 The select board meeting for Wednesday, February 23, 2022 to order first order of business any addition agenda additions or changes from staff, nothing from staff, any changes from board members. Isn't this the one where we needed to remove the January 24 minutes because we already do, we already approved those. That's right. All right, so we'll remove those. Any other changes? Okay, then I will go ahead and make the motion that we amend the agenda to remove the minutes for January 24, 2022 from the consent agenda. Second? Thank you, Sue. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, motion passes 5-0. We'll remove those minutes from the consent agenda moving on to public to be heard. I forgot to bring my cheat sheet. No, I found it. Here it is. The public to be heard is the time for the public to speak to the board on items that are not on the agenda. If you'd like to speak during public to be heard, please raise your hand in the application and see we're using Zoom. If you're on the phone, I'll give you an opportunity to speak at the appropriate point. If you want to address the board, please be brief. Please be civil. Please refrain from using inappropriate language. Please address your remarks to me as chair of the select board. Please do not attack other members of the public or our staff. And if you are not recognized, a recognized speaker, please keep your camera off and your microphone muted to avoid distractions. So I see a number of hands up. Looks like Andy Champaigns is the first hand. Go ahead, Andy. Can you hear me okay? Yes, we can. So I was at a debate Friday night and I told Don Hill that she in the select board doesn't care and she was visibly offended that I would say that March 2021 merger failed. Separation, no vote, no budget and talk about it all year long and is still a leading topic in town that's costing us a fortune. Many details still need to be worked out and implemented. July 2021, protests at Essex Police Department made national news. August 2021 failure to read merger's contract cost the town and village $85,000, then allowed him to keep his job till February 2022. March 2022 messed up a portion of the mail-in ballots for this year's town election which can cause votes to not be counted. Last year, Tracy and the town learned every vote matters. I can go on and on. This has all occurred in one year and all of them were completely and easily preventable. A person who cared wouldn't allow any of these things to occur, especially not all in one year. Andy, are you campaigning? Are you making a campaign speech right now? Andy, please stop. In fact, I've been thinking since Sunday and I have realized that I can't think of one thing that you did that significantly improved our town last year, not one. Excuses are like armpits. Everyone's got two. You people were elected, appointed, and are in command. The buck stopped with you. I shouldn't have to be telling you this. You shouldn't even be trying to come up with an excuse yet I'm quite certain you're sitting there thinking ba-ba-ba-ba-ba. Just like what Don did Friday night. Her excuse was extremely horrible just like yours. Andy, you cannot campaign during a select board meeting. It's inappropriate. You all don't give a fuck and you all need to do Sorry, everybody. I muted Mr. Champagne once the language came into this where it works. That was my action. I will defer the select board if I should unmute or keep them on mute. It's inappropriate for him to be campaigning during a select board meeting. It looks like he's dropped from the meeting. Okay, David Skopen. Well, this will be pretty low-key. David Skopen, 11th Skyline Drive, haven't heard from me for quite a while, but I haven't disappeared. Actually, I have a grandchild now and I want to be able to tell her when she asked, well, what were you doing when you were acutely aware of what was going on with climate change? Didn't you say anything? So here I am. I'm saying things. As we all know, now that we can talk about the topic, it's only getting worse and certainly if you've watched the recent NOVA about what's going on in the Antarctic or the Arctic rather, you know that we may be in store for more bad news sooner than we wanted. We need to discuss this as a community and we need to deal with it as adults because our children's and grandchildren's life depend on it. So I will be working hard to think of things to bring to you that are rational and of value and I hope that everyone present and hearing my voice will be doing the same because I can't do it by myself, as you know, and no individual that I'm speaking to can do it. We're all in this together and we'll all have to deal with it. Thank you very much for your time. I think you all are doing a great job. I appreciate your presence and let's stay in touch. Thank you, David. Betsy Dunn. Thank you, Andy. So the town of Essex has an account with Front Porch Forum and this is something that the elected officials, you, Andy, and the rest of the board can use to notify the town of upcoming events or issues that are arising that they need to be aware of. And I think that's great. But I would like you to think about making a policy that when it comes to time for elections, that our elected officials who are running for the office again, for those who are not elected and are running for the office, have an equal ability to use Front Porch Forum, either allowing them onto the account so that they can also reach all the points in Essex with the Front Porch Forum or the person who is on the board who is using it is disallowed from using it. That would level the playing field. I think it's only fair. It's only right. And I hope you look forward, look into this more as a policy that we don't allow people who are running for office to use the account that the town has for the use of elected for Front Porch Forum. Thank you. Thank you, Betsy. Zachary Fors here. Hello, folks. This is very exciting. It's my first select board meeting here. So I'm very excited to talk to you all first. I just want to thank you all for your service to our community and being here and doing all the great work that you've done. So I recently received my packet, which is the financial statements from the prior year in the mail. And for the first time, I actually read through it because I'm someone who's interested in economics and the economy and things like that. And so I just had a question about our pension plan and whether there was anything I was missing here because it's on page 58 of the financial statements like the full version. And it was in June 30th of 2021. But what was concerning to me because I'm someone who has a lot of senior family members in this community that rely on pensions and fixed income and things like that. It was concerning to me that the expected inflation rate in the pension plan was marked at 2.3%, which clearly we've surpassed immensely. And it doesn't really look like there's any significant down tick coming for that. And so especially when we look at the asset allocation here, and again, I don't know if you guys are really the people that decide these types of things, but all of these expected real rates of return are now negative on these investments. And I mean, frankly, I'm just, I'm worried