 6 percent we knew our folks were really losing money so we were able to recognize that we did have the money available in this current year's budget so we didn't have to take anything from any other line item we're not over the line item in this year's budget in fact we're still going to be under fairly significant even with the 3 percent COLA so it's really a combination of overestimating the needs and the benefits taking a look at any new positions that we think we may need continuing to reevaluate the need for those positions and then you know doing what we what we can do and we think it was it was well received it was needed and it was the right thing to do okay good thank you and then on the next question I have is it mentions the 2 percent COLA on July 1st and my question is is July 1st when COLA's are typically given whatever for us it is and but that's something that we want to look at and we did briefly talk about it when we reviewed the total compensation study done by Gallagher Flynn because it does make it difficult as we saw to adjust for an annual bubble or blip so we always use the Northeast Urban Index from the Bureau of Labor Statistics so we have that as our guide and we do the 12 month rolling average but it was a good thing for us to have another index to look at with Social Security and kind of match it up so going forward we might we might switch to an annual you know health insurance rates go up on January 1 anyway so there's there's we always have to kind of half budget increases for that and that's the other area where we generally will see some savings we tend to over budget on the health insurance percent increase because you just you don't know so you have to budget high but there is some thought about moving the COLA to January versus July okay very good thank you I'm on page well it turns out to be I guess page two and three and it's kind of a concept question I'm reading about the drop off centers and you know I know you've been looking for you've been considering for a while do you want to continue to subsidize dropping off of I assume recyclable materials some of the other materials such as used oil fluorescent bowls what have you and then I'm going down to the solid waste management fee where it says recommending that that fee stay at the $27 per ton so my opinion you know I can't speak for the rest of the board but my opinion is is one of the strongest incentives we have for folks to properly manage their waste including those materials that can be recycled those materials that should be properly disposed of such as used oil such as complex for us and bulbs is by making that fee to drop them off either zero or as low as possible so my comment becomes one of instead of keeping the solid waste management fee at the $27 per ton is an option to raise that fee and use the revenue you would generate from that to help subsidize those you know more difficult to manage materials and the nexus I see is the the solid waste management fee if I remember correctly that's a fee on material that's actually disposed of so the nexus becomes is you know that fee would help pay for those materials that you're trying to keep from being disposed of and so anyway that's that's that's my comment there I think you've maybe heard me say that last year when I think was the first year you had mentioned you were looking at the fees that should be charged at the drop-off centers yeah and the items that you mentioned they are actually covered by extended producer responsibility laws in Vermont so so those will will never have a fee and they're like electronics you know the certain covered products for e-waste they'll also never have a fee so those items are things that we get reimbursed for so that's a wash and that's that's you know those are off the table always so batteries similar product so we are working very very strongly at the legislature on additional extended producer responsibility legislation and you know we have bills that are ready to go modeled in part after bills in Maine and Oregon and New York we think ours is better but that's fine and so we're working really strongly with with particularly the Senate on that and that would absolutely help with the costs of managing recycling in particular but as Kelton mentioned markets for right now are good so that's where we feel very comfortable at the Murph again not needing to raise that fee because those costs are covered at the drop-off centers the issue with raising the it's always meant to be is that because of the fee on haulers it doesn't touch me like as a individual person per se they may pass something on to their customers but it would have to be very very very significant I think for them to do that and that would certainly be seen as negative to business and wouldn't necessarily have the individualized effect that I think maybe could be perceived that it it would I think a different approach and that's again you know we're talking about this as a district and we're open to how do we make sure that to your point Jeff we are incentivizing you know the right thing because we want people to recycle more we want them to keep these straps out of the industry we absolutely want them to keep householdizers waste out of waterways and trash everywhere and what is that balance for the operations and what are what are materials that truly are very hard to manage and is there a different way to do that a better way to do that more efficient way to do that so it's not necessarily all pricing it may just be consolidation you know it could be just a different way to move material through the system so that's also part of the inflation but we also want to make sure that we are being you know we're not undoing subsidizing in in in kind of depressing competition we don't want to be seen as because of our municipality and we do have this ability to essentially levy this other fee that we are being unfair to the private sector but we want to cover our costs and and do it in a way that is again responsible to our public you know 25 plus percent of Jinden County residents use our drop-off centers as their primary method for managing their waste and they do so for a variety of reasons cost being one so you know we're not looking to really merely raise prices just because we can there's gotta be a sound reason behind it and it's gotta be transparent and understandable and justifiable so that's why we're taking our time and taking a look at the structure and your point is variable you know just how Kersti or other districts or solid waste planning entities looking at the same same thing I know that the other solid waste management entities the other districts are all struggling with household hazardous waste costs they are skyrocketing this has been a problem for many years and it has been exacerbated over the past four years and when COVID hit forget it part of that is the cost of of bringing those kind of services to Vermont we are very very fortunate in Jinden County to have the depot to have a permanent facility other districts relying on on events and it's getting harder and harder to meet that mandate from the state and it is a mandate from the state so there's another EPR bill that we've been working on very very hard for specific to HHW to get manufacturers to help pay for the cost of managing these materials in particular so that one has the support of every single management district every just every solid district and it's it's just a bear because of all the products involved if you can imagine all the the potential products that are we've made it to the depot but we are working really hard on that so that would have some promise as well but yeah every everyone is really facing very very similar difficulties and it's you think it's just a bag of trash but okay okay I think the biggest thing with all the the EPR bills is paying the true cost of what you're buying up front so the full life cycle cost so say you buy a pair of tires rather than being surprised with having to pay to get rid of them at the end you know you pay the upfront cost of hey here's the full life cycle of this product you paid at the beginning when you buy it so you're not surprised it's almost like manufacturers can just sense hide behind the the cost that they pass on to consumers which they don't know yeah no that that I agree with the extended producer EPR responsibility concept that manufacturers are basically getting a free ride when it comes to the disposal of the materials that they sold you and made money on and you know their profit and everything and they should bear some maybe you know some would argue all of that disposal cost right now they bear basically none of it agree but I also think that that's that is a huge societal change there are a lot of societal changes I'd like to see happen but I know it's going to take a long time for them to happen we shouldn't probably dwell on that these are just questions I'm actually into the budget now and I'm on page two and it's just things I don't understand I'm under the revenue snapshot on page three and there is a row list cost of goods sold and I don't really understand how that figures into the into the table and I'm sorry I don't know if you have the budget in front of you to see what that is so if you could just explain to me what cost of goods sold means yeah so cost of goods sold are the products that we have to buy in order to to sell one of our products so paint buckets you know we create local color paint as part of the Pain Recycling Program also an EPI program in Vermont and we have to buy the buckets at an expense the cost that goes into creating that new product for compost products we have to buy things like sand and and peat and other things that go into Dan's special sauce to make topsoil and and garden mix that is a cost associated with this product that is being sold okay and then I'm on page four under expenses snapshot and the one row there I didn't understand is is it's not I didn't understand what the row meant but the administrative where there are a couple items here where I saw some significant changes and the administrative change I didn't really understand a negative almost 40% yes so in the previous fiscal year we installed a new finance software system whole new system so that expense lived in the administrative budget and now it's in so we don't have it okay I've got it in five cents okay I guess the only other one that was really a shocking change although it's not a big number but it's a change is the community support but I think you might have touched on that in your introduction yes so that is the community cleanup fund being now fully budgeted full liability being budgeted as opposed to again before the auditor said hang on a second don't do that we would budget $19,000 for each year and that was the total amount of each community's allocation into their fund and the auditor said now you really need to budget the whole liability the entire and the entirety of the fund in the event that everybody uses every penny and you've got to expense it you've got to pay it out so we have to anticipate that it's all going out every year so that that is the change this year okay all right I think I get that that's it that's it for me and that's the question is from the members of the board those series I'd be looking for a motion had moved to approve the fiscal year 2023's Chittin and Solid Waste District budget as presented is there a second a second is there a discussion on motion hearing none my lowest and favorite of the motion say aye aye aye any opposed we have done thank you very much for coming tonight we appreciate all the information thank you very much good night moving on to these the enterprise budgets we're looking at the stormwater fund budget first and Eric you know just the subjects and Bruce or is here to explain the the the budget yep so for the board this evening as we've done the last few years is have the board consider our enterprise fund budgets in the spring time that's our stormwater sewer water budget this allows these are approved by the select board not the voters this allows a little more time to develop these budgets and not has as many budgets to go through during the winter time so both works director Bruce or we'll walk through the budgets this evening for the board inclusive of the rates and finance director surely good to lack you here as well turn over to Bruce to start out with stormwater excuse me hi you all have the transmittal for the stormwater budget there's no major significant changes just to go through the transmittal quickly the one place where you might have a question because I had a question today actually that I asked Christine is under the album look well restoration plan and the last line where today we've gotten 746,000 in grant funds and been received in 680,000 distributed 1,181,841 loans have been issued but and the grant why there's a difference in number there's still a couple projects that are waiting to get completed that will get some of that that's where the rest of the distribution of that grant funds will go to or come from one actually we just sent lawyers today to review is Whitney Hill one of them was part of the flow restoration plan that they're just getting for any large changes in the end to stormwater budget there aren't any large ones really the we're not we're not raising the rate or suggesting the rate be raised so that's six years I believe we've been able to hold that rate since we've started the utility you'll see under usually receipts in revenue that number is down a little bit from last year and that's strictly because of the way that the credits have been applied there really hasn't been a change it's just the actual revenues are up but then when we we adjust for the credits it makes it look like it's down a little bit a little brilliant the other big item in here is state one of the interesting that should be pointed out is the revenues for the state grant utility incentives the state's not incentivizing utilities anymore stormwater utilities meaning they're not going to give us $25,000 they've been giving us for the past four years they've done away with that so that we won't be