about all the seniors in our community live on a fixed income. And like social security and pensions and things like that, it seems like there's going to be a problem. And I know that Chinden County isn't like the oldest county in Vermont, but Vermont on average is a very old state. So I was just wondering if there was anything we could do to, you know, kind of address these issues and be forward thinking with these types of problems. I think, Zachary, I don't have a response for you. I do know that that the salary increases, is that what you were talking about or are you talking about? It seemed in the economic statements that there's a pension plan for certain like local employees. Like for instance, the fire department was one listed here, like a salary employee there and then some teachers and stuff. And the way that the pension plans work is typically there's like a payout from investments and then the yield of those investments is how they get paid out. And so my concern is just that it seems like some of these yields aren't going to be making up for the cost of living and more broadly, even in this pension plan, things like social security and things like other types of fixed income are just simply not making up for the inflation and asset or sorry, inflation and goods that people have to buy every day. And that's just very concerning for me because, you know, I don't want to have to see seniors working past the age of retirement just to be able to keep making bills. And I don't want to see seniors our community like, you know, having to cut costs like even like, you know, some of my friends who aren't seniors have had to cut on some insulin costs and things like that in other situations. And I just think that it is really important that we be proactive with how we allocate our assets in this town so that we don't end up having this situation where anyone who's on a fixed income isn't going to be able to pay their bills in five years just because of the way that our prices are moving. All right, Greg, I see your hand up. You want to try to provide a little insight. So Essex participates in Demers. That's the Vermont Municipal Employment Employee and Retirement System. That's a statewide pension system. The rates do typically increase a little bit each year. It was about a quarter or eight of the percentage point to try to keep up and try to keep up with inflation, keep up with investments. I don't have specific details about how well we've funded. Last I recall it was pretty well funded and one of the better pension systems in the country at least for a governmental pension system. Demers does not cover teachers, does not cover Essex, but it is generally pretty well managed and they do try to increase the rates slowly to keep up with inflation and other increasing costs. Sure, and I appreciate that response. And I am glad that we have a state that is more prepared than especially others. And obviously, I mean, this is something that is a little broader than just a town issue here, you know, like this is something that I should probably be writing a letter like the Congress people as well and like talking about that kind of stuff. But I do just think that it's important even for just like people in our community to be aware of these potential risks because it is something where it's definitely uncertain to say the least. And I don't want to have us all be unprepared of this potential risk, especially when it comes to our senior population who are less adapt to, you know, adapt with the change. Sue, I see your hand up. Did you want to comment on this? Yeah, just I just was curious whether this actually does fall into an agenda item because we're reviewing the audit report, which I think is what is being, you know, ref those financials that were being referenced. So possibly it makes sense to, you know, hear what that report readout has to say. And maybe there is some additional follow up from that. Thanks, Sue. Yep. So, Zach, if you want to stick around, we'll be talking more in detail about the audit report. Maybe more can come out then. Sure. Certainly, I appreciate it. All right. Thanks. Margaret Smith. Hi, Andy. Thank you. This is on a totally different subject. I know there's been some irregularities with the ballots, names not matching on envelopes. And I checked mine and I thought it matched. And then somebody said, well, go to the Secretary of State's website and see if your vote has been counted. And I went to that website and I plugged in all my information. And it said, we don't have this information. It's not what's in our, you're not in our files. Go check with your town clerk. So I'm going, I don't know what's going on because I've voted here for years and years and there's never been a problem. But I will plan to be checking in with the town clerk shortly. I just wanted to let you know that, that I had a problem getting into the Secretary of State's website. They didn't recognize me. Thank you. Thanks, Margaret. Let's see. Petty Davis. Sorry. Am I on muted now? Yep, we can hear you. Okay. I just wanted to say that just a little tidbit. I have a really good friend who's 72 who walks five miles a day. I want to be like her in 12 years. And she was born here and has lived here her whole life and has never, I just want to say this in response to you, Andy, but also to Zachary. It's nice to have a young person who is interested in our elderly population, our aging population in town. But what I wanted to say is she told me, living here her whole life, that this town, Essex town, has been so fiscally responsible, very, very good with our money. And that I would like us to really take to heart what that younger gentleman was talking about, not so much pensions, but being interested in our aging population and eventually having our own senior center because she volunteers all the time because of the church here, right here in Essex town next to the library. Terrible. I don't know the name of the church. They donate their time and do free meals and stuff at that place in the junction, I guess, where all the seniors go. And she said, since 2015, there are way more junction seniors there that attend, hardly any from the town. And I just thought that was an interesting observation. And I would like you to take that into consideration when you discuss your MOUs with the junction. Thank you very much. All right. Thanks, Patty. Okay. I don't see any other hands up, but there are at least one individual who's on the phone. Are there any? If you're talking about me, Chair Watts, I did not have a comment at the time. No comment at this time. Okay. Thank you. All right. So then let's move on to the first business item, which is a presentation of audit report. Good evening, everybody. Tonight, we will have Bill Kaiser with Gattel Brandigan and Sargent to present our fiscal year 2021 audited financial statements. Thanks for joining us tonight, Bill. And I'll let you take it away. Thank you very much, Courtney. Can everyone hear me? Okay. Yes, we can. Yes. Perfect. Hi. So, like Courtney said, I am a principal at Gattel Brandigan and Sargent and the accounting firm in St. Albans. And for the last few years, we've been doing the audits for both the town and the village of Essex. For the 2021 audit, I'm happy to say that the town of Essex received an unmodified opinion, meaning a clean audit for 2021. This is what doesn't shouldn't come as a surprise. Very strong finance department for the town. And this is consistent with previous years. The one major change for 2021 audit, though, was that because the town expended more than $750,000 in federal funds, there was a single audit. So you'll see those additional reports in the back of the financial statements. The major program tested this year was the Department of Transportation funds specifically for Pinecrest Drive and Sydney Drive. There was work done there that was federally funded. I know Courtney was asked one question regarding the single audit in the back of the financial statements it states that the town was deemed a high risk audit. This has nothing to do with the financial statement audit itself. Just because the town has not had a single audit in the last few years were required to declare a high risk audit. And really the only change between a high risk and a low risk audit is the level of testing thresholds that has to be done. For example, we have to test 40% of the expenditures spent on the major program. So that was DOT programs. We had to test 40% of the expenditures versus 20%, which would be the required testing in a low risk program. So overall, there's nothing more risky or nothing that is risky about the town of Essex. It was just more a requirement for us. Additionally, there were no findings in the single audit. All the costs were appropriately classified and expended. One additional requirement for a single audit is testing for more sound or internal controls. The town's internal controls were very sound and this is really nothing new for the town. In the past, the village has always had a single audit. So even though we're doing it audit specific to the town, because the finances have been combined before separation, we've always looked at internal controls for both entities. So again, nothing crazy, but there are sound internal controls. It is likely with the ARPA funds that are becoming available that the town will have additional single audits for the next few years as those funds are expended as well. For the financial statement audit itself, typical to prior years, it was a very clean audit. There were a few adjustments that we made. One was for Zachary mentioned the retirement plan, but every year we have to make what we call GASB 68 adjustments for the retirement plan. That's a VMware's plan and the state supplies us with audited reports on the state's end for that pension plan. And we make adjustments specific to the town of Essex. So that was one adjustment and the others were all very minor, most of which they were proposed by the client. And it was really just a timing issue with when we got the trial balance to start field work and while things were still being wrapped up in the finance department office. So nothing that we found during the audit. Getting into the financial statements, they start with the MDNA, which is really a year over year comparison of the financial activities of the town. There's a lot of discussion about major fluctuations and future planning considerations as well. You will notice towards the end of the MDNA, there is a timeline that includes the discussions of the merger with the village. Towards the end of that timeline, there is an area added for the more up to date activity and it discusses separation that's now ongoing with the village of Essex. So that is covered in the financial statements to that extent. The first set of financials is the government-wide financial statement. It includes all funds held by the town of Essex and is more of an accrual basis financial statement. You'll see there's very significant cash balances for the town. Cash flows for the town for the last few years have been very strong. It was $17.5 million in cash between the general fund and capital projects funds. This does include, you'll notice in current liabilities, $7.5 million of funding that actually belongs to the village. Right now, the village has no cash on its books. It's all held by the town. So eventually in separation, that will have to go back over to the village. But the town, like I said, has plenty of cash that is fully funded to be able to take that hit. Net investments in capital assets, that number is about $25 million in 2021. That is net assets that aren't available for spending. And it's really the capital assets less any debt on those capital assets. So that's not a value that's there for future spending. And then the restricted net assets of $883,000, that's reappraisal funds received from the state of Vermont for future reappraisals. So that has to be restricted in both the fund financial statements and government-wide financial statements. The next set of financial statements are the fund financial statements. These are on a modified accrual basis, similar to cash basis. And the general fund will provide a very picture similar to how the budget works that's voted on each year. The accounts receivable for the town have improved significantly over the last four or five years really since the tax sale policy has come more into play. The accounts receivable at June 30, 2021 are net with $180,000 of unavailable AR. And that's only because that AR was not collected within 60 days for property taxes. That figure though is down from $318,000 in 2020. We had noticed across the state because of COVID in 2020, the June 30 financials, a lot of municipalities weren't pushing to get the property taxes paid. So that 60-day collection period, a lot of the unavailable taxes increased. So it's good to see that the town has almost been cut down in half with the recovery from the initial impact from COVID is improving. There's also an allowance of $60,000 for unanticipated collections on those property taxes. So that would mean property taxes that weren't expected to not be collected. That's just an estimate but that also is down $40,000 from prior years. The town has held about $100,000 in as an allowance for doubtful accounts over the last several years. So things are improving there as well. The town does have a fund balance policy. The unassigned fund balance should not exceed more than 15% of the next year's budgeted expenditures. And the town is in line with that fund balance policy for June 30, 2021. The fund balance is really a true picture prior surplus that is available to be used for future years. And the fund balance at June 30, 2021 is just short of $7 million. Of that $7 million, about $2.4 million is unassigned. And the remainder is held aside for specific purposes, which you'll notice in the footnote. So there's a note breaking down what those purposes are for Note 15. Also all of the funding available for future capital projects has been assigned as well. Those projects are also broken down in Note 15. The proprietary funds in the town are made up of the Water and Sewer Fund and then the Recreation Fund. These are business funds and they're meant to be self-sustaining. The Water and Sewer Fund reported net income of $211,000 in 2021. And the Recreation Fund reported income of $93,000 in 2021. There was a deficit that was created in 2020 in the Rec Fund. That