seeing that money under the revenues outside services one of the items that's changed the state monitoring fees you'll see that that's a drop of $13,000 that's because we're not monitoring there's no Alan broke the monitoring going on now we were paying the state to do that before and they dropped that program let's see that's those are the significant changes in the stormwater budget I'll take any questions if anybody has them you'll see in the bottom the bottom line is under revenues and expenditures we're not necessarily presenting a balanced budget into utilities lines anymore that's in working with Eric and Shirley since these are revenue funds they don't necessarily have to show a balance thank you Shirley gave us a good memo on why we don't necessarily have to have a balanced budget on that so thank you any questions for Bruce on these stormwater budget actually could we talk first about that concept of you don't need a balance I'm not sure I quite get that I don't need to get that maybe Shirley would explain that I mean I get it because it's been explained but because they're revenue funds it's just like any business although I'm sure most businesses would rather show that their expenses or their revenues are higher than their expenses can budget a year where they're not going to do as well so what'll happen is before the way we always did it was the last thing we ever said in all the utility budgets was the rate we had to figure out what everything was going to cost us and then we'd come up with a rate and if that rate increase was going to be too large sometimes we would go to the fund bounce and say we'd take the money out of there if needed if the budget got done with the year and we didn't need it well then that was fine too but what it really comes down to and Shirley can explain it and I think she did pretty well in her memo is we don't transfer any money anyway we have a balance and you know that balance in the year we make money the money goes into that fund balance in the years we don't make money we would transfer money over at least on our paper but wasn't that really happened? that correct? so so the idea is why show it? believe me I just assume come in here show you a balanced budget every time and could do that but it's going to go back to being against what we've been saying we don't have to do now the reason I would say why show it is because if you have a fund that over years is negative you know the one thing about having a fund balance is you can always track yeah one year we had a bad year something like that or a year where we over budgeted not over budgeted but we had more budget than we had revenue coming in at least you can you can monitor it because you can see how your fund balance is doing last year our fund balance was 300,000 this year it's 150 it'll still be being monitored we're not I mean we're still going to know what's going on with that fund balance and if it gets down to there's never been any decision on what a fund balance should be for a utility budget should we keep that budgeted a million dollars or should it be five hundred thousand dollars should it be two million dollars there's never been a number set like that and that something that has to be very you have to be very careful with because let's just say we're going to say we always want to keep a million dollars and a fund balance for whatever budget it is and we do have a bad year we have a couple we use the water budget you know we know and we've had water breaks that have cost us nine nine eight hundred thousand dollars we don't budget that kind of money for a water break in a year so if we have a year where we have a couple could be like that fairly large and now we're down we're going to say we're going to keep a million dollars now we're down eight hundred thousand seven hundred fifty the only way you're going to get that back up to a million is for a big the large rate increase so it's very that's not that's something you have to be very careful with the same what you want to keep as a fund balance but as far as tracking and certainly surely can tell you every year what we've either what we've either made or taken out and I'm going to be asking that too because I want to know where the budget you know how we end up so when when the expenditures exceed the revenues and you end up with a net negative at least on paper to start with okay but it even though it's just on paper it's still a it still is a deficit so how does that deficit get I'm trying to think of my own budget and it would be great if I could sit there and say I'm going to make so much this year but I'm going to spend you know 25 percent more of that I'm just going to put this negative number at the bottom at some point though it's the same very for us to fund down so when you look at the summary page yet of the very bottom of them okay not giving you the fund balance but it is showing you the net revenue or that is said for $19,021 actual and then go to the $522 budget shows for our first store of water shows that we'll have a deficit of $14,000 so really going back at our fund balance in store of water I know we have plenty of cash to look at you look at those ones I'm sure I'd say if you look at the ones before that all those three years we think we think in deposit okay so where does that unrestricted fund balance where does that show up it doesn't show up on these revenue for on these budgets okay but when I'm approving a budget let's say the store of water budget how do I have the confidence that having that negative number is okay we've got enough cash somewhere that we can occur that negative I think what you're asking Jeff is if we showed what the unrestricted fund balance was right below that that would tell you okay and we can that may be a good that may be a good idea for folks like me who sit there and say how can we have a negative number do you have that handy surely it's from from the auditing financials yeah I mean I trust you it's there that's not the question it's just as I was going through this and seeing for what was it was it I forget if it was the water or the wastewater that had the huge negative number that's when it caused me the water yeah so there's two ways we would have handled that normally we either would have raised the rate higher right or we would have taken money on a fund balance and there was a line item in the budget it's all these past years right where we would fill a number transfer it over right and that number that was going in there was always coming out of the unrestricted fund balance right that you didn't know what the full number was for as long as I'm getting at you didn't know whether that budget was million dollars five million dollars or whatever what you saw was the budget is balanced okay is there a unrestricted fund balance for the three storm water storm water water and wastewater or is there one fund balance for all three enterprise funds three they're all three separate entities okay okay okay okay so it's it's a little bit different from prior years so certainly it's it's the board's budget so any any changes you'd like in presentation or further information with stock and well I think surely this idea for next year is a great one is if we could just see that there's when we see a negative number or positive number but we're more concerned about the negative number that there is a correspondingly sufficient fund balance unrestricted fund balance I think would just give us a confidence to say yes you know we're not getting ourselves into a position we don't want to be in I can even add that these yeah spherical distribute them back there okay great I mean if you don't mind sure you know how to go any further questions then on the budget online or what all three or just the just sort of work just don't look okay you can do not going to get all taken in this individual separately and and what are you what are you kidding me if there's no other questions on the stormwater budget but I'm looking for a motion on that one I've moved to approve the stormwater fund operating budget for fiscal year 2023 in the amount of seven hundred sixty six thousand eight hundred thirteen dollars and capital program fiscal years 2023 through twenty twenty eight as present zero second a second great discussion on the motion if not all those in favor of the motion say aye I hear five eyes I believe we'll move on then to the water and sewer budget do water separately and sewer separately all right water from the transmittal just to show you what the increases are that we're looking at we've got an increase in the wholesale rate of four point two six percent that you know certainly means that the effects are retail rate overall so fiscal year 23 just to talk about the rate we'll go through everything else then we're looking at three point nine two percent increase of members of the voting here that we just ended up talking about about not necessarily showing a balance this year's proposed budget still includes recommended capital sheets so we do not fall farther behind and the use of our performance is being recommended for some capital projects and you're going to see that throughout as far as the recommendation for using um glad Sheryl is here will you use her bus for water so for water there's not once again the biggest change just asking for the increase are we going to do capital once or do you want to do capital do both at the same time yes for for water especially and then we can do the sewer some of the things on capital are in both departments right so we're going to do we'll do both these operating for lack of a better term and then do the cap so okay the other reason I say that is or ask that is that some of the capital items are in here and being asked once again go use the ARPA money so there once again there's no huge increases here you know we've raised the basic user charges based on a 3.5 zero CPI that's the same CPI that was used on the highway if I put this put together we know that that's probably a little bit higher like hopefully it won't stay that way so other than that there's not any huge changes in here the biggest changes in the department salary and that goes back to the adjustment we made a few months ago the salaries for everybody was appreciated and since I'm just talking about appreciation I just want you to know that today we did training and I had seen the May 3rd meetings and the nice comments that came from the select board so I shared those with the crew today and it was appreciated they know that you guys know what's going on I won't tell you you know everything's going on but then you get that you get what they do or try to do and we appreciate that support and it's important for them to hear that obviously a select board other than that there's once again there's just not a whole lot of changes here like always we try to hold the budget as best we can all of this is certainly going to be a tougher year because everything is increased in cost questions on the water budget actually no I'm sorry I meant to ask this on the sewer if you don't mind which is why is the cost going so much at the Essex treatment plant for treatment it was like a 13 percent increase do we talk about the sewer we haven't done the sewer yet hold off on that because we're just doing water budget at the present time okay that's all right but that's okay we'll get to that question any other questions regarding the water budget and the motion that is suggested includes the capital expenditures for with language takes care of the capital when I be looking for a motion then if there are no other further questions so this includes capital it does just let me see if I had any questions on the capital so there are a few things well unfortunately there are some things in the capital budget that affect both water and sewer so the motions that are presented to you take care of the other wording that goes along with the joint project one question I do have that affects both water and sewer budget is if these budgets are approved what is the impact on the towns arpa whatever remaining the rates not the rates well that'd be good to know too but no this is both both budgets propose using some arpa dollars to fund capital what I want to know is once if these budgets are approved and thus those arpa dollars will be used to fund capital what is the impact on our arpa funds overall in other words how much will it decrease the arpa pot of money we have from where it is currently I want it all anyway what's that I want it all anyway be honest Bruce the intent here is to identify it as a possible funding mechanism but not to allocate it at this point so oh interesting so the approval when the approval here is not necessarily saying if you approve this budget you're approving those arpa expenses right now okay that's not how I interpreted that I'm not I'm not you know okay that's good to know wait honestly I would just assume you do that because for a couple reasons one is even though it sounds like we've got a long time when that arpa funding we don't you know especially you and I don't mean to think about anybody else here but especially you know it's going to take a while to spend that money even once we're said we're told to go we're blessed to use it depending on the project permitting alone can take the outside the time limit for that month yeah so most of the projects that I have suggested that money be used for are projects that I'm pretty sure that we can get through any kind of permitting right morass for lack of a better term before we end up getting to a point where we've got to go back and say hey wait a minute we're doing the best we can do right because of you know waiting for permits if you want to I know the people in the audience that can even attest so that's what most of those are in there for in water alone three of the ones that are in there that I've suggested or when my original memo I brought a copy of that list of possible arpa funding it'd be three hundred some my thousand dollars just in water okay all the projects that are in there that I suggested in in sewer I didn't actually go back and look at that but you know one or two major pump stations three or