still exists. However, it's improved and it's just $18,000 at June 30, 2021. So hopefully that'll flip to a positive non-deficit in future years. These funds are reported similar to a business entity. So you'll notice there's a cash flow statement as well as part of these financial statements. And both of these funds have remained cash flow positive for the most part. Then the footnotes are also included. They provide a more descriptive outline of everything that's included in the financial statements. You'll see there's a debt footnote that shows all of the different types of debt and capital leases that the town has as well as a breakout of what makes up all the capital assets in the town. There were no new footnotes added in 2021 to these financial statements. You'll notice we do still have the COVID footnote in there just due to the risk and uncertainty of any future impact that the town may have due to the pandemic. And then lastly, at the end of the financial statements, before the single audit information, you'll see the supplementary information. There's a very helpful budget to actual schedule that shows the budget that was voted on by the town and how actual performance was and then the differences. And so that'll show you really how the town performed compared to its budget. And then any excess goes into that fund balance and is reserved for or committed for future year spending. That's all I have, Andy. If there are any questions. All right. Thanks, Bill. Any board member questions? You answered my question already, which was the high-risk question there. Any questions from board members? Tracy, I see your physical hand up there. Just a quick question and note 17 on page 36, talking about asset classes for the pension plan. Do you suggest any different type of diversification for those funds or is that sufficient? Unfortunately, the town really has no control over that as far as I know. The state of Vermont being in the VMware's pension plan, they control all of that. I think it was Andy that said to Zachary's questions earlier that the state of Vermont, while most state pension plans are underfunded, we hear about that often. However, that is driven off of estimates and actuarial estimates. So who really knows? But the state's pension plan overall has proven to be very successful in past years. Okay. Any other board member questions? Okay. Any questions from the public? Walt Adams, I see your hand. Can you hear me or do I need to unmute myself? I can hear you. I guess I'm slightly confused. I did hear something that the town has about nine and a half million dollars in unassigned assets. I knew know that we have about 2.4 million in a rainy day fund, which I assume is part of that 9.5. And then I heard something that the village is due seven and a half million dollars. Do they basically take up the rest of that unassigned fund balance when the time comes and they break away? I guess I'm lost about that. No, Walt. The unassigned fund balance is 2.4 million, and that's what you referenced as the rainy day fund. The rest of the fund balance is assigned to various things. Some of it's unspendable. Like it's sand inventory. You can't spend that, but you have to value it. There's about the 7.5 million that belongs to the village is because we share a bank account, and it's not coming out of, unless Biller, you were going to say something different. Andy, I can step in. Yeah. So the 7.5 million that's due to the village is actually part of the cash balance. That's at 17.5 million. So really, if you look at it as town cash, there's about $10 million in cash. It's completely separate from the fund balance. The fund balance has nothing to do with what is due to the village, and the village funds are not part of that fund balance figure. Again, I'm still rather lost. I know that there's $19 million worth of assets out there that are not fixed, I guess, in my thinking. Some of the majority of that is unspendable. It's something that, like the sand that you can't spend, but the suggestion was that there's $9.5 million in what I would describe as spendable money. And I guess I sit here and say, last year, meaning 2021, the government operations had a $1.3 million surplus, a fund balance, and somehow that has been assigned to something based on what you just said, where I didn't even know that we had $1.3 million in things that we needed, and if the board had done a really good job of budgeting and we'd had no money, that we'd come out exactly perfect, and there wasn't a $1.3 million fund balance, then where did we suddenly find $1.3 million worth of stuff we needed that we hadn't tried to get money for in last year's budget or two years ago's budget now? I'm thoroughly confused. I think that there was $1.3 million of found money is the way I would describe it in last year's budget. You choose to give us back $300,000 to offset our taxes. My reaction is, if you'd have given me $700,000 back, my tax bill would not have to go up this year for the town's purposes. The school's going to do, but at least the town budget would not. My taxes that I pay the town would not have to go up. I guess I don't understand how you could willy-nilly find $300,000 or a $1.3 million worth of things to assign that money to when there was a chance you weren't going to have any money. I'm lost. I think a lot of the excess funds came from federal dollars for COVID relief or state dollars for COVID relief. A lot of our expenses associated with how we reacted to COVID and so forth, we were reimbursed for a lot of those expenses. That's where a lot of cash came from. I see Courtney, you've unmuted yourself. Did you want to? Yes. It was a combination of things. We underspent in some areas. We were trying to be a little conservative in some areas. In addition to receiving additional funds due to COVID, so the $1.3 million was something that needed to be assigned to maintain our fund balance policy of unassigned that for 15%. So things definitely did come in as unexpected tax revenues, tax collections, or better than expected. As Bill pointed out, the unavailable revenue did decrease. There was a number of things that contributed to that $1.3 million needing to be assigned to our fund balance plan. You see, I mean, I don't know too much about accounting, but my reaction is that if you spent the money and then somebody paid you back, I would see it on both sides of the ledger and it would end up a net zero. So if you said, oh, well, maybe we spent that money two years ago and we're just getting it back now, but two years ago, you had a million-dollar fund balance too. So I guess I'm a little, I hear this story about you're getting money back from the federal government somewhere, and but somewhere you had to spend that money, which I assume shows up in the town budget, as would the revenue side of it show up. And I would have expected that if you got money from Uncle Sam, there would have been a line item in the budget that said money from Uncle Sam to repair, reverse previous expenses. Right, that's why I don't have anything. So Heidi Clark, can you hear yourself please? I don't get where this sheet telling me that you spend money out of the rene, what I call the rene day fund and I don't see how you could spend that money if you tried, because you got another seven and a half million dollars somewhere that you keep swapping money out of. So I'm thoroughly lost and I have to admit I may not be the greatest accountant in the world, but I understand that when you spend money, it should show up on the expenses line. And when you receive money, it should show up on your cruise line. And I don't see either of those on this budget. So I'm a little confused as to how we can continue to have surpluses each year of a million dollars and have no money to give back when we in fact have a surplus of $1.3 million. Well, actually it was more than that. Technically it was 1.6, but there's really only 1.3 that had something to do with government services. So I guess I don't understand why you couldn't give us back 700 instead of 300 and make our tax bill remain zero for this, not zero, but be the same tax rate and then get a little more money because obviously the grand list is going up every year. So I'm a little disheartened. I'm also really disheartened by the idea that you in the last 10 years have been $7 million in surplus. That's not a very good way to budget. I mean, I expect when I see a budget, I expect you to have budgets that are somewhere near where they belong, not see a $7 million surplus in the last average of $700,000 surplus every year. There's something wrong with the way you budget if that's what's going on. There's something not true about how you budget. So there it is. So a lot of that surplus comes from unfilled police department positions. We budget for a full contingent of police officers and they're very difficult to hire these days. And so we end up with leftover funds from the budget that way. And what we're doing, what we've done this year, if you look closely at the budget, there's a contrast spending account in there that actually takes some of that back out. So I think we only funded it. Was it 97 percent, Courtney, for the... 96. Andy, I need to cut in. I'm sorry. Last two years ago when I was at the budget hearing, you guys decided that it would be all right to take $50,000 out of the budget to offset one police position out of the three that were open at that time. Now, you and I both understand that a police position doesn't cost $50,000. It's much closer to 100 by the time you get done per position. So technically, while you offset this year $155,000 for at least two of those positions, at least I'm assuming there are two, I would argue that that should have been closer to $300,000. You were keeping one position for a new position for mental health position, which I think is a great idea. However, on top of fully funding the police department in past years, because you didn't have enough patrolmen, you're also charging us between $200,000 and $300,000 in overtime. So we're really double-dipping on that guy that doesn't exist. You didn't take him out and you put a bunch of overtime in for everybody else. If we can't hire people, we can't. I understand, dude. If you can't hire people, I'm not suggesting that the board change the number of assigned patrolmen from whatever that number is. But I think you should be fair to us because you can clearly fund 10 policemen out of the rainy day fund if you were lucky enough to hire them. You don't need to have the budget have that money in it if you were lucky enough to hire people. So I don't understand why you use this as a way to collect my tax money for what in my mind just puts in you put it, you hide it someplace and you say, oh, well, we found some other use for it because we had it available to us. So this agenda item is about the audit, not about the budget itself. So if you have questions about the audit, happy to entertain us. I do. I would suggest to you that you ask Mr. Kaiser if he thinks your budgeting process works well if you end up with a million dollar a year average surplus year after year after year. Thank you. All right. Thanks. Zachary force here. So this is going to be a bit more of a basic question that kind of pales in comparison to the past one here. But so I was just the very simple like governmental question in terms of how things function. So when we're talking about like excess funds and things like that, are we just talking about funds like literally just like held in cash in like a low interest savings account in a bank or something like that? I don't I don't know how we hold our cash. Courtney, is there any I don't know if we want to comment on that? We do have an investment policy and we do utilize other investment vehicles to maximize interest on the cash that we have at hand. So we've utilized CDs and different reserve accounts to maximize interest earned on our accounts. Sure. Cool. Thank you. That definitely helps with my question. And then I just had a little follow up as well. And again, it's perfectly fine. No one knows this. But and this isn't actually maybe I should say this for a different time. It's not really audit related more budget. But I was just wondering if since it is a little related to the financial health of the community, is a lot of these funds used for goods or is the majority of these funds like service based like just paying for the police officers and things like that? So the the largest expense we have in our budget is paying for the people we employ. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. Yep. Yep. Okay. Any other comments from the public? I think to to answer Walt Adams question about our budgeting process, I think the fact that the the the audit was approved the way it was indicates that are are at least our financial processes are adequate. I don't know that it comments on our budgeting process. I think the voters will will let us know how we did in about a week, less than a week. So okay. Okay. Courtney, is anything you need from us on this? No, this is just an overview and just informing you of the finalized audit report from the financials. Okay. All right. Thank you Courtney. Thank you, Bill. Yep. Yep. We'll move on to the next agenda item, which is 5b discussion and possible action on town of Essex rule requiring wearing face coverings indoors and public spaces. Now I had at the last being this has been actually been on our agenda three meetings in a row. We two meetings ago extended the the the mask rule to what would have been yesterday, but because today's meeting was more than 30 days from the original from that authorization, we also had on the 7th at our meeting, we extended an additional 30 days which which extends it to March 22nd. But during as part of the discussion there was there have been there are many we're getting a getting a lot of emails, both foreign against continuing the the mask rule. And as you know, many folks are indicating numbers are coming down. But we and so at the last meeting, I had asked whether we could have a discussion in this meeting about whether or whether we might want to rescind prior to, you know, whether we were ready to rescind and I know Greg shared with us earlier what the current data is. And I guess I'd like to open up to board member discussion about what folks are thinking. So I see Sue's hand, go ahead Sue. Yeah, I thought I thought tonight we were going to discuss establishing criteria for, you know, so