four hundred thousand dollars fees we're talking you know we're talking a million million two right just just on those few items identified and and just so you know Bruce my concern is is that we haven't had that discussion yet or coming to a resolution yet about how does the town want to spend its arpa allocation you know the three point one million dollars you know how much for infrastructure versus how much for other programs that are of value to Williston residents and and town staff I you know we just because we haven't had that I don't want to get in a situation where we're so far down because we've allocated let's say dollars to infrastructure that that high priority non infrastructure project that's a value to Wilson no longer can we pay with with our dollars because we spent it elsewhere so like a better words so this budget these budgets are set up so that whatever's in these budgets using our funds would just be a bonus for lack of a better term right it'll have a direct yeah so and once again we haven't really gone over the sewer budget yet but pump stations are big and we already know yeah we put out the north Wilson road pump station just prior to covid and it had a $200,000 estimate from the engineers or something and came in at 375 or something that was before this even happened yeah so we're probably looking at $500,000 for that one now couple reasons for that especially now is materials just getting just getting the stuff and and lead time on a pump station just to order the pumps you're waiting four months whatever that was before all so once again that goes back then to we're already behind we were doing a very good job and I don't know if you want to keep talking about sewer but we're on a very we were doing a very good job of doing that every other year pump station for a 20 year window for 10 pump stations then we get done we're back to 20 years it's time to do them again two things hurt us one is the we ended up doing Blair Park twice because the hotel came in we weren't expecting that hotel so that had to be an an upgrade even though we had just done a minor upgrade there a couple years before that and the cost that came in in North Wilson Road actually both of those came in way over what we thought budget-wise and then the same thing we're all still living with COVID right so we haven't done a major pump station upgrade now for two years so I'd really like to get us back on that site and the only way we're going to do that is to get influx of money somewhere to allow that to happen we couldn't do the one that wasn't just necessarily of course the COVID is because we had to spend so much money on doing those other upgrades but even though we've been putting 175,000 dollars aside every year we didn't have any money left right now yeah we're very little so thanks the other thing I'll mention on the water half full side for Chamberlain Lane you'll notice we put ARPA or Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund and we're waiting here from how the state revolving loan fund is going to be set up we seems like it's been laid a little bit I understand the state is likely to figure out how it's going to distribute its ARPA dollars and how that revolving loan fund will be structured and it will be any forgiveness similar to the Lamp Lane project so with this one we can wait a little bit to get some clarity on what that might be then if the Board wants to move forward with that project looking at those different funding sources and making a decision that it wants me forward how to have funds so sorry to get specific but that you're waiting for the state to issue the IUP the intended use plan for the next round of funding that's right yeah okay and then we got to see whether we're even in the fundable range right because there's going to be lots of folks come keeps our options open for a little bit before necessarily asking the Board that's the only way we got the water budget to 3.9% increase we were looking at a 25% increase and I even said Eric the memo on that and then you know sitting there's no way in hell I want to put further the important telephone really have a 25% increase so went back and really started looking at things and that was how we were able to get things to where we can still keep moving forward doing what we're supposed to be doing and not hit everybody with large increase but part of the part of the reason for the increase though and it was in my my transmittal was we have had years where we've kept the rate flat and I would suggest we never keep the rate flat even if it's 1% because what happens is just what's happening now it comes back to get us later on it sounds good everybody's happy nobody's going to rate increase but we pay for it somewhere somehow along the line okay if there are no further questions on the water budget I'd be looking for a motion move to approve the water fund operating budget for fiscal year 2023 and the amount of 1,409,635 dollars in capital program for fiscal years 2023 through 2028 as presented zero second second sorry discussion on the motion hearing none all those in favor of the motion say aye aye aye aye now we have five aye votes so we'll move on then to the sewer budget okay so for the sewer budget the budget just to go back to just question 13% I mean it's kind of along the same line with some of the water stuff it's salaries it's the cost of chemicals they're gone through the roof it's just all that kind of stuff it's making that increase happen I don't have I don't have it specifically have their budget right in front of me to tell you here's the real items that change I should have thought about that actually not wanting to was that high and looked at before but I just don't have it I can say the sewer tri-town agreement they did increase our rate by 15% fair okay I mean everybody's facing the same thing everybody's had to increase salaries to keep people my town I didn't know Richmond just did it last night that they're selected and they had the same kind of thing done and you know we did here was they had a study done to see where rates were or salaries were and all that stuff so it's happening across the board you know any one of our drivers hope this doesn't happen they probably leave us tomorrow and go make $13, $14 more not doing the fun job they're doing here with the recognition they get right but but if you just look at dollars you know a truck driver now it's they're making $800,000 it's just not not the truck driver don't deserve that either I don't know we need those goods they deliver so go ahead I'm sorry go ahead so then the rest of this basically goes into what we've already we've already been talking about as far as once again the major increases in the budget were the salary our actual rate increase is put the percentage yeah isn't that on first 3.47 percent it's the rate increase basic user charge once again which is done by the CPI that's why we've been doing it every year salaries you see are up but that's once again because of our increase that was given a few months ago other than that there's not any major changes questions for Roots and Shirley checking through my notes on the or see if I have any notes on the capital budget just a question about our fund I just wanted to check check the project funding and make sure I got them all so if I miss something Erica Bruce let me know but when you look again I'm looking at the summary page for sewer and I'm looking at the second page of that and I'm looking under capital expenditures for from the operating budget as Bruce noted the pump stations the 175 we have that in these members you're looking at now but we also have a recommendation for possible ARPA and same thing with the sewage infrastructure I'm sorry yeah the sewage infrastructure also from ARPA but it's in these numbers so then you look at that deficit of 287 nine at the very the very last number in that call okay it's mostly made up of those and that's actually I misspoke when I said that about the water jet that was these three numbers added together come up over $300,000 the 175 to 112 and then actually I had wouldn't have the 15,002 for asset management that I was asking about if you do all those numbers then we come out in a positive at the bottom of there if those numbers come out of ARPA if they don't then they come out of fund bound yeah okay the other note there is budgeting some money for any feature capacity purchases which the town hasn't done in prior years we have some money in that budget should there be I'm sorry yeah that's actually any capacity change purchase and that's only a major change because we didn't do that last year let me just go back yeah look where does that or Erica surely where does that show up the future capacity if you in the capital expenditures line additional so we can go we can go through the half sheets if you'd like no no no this is I'm sorry I missed that okay you'll see that that accounts for a lot of where that would be coming from as Verzin Shirley said from fund balance or a potential okay so Jeff I went and pulled up our audited financial statements from June 30th because our system doesn't doesn't calculate the unrestricted fund balance the same way it doesn't audit in the audits the more accurate way so the storm water fund unrestricted fund balance round numbers a million two thirty eight water sorry the sewer sewer is four million okay four million three hundred and eighty one thousand and water is two million three hundred and eighty four thousand okay so we have healthy fund balances you would say you would say I'll go back to the memo right it only takes right it only takes a major issue for that to disappear I get that right that's why you know it's always scary with numbers like that out yeah not that we're trying to hide anything because they are they are nice numbers they sound like good numbers but it doesn't take much right so you know one one piece of catastrophe you could say well you're going to give me my money or whatever we don't know that yeah so and plus it's not immediately available well that's right we all well it's never immediately we're always putting that money out when we have a FEMA but anyway so it is good to have those kind of fund balances sewer's always done better than water fund balance more interesting okay any further questions if not I am looking for a motion I'll move to approve sewer fund operating budget for fiscal year 2023 an amount of 2,174,039 dollars in the capital program fiscal years 2023 through 2028 as presented is there a second second that's right discussion on the motion nice job thank you all those in favor of the motion say aye aye aye aye five guesses that takes care of our budget to this deliberation tonight thank you for this Shirley and Bruce we appreciate all of the all of this moving on to the bylaw amendment for tap corners form-based code transmittal this is our second week on this and we have Eric lead off just with a brief comment on that and then turn it over to Matt Belangeri our planning director thanks Darry so this is a part two of the transmittal presentation for the board for a proposal for a bylaw amendment for a form-based code in tap corners so Matt is back to go through as we're calling it additional chapters in the book here as we started at the last select board meeting so Matt will go through we have members of the planning commission here as well like last meeting and remind the board at the June 7th meeting next there'll be time for general public comment on the transmittal and then for time for board discussion to direct staff on the next steps in this process so I'll pause there turn it over to Matt great well thank you for having me back and members of the planning commission back to have some of them with you on zoom tonight and some in the room just wanted to mention to the board before we get started that I had the pleasure of turning over a copy of a certificate of award for this project to the planning commission chair tonight this project was selected by the Vermont planners association as the planning project of the year and the award ceremony will take place June 16th at the Vermont planners association of conflicts and wood stuff okay I wanted to let folks know that's happening I've run into quite a number of my fellow planners since that announcement was made and they all think it's quite the defeat that we got the award without having the bylaw adopted do they resend it if no somebody will come and black from our wall not sure it's certainly today reflects all of the very hard and vigorous effort by the planning commission members town staff citizens who have come out and participated in this board as well so thank you all around for that so as Eric mentioned this is our second night on this topic very briefly what we're looking at is a form-based code for tap corners this is a type of zoning that focuses more on the shape and design of buildings and how they're placed on sites than it does on the uses that happen inside it is a major evolutionary step beyond the kind of zoning that we are using in the tap corners growth center today and it is backed up by a tool we discussed last time called an official map which lays out a perspective designed for how new streets could be built to serve new development in the district integrating with one another in a harmonious manner that makes tap corners fully connected for cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers alike so that's the shortest overview I think I can give last time we talked about the boundary of that district we talked about what it would take to amend the current zoning bylaw to fit this new overlay district in we talked a lot about street design and public realm we talked about the regulating plan which is the sort of sub-district zoning map for this and how we base what it can happen on the site based on its frontage on a particular street rather than its location in a district so you remember the map where the streets are colored orange light orange yellow and red we talked about the official map tool that underpins that regulating plan and street layout and requires new development to follow pattern to ensure that we have that interconnected