that it's not like a subjective thing more objective in terms of, you know, we all agree that when we reach some sort of a threshold, and I would add, in addition to a threshold that there is some, you know, sustaining of whatever that threshold is for some period of time, that, you know, that we could then be looking at whether we rescind or you know, obviously in the other direction have to put something back in place. So I thought tonight we were not so much talking about whether we should rescind but rather what is the criteria that we would like to recognize as, you know, adequate for no longer needing a mask mandate and how long do we think we need to sustain that threshold before we're actually comfortable with rolling back. So do you have thoughts on what that criteria might be? Yeah, I mean I think in our memo there was references to what the CDC is using, right? So although it is, and that's the new cases per 100,000 and the percent, the percent positivity, the thing that it makes it a little bit, it's not as accurate as it could be because of the switch to home testing and not everyone, you know, sharing what their home tests are. So we've lost some of that, that information I think. But I don't, it's a place to start and I think Greg had also shared some other statistics, current statistics, I don't know. Yeah, I'll be the latest number that, so the criteria that the CDC is recommending is positivity below 8% and case rate per 100,000 of less than 50. And so looking at, looking at I guess today's number, Chittenden County has gone from high to substantial, substantial being a lower situation or a lower case rate than and positivity than high, which is what it has been. And so the numbers for case rate are 97 and positivity today was 3.16, but the criteria is that both numbers be below the criteria in order to get to, I guess it's called moderate transmission. Yeah, and to be clear, we're just barely out of high to substantial, right? Today's the first I've seen that it hasn't been high, correct? Yeah, and I guess what I was suggesting in addition to whatever metrics we decide that it also, you know, there's always going to be dips and peaks, right? So you're going to want to see it not just be a one time, but you know, that we're sustaining that level, I think for, I don't know what what the right number is, but you know, throwing it out there for for five days or 10 days or something like that. So yeah, reported reported case rates are always lower on Monday than they are later in the week because of the weekend. Yeah, correct. So that's just my my thoughts. Okay, thanks to any other board member comments. Thanks, Andy. Apologies. I don't have a webcam because I'm pulling double duty at work tonight. So just have to hear my voice. I you're taking a look at the rates from where they are and what Greg was able to give us today. I mean, I'm I think I would feel comfortable and Sue brought up a great point to have us in the CDC's moderate territory for, you know, I would say a period of five days. You know, it seems like having, you know, consistent, you know, consistent level where we're, you know, remaining and, you know, out of substantial and high, you know, ratings or classifications over the CDC is putting that. That's that's where I think would start to feel comfortable about pulling down the mask mandate. And I agree that I think attaching a metric to it. So that's not just subjective is probably the way to go that way. You know, we can tell people with, you know, relative confidence that, you know, these are the numbers. This is what we're going to use. Everyone can check it. Everyone can know, you know, if it's published and we set those numbers themselves, then I'd feel a lot more comfortable than, you know, just coming back, meeting to meeting month to month and deciding where we are. All right. Thanks, Pat. Tracy or Dawn? Yeah, I think, I mean, attaching metrics to it is an extremely good idea. We need the data to back up these decisions. And as I stated last meeting, I think, you know, we should really be in moderate before we lift it. Also thinking warmer weather is coming, people are going to be outside. That should also decrease the rates of transmission in and of itself with schools going back into session after winter break next Wednesday. And a decision the school need to make regarding masking and vaccination rates. I think it makes sense the data metrics that we've talked about. And I think I would like to see masks still on until at least March 2nd and considering that we have a board meeting the next week. I'd like to revisit it then, but moderate sounds good to me. All right. Thanks, Tracy. Dawn? Sounds good to me. I think we should keep it. And we should also not only follow the guidelines as the CDC has recommended, but also to observe what the school systems are doing too. Yeah, one thing I want to make clear to, I just want to say this in a public meeting is that the select board has no say in whether the school changes their mask policy. A lot of the emails that I've been getting have been expressing concern about how learning is, children are affected in school and how learning is affected. And I just want to get clear that the select board has no jurisdiction over the school board. They set their own mask policy. Sue, I see your hand back up. Yeah, just I also just to have it be part of the discussion, we only were given the ability to put mask mandate in place through April, I think, right? April 30th is the last day. Yeah, regardless of what we just, yeah. Exactly. So I heard a couple of thoughts here, one being, and I agree that we should have a criteria and I agree that the CDC recommendation would be appropriate and also for some timeframe. But Tracy also raised the question of well, should we have our next meeting is, but we have town meeting, we've already warned that agenda so we can't, we wouldn't be adding it to that meeting. But the meeting following is March 7th, which is less than two weeks away. Tracy suggested that we wait until that meeting to, at least until that meeting to decide whether to lift or do we want to. And I don't know, Greg or Evan, can we have a motion that is contingent upon somebody collecting data and looking at it and then pulling the trigger? I think we can. I think that's some question for the board. Do you want to take this up that just to regularly schedule meetings? Do you want to make a motion tonight that if there are five consecutive days at such and such for exterior or whatever number of days you decide that the rule that was sent to that point? Okay, okay. Tracy, is your hand back up? Yeah, I question for Evan and Greg if I may. I believe that the agenda can be altered and changed up until the posting deadline, which I believe for a regular meeting is 48 hours. Does that also apply to the town meeting warning? I don't believe it means the town meeting warning. That has different statute. Okay. But the regular agenda is up to 48 hours. Listening to your conversation, I think if you set the parameters for the mandate, what you would do and what you're not going to do. Also, and I'm not completely versed, Greg's a little better at this, there is a what's the 24-hour rule, Greg? There's a special meeting. You