grid of streets so tonight the second half what we're going to talk about is administration how permits would be issued under this code parking and loading very briefly I feel like we talk about parking an incredible amount of time but we will talk a little bit about how parking is addressed in the new code here tonight building function which is effectively the use table so even though it's form-based code we say it's about building form we do talk a little bit about use so I'll go over that and then the fun part building form and architectural standards so what are we talking about in terms of height width depth and configuration buildings on sites and what are we talking about in terms of the standards for how those buildings as our consultant says will be dressed what is the style of the architecture that the code calls for so with that I'll dive right into administration this is in section eight in your great big partner and I'm going to talk about just the most fundamental elements of this that are different from current zoning and then pause there for questions and comment and also I'll just say after this first section the board wants me to run straight through all of tonight's elements and then open it up we can do that as well so the main takeaway from administration is we're trying to balance efficiency of permitting with clarity of the requirements and transparency of the process so in this draft the zoning administrator can sign a permit for the construction of a new building on a new site without that building being reviewed by the development review board that review would be conducted by the by the zoning administrator in concert with other town departments against this new very lengthy very comprehensive setting standards and that review would culminate what's called a project review meeting which would be a publicly announced meeting of the planning staff and other relevant departments to make a final review of the project and decide to issue a permit so there are still some things that involve the development review board if there's any sort of subdivision or planning whether it's to subdivide a lot to turn it into more than one lot or to lay out the right of way of a new required street those elements must be reviewed and approved by the DRB prior to an application to actually develop a site and build a building also the intent of that project review meeting an administrative approval being publicly noticed in a publicly accessible process is that it is an appealable action of the zoning administrator if anybody believes the zoning administrator has made an error in issuing that permit or if the applicant believes the zoning administrator has applied a condition or a requirement incorrectly the avenue of appeal remains to the development review board so any appeal zoning administrator's decision permit will go to that board for review so the other part about that efficiency is because Williston has this unique thing we do that none of the other 250 municipalities in Vermont do and what I refer to is growth management the proposal here is that for projects for the residential component the growth management allocation will be awarded by the administrator as part of the issuance of the permit so if you have a project and you are applying to build a 40-unit apartment building that apartment building is found to be in accordance with all of the bylaws the zoning administrator would schedule the development of those new dwelling units into the growth management system as part of that administrative approval so I'll pause there for a second let that sink in a little bit what does that mean it means that in the growth center under the form-based code area projects would not be in competition with one another to obtain that allocation but all of the other allocation rules would still apply our experience as a staff has been that there is rarely competition in this particular part of town most projects that meet our current zoning just by virtue of doing so tend to score quite highly in the process and the level of requirement that comes in with this bylaw really means that projects are going to be of a very high fall that said we did write out into the administrative section if the administrator believes the project is in danger of not meeting the minimum required score of 30 out of 100 points the administrator may say I'm not going to issue a permit on this I'm not going to issue allocation you need to go to the DRV and make your base there but the goal is to look at projects with a residential component in the growth center and not say hey this is a great project it meets all of our requirements we'll see you next March that was identified in our vision document as a major outstanding issue and a significant impediment to some of the housing production goals that this vision and document hopefully will meet that said we are maintaining the overall limits the 50 dwelling unit equipments per year of the district our vision plan also identified that as major impediment to housing production but we didn't want to reach any further than just changing the process not the limits of this so the change of the permit going from a DRV to the zoning administrator is it's not purely based on reducing the time or is it I'm trying to I'm when you were starting to explain that the big thing going through my mind was why because that's a major change we have a we used to have a committee well assuming these are adopted we used to have a committee or board look at it and there's some continuity there's differences of opinion but it kind of melds all together looking at this now it's up to a single person who may or may not you know choose to stay in Williston and be replaced by another person and you get a whole different philosophy in that person not a whole different but you know so I'm trying to understand why and the one thing you've told me so far is that it greatly reduces the time and I see what that's a benefit but it also probably comes with liability and I want to understand you know what are the benefits what are the liabilities so the benefit is time and just sort of less process and I think also just we're finding that the more prescriptive our zoning becomes the more things are more or less the way they're going to be by the time they come to a DRB hearing anyhow and the kinds of things that are subjective and that are being hashed out at the DRB in the growth center are things that staff throughout the adoption or the development process of this code really identified as this ought to be more clear we're debating something that seems to make sense but that's not quite what the words say and we think it ought to be clear so the counterbalance to that that concern about continuity is the prescriptiveness in the code and I didn't I didn't flag it for a big presentation um but it's probably worth chapter one looking at the definition section and what I call your attention to be here starts well it starts in the gray box on page five and then it continues six seven eight nine these are all new terms that have the specific definitions shown on this page on these pages these terms are in all caps and when they're used throughout the code they are also in all caps so I can tell you we had a conversation recently with an architect and we were talking about building building under this code and the architect said well I see the limitation on building height but where do I measure that from and I looked at the the discussion of height and said measure from the clear sidewalk and I said what the heck is a clear sidewalk well it's in all caps so flip over and I get a definition of clear height on page six and the definition of clear sidewalk on page seven and and it's it now makes sense to me what those terms mean and that's that's just you know sort of one one quick example so a little bit of time savings way more prescriptiveness especially around the things staff has identified over the last many years as being fairly subjective in the current code and the idea that no matter who sits in that administrators chair they are they are bound by and need to follow these definitions and you know I will say that in considering this code spent a lot of time talking to my counterpart when he's here because he's administering the code written by the same author and he's a planning director who arrived on that job with this form-based code having been just adopted but not a process he was really part of here you go administer this he said yeah I can you know I can do it there's always a few things in practice you have to revisit but it was not confusing to him what what terms then or what requirements then so the concept is is that it's so conceptually it's so well described that one administrator to another is going to come up with a pretty similar interpretation of what meets that or what does not yes there is going to be some case or cases where there is some it turns out what was thought to be incredibly clear it turns out not to be or maybe it just was impossible to describe in those cases what happens when there is and you give and however you say that word there is it's not clear there it's up to some interpretation what do you do then so the first part is probably not the most satisfying answer is it's up to the administrator okay my view is if it's something that's really very critical you know seems to have great consequence seems to result in the approval of something that just doesn't make sense the zoning administrator can make the interpretation that results in a denial and offer that denial I'll say you can go to the DRB you know we we've often you know in the time I've worked in Williston offered that to somebody on an administrator permits well I you know I I think this means this and I'm pretty sure I'm right but if you want I'll you know I'll deny your permit which will give you the opportunity for you know 130 dollars on a Tuesday night to go discuss it with the DRB so you offer a lot of access to the boards that are overseeing you and you make sure that's part of the practice as well but in this case that Tuesday night that's available won't be six months down the road it might be within a month or so that's our standard practice with appeals we put them on the earliest available agenda okay we want to resolve those quickly just out of curiosity how does the DRB feel about this new way this new their new role in form-based the newly adopted form-based code so we've spent quite a bit of time talking with the DRB about this both during the development of the draft and once we had the transmittal draft and I sense a couple of things but one of them that I feel most positive about is a sense of relief because if it's if there's one thing the DRB as a group doesn't really like doing they don't like being the arbiters of style they like they like clear concrete things they like working through a defined process and especially in tap corners you know they find themselves being the interpreters of that famous phrase use a variety of colors of materials but with restraint and seven folks at 10 30 now on a Tuesday night are sitting there looking at a building elevation and looking at that design review requirement and the recommendation the hack has made based on it and what happens in a case like that is that the result is just sort of like to nullify it say well I can't find a way to make an album and do this thing or that thing based on that so when we've talked about it we've really we've really talked a lot about the code handles those kinds of things in this really prescriptive way and you know the other the other thing I think that we've been able to talk with the DRB about this code in the context of this the way we're currently staffing projects which is here's 40 pages of analysis of this new Aldi grocery store to pick a recent example on pages seven 10 and 29 there's some things we'd really like you to look at and make a decision on interpretation but the other you know 47 pages is a recitation of all the ways in which this project applies to the file so you know as it is when the DRB is seeing a project especially in this area a lot of it has been has been kind of worked out by the time it gets there and the few things that haven't been we are finding are some of those more frustrating things that we'd rather just go ahead and codify so we spent a lot of time talking about that talking about tried to codify frustrated things and then pull it generally out of their stream of projects to review knowing that they need to be knowledgeable about it if it gets back okay great and I I just want to remind planning commission members if you want to jump up and and answer anything I've brought water with me tonight but I'm happy to not talk so much as to you well let's move on let's talk about all right I lost my place our next section so parking and loading section six and if you're in your body you're go ahead and grab the section seven tap and go to the last page in front of it you should have a diagram in front of you that's orange and green this is our discussion of parking and this is a summary table of everything that is said about how much parking is required in the proceeding pages so the takeaway I want to I want to give you on parking is flexibility and within that there are a few things that we talk about as minimums and maximums which is sort of the normal way that municipalities talk about required so everything happening up in the green part of the table is about any sort of minimums when do you absolutely have to provide a certain amount of parking the first thing is you have to provide a certain amount minimum parking for residential uses and the numbers are there and I'm just going to summarize and say they're quite similar to the numbers in the current zoning bylaws relates to multifamily residential a tiny bit more flexibility for efficiencies in one bedrooms with the 0.75 per minimum and we wanted to make sure that the calculation didn't talk out any higher than our current requirements for multifamily and then that's for reserve parking and then you also have to provide some shared parking with a residential use so you have some parking that's reserved might be reserved for residential use only or a particular unit you might also need to provide some parking spaces you will need to provide some parking spaces that are more flexible in their use shared parking whether it's because one unit needs another space or you have visitors or you have service or even shared against a commercial use of the ground floor building that's the shared park requirement and then there's a cap there at two spaces for dwelling unit on that minimum so then in commercial is there a minimum reserved parking required for commercial no don't require you reserve any parking commercial we do require commercial over 5,000 square feet to provide 1.25 shared parking spaces per thousand square feet it's a relatively low number it nevertheless means that commercial uses over a certain size will have to provide some parking on site it can be shared most multiple commercial uses that's our minimum use in the orange we talk about maximums so when do we limit park and the big answer here you see a lot of columns that start with no column 7, 8, 10, and 11 and what that says is there are no maximums for the amount of shared parking that you provide there's no maximums for the amount of structured parking that you provide but we want to limit service parking when it's reserved for just one use so the limits you see in column 6 and 9 for residential and commercial uses are maximums for reserved parking this parking spot is only reserved for residential use in this building this parking spot is only reserved for this business in this building because when you do that in a parking space it means you're leaving an empty award so minimums are all about minimum shared and minimum reserved for residential maximums are all about limiting how much surface parking gets filled that's really only reserved for one use that's the really short version of parking what else is in the chapter can I can I ask good questions about oh yeah that I'm noticing that in the definitions the term shared parking is a term of art that's defined yes that the term reserved parking is not defined I wonder if that's going to be a problem six years from now and some sneaky lawyer trust and old past one we might be able to pull that over into into the definitions I was looking to see if we had said anything right in the right in the chapter I mean I I know what it means and you know what it means but I but I hear you what could somebody I believe the focus in the current Biola Megan's asking is it already in the Biola somewhere is really about shared parking because we require shared parking studies et cetera and sort of understood that any parking that's not shared is reserved but we could clarify that yeah I just wanted to call it to your attention sure so I I did just want to mention the other element of parking we do talk about bicycle parking in here and some some rack requirements and and the trip facility requirements similar to the current Biola and some ability just as we have in the current Biola offset for adjacent street parking if you're trying to meet a requirement and then we do have some design standards for surface parking related to landscaping those areas fairly similar to what we do and just keep in mind other than street parking the goal here is for parking and loading areas to be served from an alley that access is the street rather than from an individual driveways that access this did you go on for any function nope yep okay building function is in chapter seven before you do I'm just what I'm and I was quickly trying to open up the official map and the official map doesn't it deals with streets it doesn't deal with parking doesn't this the street map which specifies the types of streets so it's it's the pastel version of the official map when you go in and look up those allowed or required street section what you'll see and this is in the chapter five public realm so when you're looking at your street sections you see that several of those proposed sections in fact all all but really one street which is the the town takes over route to a street include street parking they don't require it so you know a lot of things can happen in what we would call that parking lane and you may have all about you may have places where your control will speed you're presenting parking but the intent is for those street sections to accommodate street parking and you know there'd be a strong incentive for somebody who was building a chunk of street in order to develop a building on it to have street parking in front of the building and that will be addressed as part of the minimum or the parking requirement they have some ability to offset so you know when you're trying to fit all the building you want site some of the parking under it and some behind it and you go I need three more spaces you may have the ability to offset street for that okay so yeah there'd be a strong incentive to integrate street parking if you were building the street as part of the project my question and you help me think my question through my question more is is where does when there is parking and and let's say it's it's not beneath but you know underneath a building type parking it's it's more the surface type parking how is it determined where and how that that can be allowed sure so spatially on site where it can be allowed right I get the minimums in them and the max and and I to a degree I get how that works my question is is how does it work in terms of when you're actually looking at a specific parcel it is determined where that parking goes that the developer is saying yep it's it's above the men but below the max if there is there is a max and but how do you review it how does the administrator who doesn't have to use a DRB decide that that parking is in the right place so when you look at your regulating plan now you see those yellow orange red streets if you look really closely you'll see a black dashed line right on the edge of the street because that layout actually includes the full public street right of way plus the door yard the front yard set back and that little black line that's the build to line where the building's got to go and if you if you don't look carefully enough you won't see that black the next line you see coming out into the white space behind the street is a blue line that blue line is our being set it is generally 30 feet back from the edge of the build to line and parking can go on the site behind on surface behind that 30 foot setback so the idea here is we're not going to front street with a parking lot you're not going to have a block where you know you're walking on sidewalk and you're looking at bumpers right next to you in fact if you have a parking lot and it's not behind the building you're most likely in this code being required to place it not just 30 feet back but behind a street wall some kind so there's actually a physical element providing visual and functional buffer between the parking streets so we've looked at a couple of just example sites redeveloping existing lots and tap corners under this code it all kind of falls into place when you start thinking about well what kind of building could I put here well I'm going to be required to put it up on the street oh I've got a corner so I've got to stick it on the corner all right what's left where am I going to put the parking well I can't put it within 30 feet of the street looks like I'm putting it behind the building so the prescribed building form standards that we'll talk about a little bit more tonight including that parking setback of the regulating plan really drive the sighting of the parking okay all right all right let's let's talk about use this is in chapter 7 and I'm on page 84 there's a multi-colored table there so the color in the column labels here corresponds to the colors on the regulating plan maps so remember we have we have a couple of more intense zones the red is the shot front the dark orange is the most intense tallest mixed use zone all the way down to the yellow which is our neighborhood zone our strollable neighborhood where we're dealing more with the two-story minimum row home and more residential pattern so a couple things you'll notice about the way we talk about uses here if you've ever seen a use table in the current Williston bylaw you'll see all of these names for uses and all of these six-digit numerical North America industry classification codes about what those uses are it gets very very fine-grained um this is very broad residential commercial retail industrial civic couple of subcategories under each of these and then you have whether that use is permitted not allowed or if there's any additional requirements for that use and the really different thing here other than the the use categories are really general and most everything is allowed somewhere everywhere in the code is that some things are allowed on a ground story but not on a number four and if you look at the types of uses we're talking about here you know it becomes fairly obvious you can do vehicle stales on the ground story in the urban shopfront district but you can't do it upstairs because that could create that could create some significant conflicts and some of these uses are things that you probably would not expect to see in your your design haunches downtown with the strong pedestrian orientation like warehouse distribution and auto repair like industrial and manufacturing but they they might small makers things small car repair in a real sort of city you might see those things in some parts of the city in the ground floor building so this is permissive not prescriptive there are ways that some of those less traditional tap corners uses might be allowed they're going to have to follow form they're probably not going to be upstairs from somebody's apartment so that's the main thing to understand about use so when I say that the code de-emphasized its use you know that's the use table for the whole code it's on about three quarters the sheet of paper in a 120 page graph we're not going to spend a lot of time worrying about use here I was on the planning commission the first thing we did when I got on was redo the plan for the use tables and it took forever and it was it was as exciting as it sounds and I'm glad to see this is a lot more concise right yeah so you know the last thing is this is just a good time to revisit something we talked about last time although you know this code is definitely designed to enable a lot of mixed use there's only one place in this whole code where we're saying we want to see a commercial ready ground floor and that's along that main street the red on the map currently designated as right avenue everywhere else if you meet the building form you can go residential to the ground floor if you want you can have commercial on the ground floor in most places if you want it's really up to the builder of that building and what they see fit so with that let's talk about building form this is in chapter three this is where we talk about what's allowed in terms of the height the width depth of buildings and to what depth the full height of the building is allowed and it's also where we talk about where a building can be placed on its lot so if I was trying to figure out what I could do on a piece of land and take a look at the regulating plan I'd look at what color street my lock was on and then I would go into these building form standards on the second page of the chapter on page 18 you see the sort of statements of intense frontage descriptions for the regulating plan designations so town center storefront transitional neighborhood strollable neighborhood and you see some of those all caps definitions there and then you see general provisions talking about placement put the building on the required building line there are some ways you can flex off of that required building line we had some early examples we have a lot of curvy streets in tap corners so we had to figure out some things about what to do if you're in the middle of the island in Blair park or on the third part of the slain and you've got that build to line but you don't feel like building a curvy building so we have some ways you're allowed to have significant length straight facade elements there you can see that in the diagrams you can see some discussion about needing to occupy corners when you have them what happens when you want the building on the build to line and you want it to really occupy the street is you may at some point say well I've got more lot than I have desire to build build and depending on how that lays out you may make up the difference with a small street wall or another element you generally need to occupy 70 to 80 percent of your lot frontage but if you've got a really big lot what you may be really looking at needing to do is something about really you have two ways and you might need to go create that with the development you want to do in mind leaving the other lot in a configuration of significant enough size that it could someday be developed something else and that's codified in here on our screen Emily was just showing a drawing of a street wall in cases where there's more property that a developer wants to develop and there'll be an empty lot they for some reason either they choose not to subdivide it or they do subdivide it but the person who bought the subdivided lot is not interested in doing anything on it yet will it be required that they build a street wall not immediately so we could have that empty lot you could have that you could have that empty lot hopefully it would be compelling enough that you know somebody would want to do something okay okay thank you all right so also within the building form standards and I'm on page 20 now most of item 4 we talk about private open area this is kind of kind of our our form-based code version of open space on smaller than lots so you need to provide a portion of the lot you're developing as private open area and you can do that in a number of ways you can do that on the ground you can do some of it on the roof with a rooftop garden which is one of our exceptions to the pitched roof architectural requirement and you can get