can amend the agenda after that 48 or 24-hour period. So the other thing you could do is have it as a standing agenda item. And if there's no change, there's no change. If there's discussion, there's discussion and you could change. That's just the way it's got to go, but the data comes out. I'm not exactly sure when the CDC updates its data. Yeah, that's the thing that worries me is having somebody responsible for finding that data and did they really update it? Because it didn't get updated Monday because it was a holiday. I kind of run through the holidays right now. It's a good metric, but it may not be a timely metric. Yeah, right. Because if you check it eight o'clock in the morning or if you checked it four o'clock in the afternoon, then it might, if it gets updated, I don't know. That too, but it may not within 48 hours of your meeting, which is roughly once every two weeks. Right, right. So I guess, go ahead. Sorry. I think the only other thing is it's not that back to the discussion about the school district, you don't get to tell them what to do. They don't get to tell you what to do, but you both have like your, a lot of our rules are done by the Secretary of State or by the governor's office. theirs is done by the Department of Education. Whose numbers are they using? You know, so I don't know if there's a perfect solution, but I think I go, I go back to some of your other rules and responsibilities, which is the protection of life and property in the town of Essex, and it doesn't change. Really, it doesn't change. That's what your role is, partially. And so if there's a pandemic going on, you have to take that into consideration. And for some of the people that I've read some of the emails, again, we're, you guys took action that it's not, there's no penalty. You're out for voluntary compliance. Oh, you're welcome. Hey, Brad, can you Brad, can you meet yourself? Brad, can you please meet yourself? Sorry, Greg. Sorry, Evan. No, no, no, you have, you have asked for voluntary compliance. We have not arrested a soul. We've not find a soul. We have talked to a couple of business owners, mainly about their employees and whether they're wearing masks in a building, in a space where we've asked that this be followed. There's not been one fine issued in the month and a half that I'm aware of that has gone through. So that's what I've got for you. Okay. Thanks, Evan. So to the board, should we go for listen to public comment and then perhaps come back and have a discussion about what we would like to do. So if there's anybody on the phone who'd like to, or not on the phone, or on the phone, sorry, or in the meeting, raise your hand or actually, Brian, I know you're the only one who was on the phone. Did you want to comment on this? No comments. Thank you. Sure. Well, okay. All right. Thanks. Okay. So go back to Lorraine Zaloum. Thank you, Chair Watts. Just a quick question. Is there any way you guys can get our wastewater online into that testing program? I mean, I'd now, and Sue certainly mentioned that now that we're self-reporting, the wastewater certainly gives us a heads up in advance instead of always chasing a community spread and can also parse out some other communicable diseases hopefully in the future. And we have a wastewater plant right here. So how can we get that online? The federal program is up and running. There's a number of states that are participating and they're collecting national data that way. I would love us to participate and be a leader in this. Thank you. All right. Thanks, Lorraine. Ken Signerla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've got to hear a bit of concern about employees because I'm yesterday on my way home from using my doctor who I asked about this as well. I asked one of our local business owners what they thought of this vote that you're going to take tonight. And I was surprised it's only a sample size of once. I'm not even going to say what he said because it's anecdotal. Not good for making an inference, but I was surprised at how strongly this owner felt about it. And I really think that the temperature of the business community and the impact of this decision on employees and businesses in general and the stress that they're under with employees trying to enforce this should be taken. And maybe that's a great job for the Economic Development Commission to do. That's it. Thanks. All right. Thanks, Ken. Zachary. Sure. So in relation to business employees, I'm also currently a retail employee at a local business in this area. And I want to voice that some of the frustration I've heard from fellow employees is just that there often are these low standards held for customers. Well, there's a very high standard held for employees, especially in our business. And one of my friends was serving a table of 12 boys that had likely come from a sports game. They're all sitting there with no masks. We serve them. And I'm not saying that that's something that should be regulated because obviously I want the business to be able to operate. And I want the economy to be able to continue. But there is some resentment in people that I've talked to just to the fact that they often feel like them as workers are having it more. There's more penalty for them, too, because also the business owner could likely tell them to go home if they weren't doing it. Whereas the customer we kind of want to be accommodating. So I just wanted you guys to take into consideration that opinion. Thanks, Zachary. Sharon Zuckowski. Hi there. First, I want to say I think it's a really good idea to set a standard because that way everybody in the community sort of knows when it's going to change and probably won't get an email from me every single every two weeks. But I do have to also input something anecdotal about businesses. My daughter and my son-in-law both worked for a grocery store and they were very grateful when Governor Scott did the mandate and when you did because then it's not on them. It's not their fault. They don't have customers literally screaming in their face that why are you making me do this? It is hard for the employees to have to wear the masks eight hours a day. I feel for them, but I think we as customers going in the store for 30 minutes, which should not be up in arms about another mandate. It's just a matter of health and safety and lives. But so thank you. Thanks, Sharon. Any other comments? Can you already spoke? I got real quick though, if you wouldn't mind. I forgot to say what my doctor said. He's authoritative, so I can tell you. My doctor said, why not? Okay. Thanks. All right. Any other comments from the public? I don't see any other hands and there's no one else, no other callers. So let's go bring it back to the board. Well, it's not bad. So I guess the question is, the question is, do we want to put a motion, make a motion to lift as soon as a specific criteria is met or do we want to have this as a standing agenda item and lift it if the criteria has been met? I think those are probably the two choices. And if there's other choices you could think of, then bring them up. I think I see Greg's hand up. Yeah, thanks, Andy. I just saw Brad Kesson and I'm muted and I'm clapping. I don't know if that was meant to be a hand