up to 30% of your required open area in balconies and I'll come back to balconies toward the end of our building form standard but you do need to provide open area you know the understanding I think underpinning this code is that a lot of what is going to be built will be residential and in addition to our planned public green spaces in the official map we want to see folks having some green built into their home as well so we talk a lot about private open area we touch on street walls there's emphasis in building form I'm on page 21 and 6 on requiring the parking be accessed generally from the alley but in other words de-emphasizing parking visible from the street and we have some specific standards on 22 so you can get into the accessible parking structure so we had some of those sort of 2070 2080 vision documents that imagined things like actual consolidated paid public parking and how you might deal with something like that in a building form standard we talk a bit on 23 about how we measure height may remember my example measuring clear height above clear sidewalk etc dealing with with certain architectural elements like mezzanines etc and then we talk about elements of the building that are going to be required one of my favorite words fenestration because you know once you read Shakespeare you learn that to defenestrate means to throw someone out of a window at least I think that's where that it was even better watching brave part I'm not sure so fenestration is you know that you need that you need windows and that you need windows on your ground story facades the building has to have some things going on where it relates to the street we'll talk a little bit about that in architectural standards as well we talk about facade projections I'm down on page 24 section 2 there are things that can come out from the front of the building into the door yard this is especially useful when you're providing accessibility ADA ramps etc to get into the doors for apartments and and commercial businesses and things like that we talk about the incorporation of porches and as I said requiring balcony so balconies happen in two ways here we talked about using them to create private open area that's required we also require balconies on most facades that face the street and it's I believe in most of our districts it's 30% of the units have to have a balcony so in some of our planning commission walkarounds looking at development in Williston and beyond there's a feeling that there's a real difference in the kind of neighborhood you create if the apartment is just sort of a big flat wall of often you know operable buildings very impersonal very little ability for people to interact what's going on the street versus places where you see buildings balconies where there's some life happening out of that balcony maybe there's a person but maybe there's even just chairs in the table and some evidence of it being used and those balconies do have dimensional requirements that require them to be a true usable space um last thing I'll talk about before we look at the individual destinations couple more things one is the concept on 25 of an attic story an attic story means that if you have to have that pitched roof on top of your number of stories that you're building you can use that space for essentially a three-quarter story occupiable space and there are some rules we have about roof pitch and some rules we have about the proliferation dormers to make that space work to make sure that we're not just building it just a plain old extra story and pretending it's a roof it's it's truly occupiable space in a real pitched roof we do touch I'm on 26 on a little bit of flexibility there's places on the regulating plan where your lot might straddle two different colors two different frontage designations zoning administrator gets 50 feet of discretion there to to move the line to accommodate a development beyond that you'd be you'd be amending the by-law you'd be coming in and asking to change that we do have some exemptions from the building form standard provisions for civic buildings you know in our looking around civic buildings libraries performance spaces town halls courthouses those often are built in a different way from everything else they may be more set back with a big courtyard in front of them or be configured in a different way and that actually communicates something about sort of their specialness and their function in a place you can you can think about you know going to a county courthouse that's on a large read or you know museum in Boston where all everyone's light up on the street and then there's this suddenly there's this big promenade you walk into or something like that so there's some flexibility in civic buildings lastly some things about neighborhood relationship so when we're stepping down into that more row house configuration where things are smaller scale there's some rules there about the big building needing to sort of step down toward the places where there are smaller buildings so you're not putting the full facade height right across the street from a much lower allowed facade height and we have a little bit more flexibility for accessory dwelling units letting those come in to row homes so today in Williston you can only have accessory dwelling unit to a single family home so what this would do is add the flexibility that we had that row home configuration those are often built out with a you know a garden level apartment in the basement and you know I can say from inspecting a number of row homes at Finney Crossing there's a whole bunch of occupiable space in those basement levels that you know this would just allow that to be also utilized as an accessory unit if somebody wish after that when we look at building form we're looking at the standards that are specific to each of our frontage types so remember that this is where you look to learn about the minimum and maximum allowed building heights and then you'll see these diagrams called the tofu diagrams because the buildings are just big white cubes but in the tofu diagrams you can see versions of the same lot being developed in different ways all in accordance with the standards the green on those diagrams showing how the required private open area is provided the black line being the built-in line the blue line being that generally 30 foot back park setback line and then the building height showing just in terms of the number of stories stacked up there so you see you see different ways that that can happen and then the I'm on 29 diagram for the placement diagram that just shows where things where things happen on that site just wanted to clarify the green is the private open area so then we're using the town center frontage right now as an example I'm on 30 and 31 you see these diagrams that are specific to each form district so and underneath that diagram on 30 you see the discussion of what those form standards are in this district so here in the town center you need to occupy at least 80% that required building line length if you don't build on it you need a street wall you are allowed to chamfer a corner to provide a corner entry in other words not come right to the build two line of corner and you can generally occupy the street you can see where the buildable area is and if you look up at that diagram above C you see a red line so you can come back with a full allowed height of the building for a maximum depth of 80 feet after that your maximum height is one story so think back to those toky diagrams on the page or you see the full height of the building and then sometimes you might see another piece of structure that's more than 80 feet back from the street that's limited to one story by the utility area garage entry or something else like that full height within 80 feet you see a maximum building footprint you see a maximum building frontage and a minimum building frontage so the maximum width of the building here is 180 feet the minimum is 60 feet and then you see the specification for private open area of the green 15 percent of the buildable area on that lot needing to be dedicated to private open area so that's how you figure that out you see parking setback again blue dashed line any parking forward of that setback line would need to be completely underground if you put it completely underground it's fine if it's right up against the door yard because we're not seeing it anymore but if it's visible it's got to be stepped back those 30 feet and then on 31 you see the vertical version of the diagram of the building height so in this district maximum five stories minimum three we're looking at a finished floor elevation and if you look inside the building you see a couple of elevations you see something says minus six to 18 inches and then three to six feet the idea here is if you're intending a commercial ground story the idea is for that commercial used to be between minus six to 18 plus inches to the street level in other words you walk right into a retail store off the sidewalk if you're doing residential it's really not very nice to be eyeball to eyeball with everyone who's who's outside while you're washing the dishes so minimum three maximum six and one of the questions that came out of that was well if my residential ground floor has to be about the sidewalk like that what am I going to do about ABA well the answer is you can use that door yard to build your stew and to build your ramp so you can occupy that five or seven foot wide door yard with that ramp element so you can ramp down to the sidewalk so we talk about those things again we're regulating building height in stories but we do also have a number of feet there just in case somebody thought we're going to build them five 30 foot stories or something the maximum height here says 64 feet and that's defined building height go back to the definitions clear sidewalk to top of top plate meeting the top of the building before the roof pitch starts so there's a couple ways to look at height and you have to comply with them all and then you see ground story clear height so if you are going for retail it's a taller ground story if you're definitely intending to raise residential it's a residential dimension and again only one place in the code area where we require that retail ground story and it's not here in the town center so each of the designation areas works the same way I'm flipping into the red and then the yellow on page 36 the transitional neighborhood frontage they work the same way but the numbers change so I'm just going to compare on pages 38 39 transitional neighborhood the yellow sorry the light orange on the map in fact let's keep going let's go all the way down stroll of the neighborhood it's the lowest intensity one on 42 and 43 you see pictures showing in 10 you see the tofu diagrams they look different the tofu is smaller because the allowed building is smaller the required open areas a little different as well it's bigger it's 20% instead of 15 if you go to 44 and 45 you'll see the flat diagram and the height diagram um very similar diagrams except here we have maximum minimum to maximum three stories maximum building height at 42 we have still full height within 80 feet and a few of the other standards are a little bit different as well biggest difference here is the maximum building footprint is only 7,000 square feet so this is a much more likely to be fully residential scale design but each of our different building form standard areas works this way figure out where you are on the map go to building form look at the placement diagrams look at the site diagram and the height diagram and the things that are on these two pages and you know most of what you need to know about where you can put the building on the site and how big it's going to be allowed to be so I'm going to pause there some questions because there's a lot to take on the machine is locked wow I can just say that this is part of why zoning administrator be able to permit things be backed up it's not just one zoning administrator it's this code right coming down to these really from the brain level which we don't know I guess my question is less about all that you presented tonight because it's a lot in terms of tab three building form standards really what I'm interested in is how did we get to these standards and these standards on this part of the map is there a relatively quick answer to that sure I can I can give a try so where we are today in most of the growth center in terms of building placement is we have a line in the bylaw that says the setback is you know sometimes it's 20 feet from a state highway in most of these districts otherwise the building shall be brought to the sidewalk wherever that ends up being placed and there's quite a bit of flexibility where the sidewalk is placed and just what brought to the sidewalk means it's not especially clear the intent of the current bylaw is very much to do something that looks like this in terms of building placement a big difference today Vermont statute when talking about zoning just uses the term development and so for the sake of consistency we have a lot of statements on the bylaw that say all development is subject to this setback well you're bringing development to the sidewalk and all development is subject to setback and parking is a type of development you can as in the current all the proposal to pick an example build a parking lot upon the sidewalk more or less you don't have a special setback for that when you try to do things like say parking needs to be behind or beside a building you start to ask yourself for what's front and what's side and how squishy are those terms when we are on corners so I think how did we get here we wanted to refine those things but let's talk about what I think the biggest difference is which is the building height today in most of these districts if you are building either affordable housing or structured apartment underneath the building your maximum height is 56 feet and that's for the roof and believe it or not roof is a somewhat torture definition all by itself one of the things it doesn't include is the mechanical equipment on top of that roof and any screening around it we sort of learned that hard way processing some certificates on a couple of buildings in tough corners where we had a building either at the 36 or that 56 foot limit but then a giant piece of mechanical equipment with giant stocky fence around it providing apparently hiding it although in some opinions emphasizing it and so really we're looking at something that looks more like 66 or 70 feet with this sort of appendage on the top so the intent here was to take as I keep saying sort of an evolutionary step from what we have that the building height is no longer conditional on the provision of affordable housing or structured parking but most development is going to at least want to do structured parking just because of the way it works in terms of trying to develop one of these sites and it's a small step beyond what's currently allowed those maximum heights so 64 feet pitched roof on top of it yeah you know you could you could be looking at 72 75 feet on a five-story building at 64 plus steam room you know maybe with some dormants that is that is different there were vigorous conversations at the planning commission especially about maximum building height and there was some disagreement about it what's right in terms of the scale for tap corners a lot of that goes back to the conversation about to what extent does the town want to try to set table for a greater abundance of housing at various levels of portability because more height means more units on the same amount of land and a possibility of sharing costs and I'll leave it there I think Megan you might have some things to say about it yeah yeah and it was definitely something we had a lot of conversations on and and you know I think that there is some certainly there was some sentiment within the planning commission some members felt like yes we we need to achieve those efficiencies let's go to the height some felt a little hesitant about that and understandably it's very different than you know most of what we have at least in the other side of route two and I think ultimately you know we put it forward with this suggested five-story limit probably see what you folks say and I want to actually go back to the question though because the way I've heard your question was a little different than what Matt interpreted my reaction to your question about like how would we decide what goes where was to look at the regulator and if you look at the regulating plan you see this center of high density right in terms of particularly in terms of the possibilities of commercial use on right avenue kind of in the middle of this district and then gradually going outward from that you have the the dark orange this is not 100 you know consistent but you've got the darker orange and then the lighter orange and then the yellow is the is essentially zephyrote in that area and so in the the way I heard your question was how do we come up with what goes where I think that's part of the way I would answer is well essentially a very you know as as most you know driving urban places are it's got a more high intensity use core with a bit of gradual sort of gradient so that allows a lot of different things it allows some very high value land uses particularly in that core area and yet it's also differentiated enough so that there is you know a lot of progress made for our goal of a lawful community and then you know I guess the last thing I'll say about taking a sort of regulating plan approach here is that the location in this in the sort of gradient of intensity of use and maybe building height to some degree also allows the sort of differentiation that we as as human beings find pleasing right so it's not all completely overwhelming in terms of height but it's also not random you know there's a clustered area of taller buildings you know in potential full build out of this which is up for two but and then you know it's kind of logical there's like you know what to expect because in different parts of the plan there are different height limits and so there's going to be some consistency and some gradual changes and predictable predictability as well so I guess that's a a sort of very different take on your question but maybe between the two of us you got something out of that to be honest I'm not I mean again this is a lot yeah and so I'm not even sure where to begin is the is the planning commission I mean is there a consensus that you know you know of course there's a kind of different ways in which this could have ended up but is there a general consensus that what we ended up is a an appropriate approach maybe that's not the best word for you know that concept of that core and dense area and the spillout out of it if you will and less less intense but still you know fairly dense compared to the rest of what was then development I mean did that and given that you know the train that's there given some of the existing uses that were there given the you know the major bisecting thing right now which is root 2a and root 2 yeah I mean I'm just trying to get a sense of I'm looking you to help me understand how I should feel about this you should you should go for it because we did we spent 18 months going through this with a fine two film arguing about whether we should include fiberglass in the list of materials for siding or doors or you know whether stoop meant that it had a cover on it or the stoop really means stairs I mean we went down to really really fine levels but also I think we had a pretty good sense of the overall goals and and sense of what it it could potentially look like at some point we voted by one to bring it to you folks we had one person not present and and one person who had some very healthy questions about you know building height parking you know some of the friction points that I think we can certainly still work on and we would you know partly like to hear from you as well on those but overwhelmingly and and that person said they were in favor of like most of these things right there were a couple details that were kind of hangouts but we you know we worked hard on it and we feel like we have considered the population of Williston who we are kind of in a sense representing at some level and you know we we brought a lot of different viewpoints in and came to you with a five to one vote so I'll leave it there so we'll have at our next meeting we'll have a great opportunity to hear other decisions on this and answer our sort of our philosophical questions as well so I think we still have a fair enough amount to do it tonight at the rest of the meeting so thank you and we'll look forward to seeing you again in a couple weeks thank you thanks so Matt you're still with us here and we're going to move on to the wastewater allocation request regarding to encouraging specific development you've written a very nice smell to us and if you give us a brief overview of this and I presume we have somebody else who will be giving a presentation on this yeah we we have some folks um from the applicant here tonight my name is Norman Stanislaus I am the property manager at White Caps Business Park the real estate broker at White Caps Business Park and also I'm the contractor and I have been there from the inception of the start at White Caps great so what the select court has before it is a request to purchase for the purpose of locating evergreen family health in the White Caps building up to 3,750 gallons per day wastewater treatment capacity from the encouraged specific development category of sewer allocation as it was established in the fiscal year 2022 attached today to the town of Williston regulation of sewer allocation ordinance this category of allocation has 10,000 gallons per day in it this is the one category of allocation the select board votes on every year that cannot be sold to users simply by the staff as all the other categories new commercial new residential etc can be it requires that somebody wishing to purchase allocation from this category come before the select board request to make that purchase and that request for purchase be analyzed against the requirements of the allocation ordinance and the town plan and Williston developed bylaw so I'll I'll go into that um a little bit uh in a minute the purpose of the request for allocation as I said is to facilitate the relocation of evergreen family health which is a general practice medical use from its current location in Williston at Park Avenue to the White Cap building the White Cap building represents a long-standing adaptive reuse project of the former Ross Nelsky Company warehouse on industrial Avenue in fact I think it's one of the first places I was given a tour of when I came to the town in 2008 and both in the town plan and Williston's bylaws there's some specific language I'll talk about that intends to support flexibility for allowed uses in these adaptive reuse type situations particularly in the industrial zoning district and as it was explained to me back in 2008 this particular building is in good shape it's a building with long useful life ahead of it but generally not tall enough for the kinds of warehouse uses it was originally designed for racking doesn't fit it's not useful for that purpose anymore and since many years ago there's been a project ongoing to outfit various parts of the building for other uses and this continues that process so this would allow the fit up of up to 18,856 square feet in the building which would support the operation at 32 doctors and nurses 13 other employees this adaptive reuse would also place evergreen family health in a building that can support expansion into another 8600 plus or minus square feet as shown on the plan that I provided you in your package so to support the relocation as shown by the applicants calculations which I've attached 3742 gallons per day would be needed to get this project off the ground the applicant did purchase 1621 gallons per day from the town out of the new commercial category they did this in that amount because that was exactly how many gallons per day was remaining in category for the fiscal year they bought it all and hence we find ourselves in a position where we've done a you know a month and change to go in the fiscal year and cannot support any other new commercial no matter how small until the term of the fiscal year so the recommendation I'm making is that the select board vote on allowing up to 3750 which would support the full amount needed by evergreen would allow us for that remaining month or so to return the 1621 into the new commercial category and deal with any small projects that come down the pipe for the remainder of the fiscal year and I worded it to say authorize the sale of up to just to allow for some flexibility to make sense to strike that balance in a different staff level and staff would have the ability to do that but all of whatever green needs could be sold from the encouraging specific development category so as I said to sell allocation out of this category a select board vote is required and that this is different from the way other allocation works in attachment a and the allocation ordinance identifies encourage specific types of development including but not limited to housing for specific populations and major employers and based in export industries and it and goes on to state allocation made under this provision must be to implement a specific goal of the comprehensive plan so I wanted to talk a little bit tonight about the town plan goals that could be supported by this sale of allocation and the first the first place we do that page two of your memo is talking about it in the land use chapter chapter three this is in the current Williston comprehensive plan the plan acknowledges that there's been a real change in the mix of uses in industrial lands in Williston it's becoming more diverse and we have space in large buildings along industrial have that has changed including office gym daycare etc that are allowed by zoning in the area especially when existing buildings are converted so I'll stop there just mention that in the bylaw our industrial lands chapter has specific provisions allowing greater flexibility for loud uses in the adaptive reuse building identifies adaptive reuse is a building that is being repurposed and has been approved for such under a site plan approval which the White Capital has been through a number of site plan approvals with DRV with office and other service uses like medical specifically identify as purposes for that repurposing of the building we have an objective in land use chapter calling for changes in refinement and standards applied to uses of industrial lands and implementation of that policy in the bylaw as I quoted before in 36132 offices we wouldn't we wouldn't let somebody build a new office building in the industrial district but we would let somebody do office work in a converted adaptive used industrial building we also in our economic development chapter of the town plan refer back to the land use chapters and talk about the fact that supporting adaptive reuse is also an economic development strategy related to job expansion creation and retention in lowest finally in 2020 the select court voted a slate of amendments to the town plan and one of one of the focuses of that was to add public health policy goals throughout the plan and included in those added statements was one referencing Williston's vision to support active living healthy eating access to services and recreational opportunities within the town I would see this as falling under the access to services element of that statement in that retaining a primary care medical practice in town in a place where it has room to expand means that access is available to town residents workers and others and I conclude my memo with something I already brought up which is why 3750 how that balances against the existing purchase of 1621 and some of the ways in which that would be handled with a purchase let's stop there so would you occur done anything other than what Matt has already had a great job okay very thorough we're open to questions from the board oh boy um well anybody else first right well the first question kind of mundane ones is it was unclear to me who is actually purchasing the capacity is it white caps or is it evergreen wake cat business park as the landlord is purchasing the capacity okay okay so and then you're going to evergreen will rent space from you that's correct so the kind of the question becomes this let's say evergreens there for a year for whatever reason they move the capacity will stay with white cap I assume even though the use is that it has access to that capacity may no longer be the same use and that's just part of the game that could happen okay and I guess the same thing with wherever green is right now whatever capacities is associated with their facility on park park avenue was it park street park avenue we'll just stay with that build yes okay I just want to make sure I understood that part of it the part that's it gets a little tricky for me is I'm reading under what you know we have this well actually first let me go back to wide the question is is why do you want this now in other words to get out of this capacity now versus in a month and a half we'll be into our next fiscal year and all the numbers will reset back to zero so I guess I'm asking the question is the time between now and when that capacity becomes available because our next attachment a goes into effect which I assume is July 1st is that a factor in why you're coming for us for allocation out of this pot of yes unfortunately it is a factor it is okay and that's all you need to say that's I just wanted to make sure I understood that so my next set of questions is I'm on page one of your memo and it talks about the sewer allocation ordinance and I'm going to focus on the very last sentence where it says made under this provision must be to in the word here is implement a specific goal in the town plan so all implement means is it's consistent with the town plan it you know implement is is it meets the requirement of the town plan that's how it implements it I'm on to the next paragraph which is on the top of page two and under the first sentence there it says provided the project further identify goals and that word further to me is very different than implement further means it takes what's in the town plan and says these are the you know these are the goals you need to meet but you go further than what those goals are so I guess my question is is which is it implements or furthers if it's implements it's very easy the answer is yes if it's furthers then it becomes interpretation have you gone further enough and I hate being in that position I know that I agree with your interpretation of that language okay great I don't you know if something furthers a goal it can do that by implementing it it's not like that crap door or something that you know well you've got you've got to go further I don't think the word further doesn't the word further in this context doesn't mean go beyond it means bring about okay fair enough um and you and I might differ there but that you know doesn't really matter my question is is let's let's let's take not take 10s I didn't mean it like that so I further means further and implement have the same meaning why do we even have this category of 10 000 gallons because anybody who meets the town plan would get it under commercial or under this category I've never understood that because we put no real requirements it really doesn't need to do anything except meet the town plan which it has to in order to get capacity no matter what I've never understood that does that make sense that kind of question I have it does we might as well just say this 10 000 gallons is available to anybody who meets the town plan doesn't matter if it's well I guess we could say residential versus non-residential but I've never understand when we make people jump through the hoop of demonstrating they're doing what we know they're already doing well the first thing I'll say is struggling through the ordinance in order to write this memo has never made me want to help somebody work lies in the ordinance more it's it's it's next year let's do it next year and and there are some language differences that I think connected better yeah the town plan um to answer your question about implement versus further implement in the ordinance further is a word choice in your cash and a memo so if they are different I would say implement the goal if they're not and we don't have to worry about it but I further to the goal of the town plan was either myself and my predecessors are just trying to summarize like 75.3 of the allocation ordinance I I think though your question of well everything should be achieved in a town plan um so so why have discretion over any of any of the allocation at all um I think the intent there is that what I mean is that there is an anticipation of the ordinance that sometimes all of the allocation needed category would be sold before the fiscal year had ended or somebody would have a project so large that they really needed more than the select court just wanted to go ahead and budget sold over the counter um so in the case of Caring Green Mountain wanting to come in and purchase all 10,000 gallons per day you know that's somebody coming to you saying I'd like to buy a year's worth of restaurants to grow and put it into my my factory so that there might be a hold back um and some decision making on the part of the select board about some of this I can kind of understand where that comes from I do I do think the ordinance could be at some point looked at what would the board really like to scratch it over at that at that point and should there even be a number on it should it just be if you want something that's not in a tax finnay you've got to come talk to yeah you know right um it's it's a sort of a self imposed limit yeah uh but I do think also you know we we have uses that meet zoning that go in and buy capacity that don't necessarily really achieve or move along any particular town they they comply with the zoning they're allowed but they're not necessarily well boy letting this thing that uses a bunch of water into the town it's really going to change it it's just sort of it's part of the nuts and bolts running the town it's now like for this stuff so everything should be in accordance with the town plan but some things really really might move a state goal the town plan a wall okay and then my last question will be is um under the public health goal and um it's the wording maintains access to needed services and so when I first read that I was like what is that um and you know I could see word you know like an emergency care or evergreen is a needed service and my question kind of then became okay well what are other needed services for instance mental health would that be a mental you know facility you can see where that could be how about rehabilitation um the type and it just is all I was trying to do is when I think of public health I think of causing people to exercise and that type of thing and be active we took it a step further and said and then those services that protect that you know you're active well my wife fell off a bike got hurt and actually we used evergreen and they were great um and so I could see that but I'm just wondering if there's kind of at what I don't know I just was kind of wondering you know I see the connection but I'm kind of wondering if it's the right connection between a healthy health goals and what types of facilities um I guess I was wondering is a service more of a gym than it is let's say health facility you know a medical facility so I was just wondering not wondering I was questioning whether this is what was meant by needed services and I assume the you're saying yes because I put it in here well so you know we've worked with some staff in the Vermont Department of Health um in working suggest a public health language into the town plan and we did this and in our discussions they tend to take the view of things like access to services very broadly might be um access to being able to be around other people like being at a senior center it might be medical service it might be access to healthy food um or or something like that there are some uses again that if somebody came to you and said public health access to services you've got to sell me this allocation or I won't be able to build my bank right right we have a lot of access to to retail banking in town I think we're meeting that this this I think is a little bit okay okay yeah other questions there was a suggested motion if we're in agreement to to do that move to authorize the sale of up to 3750 gallons per day of wastewater treatment capacity to white caps ventures LLC under the category of encouraged specific development as established in the town's sewer allocation ordinance fiscal year 2022 attachment hey is there a second second sir discussion on the motion well I guess the only thing is I'll I'll concur with the with the experts that include I think that was the word include and further are the same implemented further are the same have the same meaning in this context any further discussion if not all those in favor of the motion say hi hi we have five thank you very much thank you thank you except for the whole meeting for this moving on thank you matt for February event permit for adam's farm tracking Tuesday here I speak briefly in this so this is under the new ordinance in effect in early June so second application the board has seen this is for adam's farms tracking Tuesday's event I think June 10th or so or early June it'll be the third year of this and first under this new temporary event permitting really consistent the last couple of years in their facility at the corner of old stage and mountain view road some food trucks some some music more acoustic variety we have some miniature golf plan too so I'm comfortable I know it's uh it's gone well the last couple years no no concerns out of staff level I had police and fire review it as well along with public works some police and fire just had a a couple brief comments that I've shared with the Adams and should the board wish to approve this that that would fall under your purview under the ordinance any questions for Erica the only question I had is I'm under the question of or the statement of arrangements for food and water and it says food trucks without any qualification of you know how many or anything and I'm just wondering if that's at all an issue upward is a concern um it hasn't been the last couple years I think they've had a system where they have I think maybe three or four and they have them spaced out the fire sheet provided guidance for um public safety for the food trucks yeah follow when it's setting up okay so there's no need to limit it feel we should need to limit it I don't believe so at this time if it became an issue um I would have a conversation and look to bring it back to the board at that point okay good so the 15 food trucks isn't working exactly yeah good all right I'm good with that if you look at the um the diagram the like the overhead picture that they had they've drawn in maybe five food trucks placement for five so and I've you know having attended this event I've never seen more than four or five there so thank you um just an observation is these types of events sometimes um there's their demise is their own success you know if you will it gets popular and as it gets more popular you need more food trucks you know well you know you can but I think Eric's answer answered answered my concern which is if it becomes an issue will we visit this is one of the events and things during COVID it kind of spurned staff's recognition the board to adopt ordinance for these um so there's more gives the town more control to regulate these and they've done a good job of controlling this over the past two years so yes what what Jeff said reminds me of what Yogi Vera said once about the restaurant it's like nobody goes there anymore it's too crowded so I'd be looking for a motion I'll move to approve a temporary event permit for Adam's farm trucking Tuesdays with conditions from town staff let's hear a second second it's only a discussion of the motion if not all those in favor of the motion say aye hi hi hi so we have five eyes on that we're up to the manager's report I'll be brief about the power question we always allow questions to be asked but I need to know that if somebody wants to raise their hand and speak so your your opportunity will be next meeting to next meeting because what we've done is reserved the first two meetings for education over the board anybody who's here to listen to it we've reserved the next meeting for an hour or so to listen to people who have objections or or good comments for yard and the the concept the Sarah green update in town fair was a was a great success I think between two and three hundred people stopped by was put on the screen so that well we'll look to make that an annual annual event here in early mayfield town and I want to share our highway form with Mark Russell is announced it's going to be retiring in July so Mark is that dedicated staff member for 27 years now certainly have a lot to recognize him the next couple months and versus started the processing it was coming of finding a successor to Mark so that'll be a be a role but works is working to fill and also share its national EMS week in our fire departments they're doing a number of information sharing through social media and on their website so he makes a check out good and other business there's a catering permit request yep this is a wedding at isham family barn it's on um june the fourth the carer is a sausage shack doing business as the beverage shack and it's a staff has no objections it's not allowed use for a wedding and this reports approval of this I just want to make sure I heard that right it's the sausage shack that's doing business as the beverage shack yep the business name is chocolate shack LLC okay if there's no questions and I'm looking for a moment so move is there a second second any discussion on the motion not was in favor of the motion say hi hi hi we have five high votes is there any other business to be brought forward tonight very none we are turned