raise. Do I have the floor? Yeah, Brad, sorry. I didn't. I saw your clapping. I didn't realize. I didn't think that. I might have had your hand up. That was your hand. So go ahead, Brad. I was waving my hand. Just a couple comments. Yesterday, Governor Scott held a press conference. Any remark that hospitalizations and the trend analysis of cases was trending in the right direction. So if you go to the Department of Health, the Department of Health and the CDC dashboards, there is a dramatic, dramatic decrease from a month ago. And you can look at the macro month in month or you can look at the more micro trend analysis. And it's a precipitous drop. The trend is at a point where we were in late fall. So it's dropped dramatically. It's the same in Chittenden County. It's a mirror image in the state of Vermont and nationwide. And hospitalizations were mentioned yesterday. They went from 235 in the time period of December 21st to January 22nd to 44 on February 22nd. So all this data is as of yesterday. So from 235 to 44. And number of deaths over time is 50% of what it was a month ago. Same time period. So I think it's important that you look at the trend analysis. The Governor yesterday also said that masks were optional in schools. Some of the schools have already dropped that as effective when they return from winter break. I think that it's time for the select board to look at how we can move to a more normal functional life in our community. Our businesses and our residents have been in bondage for a better part of two years. And it's time that we start moving in a direction that people can get their life back. I don't think if you remove the mask mandate, I don't believe, this is my opinion now, not factual, that it's not going to change behavior because people that feel uncomfortable are still going to wear their mask. You have to give people some credit and let them make individual choice. Maybe you wait a little bit longer, but I mean, this trend analysis is pretty clear that the Omicron is burning out. In most cases, it's a case of a flu or a cold. And it's not like the Delta variant. So my recommendation is that we move as quickly as possible from the mask mandate to open up our community. Thank you. Thanks, Brad. Okay, then I guess back to the board. As I mentioned, I think there's two options, but if you think there's a third, please speak up. I think the one would be to have an extending item on our agenda, and then we could revisit on March 7th and then again on the 21st, which would be our next two meetings coming up, or we could establish a criteria and ask town staff to monitor the data and then put out an announcement of it being lifted. So what do folks think? Any comments from the board? Pat's got his hand. Yeah. Yep. Pat, go ahead. Thank you. Yeah, just after listening to the public, I think a few things that are certainly helpful to keep in mind. One, masks are in no way, shape or form a type of bondage that's incredibly disrespectful to those individuals who come from backgrounds where that's an extremely sensitive topic. It's a paper or cloth mask over your face, not bondage. And as far as certainly the governor's announcements and the rates trending down, it's really easy to make rates trend down when you stop testing in all the schools, which was the direction that came down from the agency of education. Now that's been placed onto the burden of families, whether or not they have the ability to access and get tests, which was extremely difficult for an extended period of time. That said, I would propose a standing agenda item. I can make it as a, I'd be happy to make it as a formal motion if people are ready for it, but I would move that the select board have this as a standing agenda item to be revisited should rates in Chittenden County drop below the CDC threshold of moderate for a period of five days. I'll second that. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Thank you, Pat. Thank you, Stu. Any discussion around that? Just a question. The motion said if they drop below the CDC's level of moderate clarification, does that mean drop into the moderate category? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Into moderate. Okay. And to be clear, when you're in the moderate category, the CDC guidance is that unvaccinated individuals should wear a mask and indoor public places. So it, the CDC guidelines still, but we, we aren't going to, I don't think we're, we would modify the rule to say only that. Just wanted to make it clear that the CDC guidelines for moderate would be that unvaccinated people should still wear masks, but Don. I'm probably not going to be very popular here, but I would rather see our current mandate stay until the 22nd. We can revisit it on the 21st because I have to say that this mass mandate is starting to feel like separation. That's all we talk about. We made the decision to put it through until March 22nd. By then we would have the results of if the school unmasked to see what's happening and we'd also have better numbers. I'm not going to stand in anybody's way, but that was my opinion. Thanks Don. Back your hands back up. Is that a residual hand? Yeah, residual hand. I didn't take it. Apologies. Okay. So I guess my other question then is Evan and Greg, if we, um, can we commit staff to watch so that we know in our next meeting whether there have been five days or, or how do we, how do we know on March 7th whether or not we have had five days in the modifier category? Because I don't know that you can look back. I think that's fine. I believe I want to research this and more, but it looks like the CDC has a tracker or a time lapse to check by date. Okay. Okay. Okay. All right. All right. So we have Sue. Yeah, I just want to make sure is if it's clear in the motion that both metrics need to be in the moderate zone. So in order to fall into the moderate zone, you have to, you have to satisfy both. That's the, that's the criteria that the CDC established that, that only, you know, we're already in that, in that area for positivity, but not for, for case rate for 100,000. So, um, all right. So we have a motion to, um, revisit this or to, uh, Patrick clarify for me, did we say that we're going to revisit on the 7th or we're going to have it as a standing agenda item? I said a standing agenda item that way if by the 7th we aren't meeting that, then we don't need to worry about taking it up. And I think that might satisfy Dawn as well, where I agree we shouldn't need to have to discuss it every single week. Um, but, you know, we'll, it means we'll know beforehand, um, if we need to address it. Okay. Okay. So, so the intent here would then be that if we don't make the criteria that we would not have it on our next agenda. Correct. That is my intent. Okay. Uh, Greg, does that work for you? I guess we can, because we set the agenda on Friday before the meeting Yeah. It will work as long as you're okay with that metric being based on Friday. Right. Right. Right. Right. So with the, we would just to be clear for everybody, the, the metric would be based on, yeah, but this, but it would be, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's just a matter of question of whether to put it on the agenda or not. It's not, it doesn't actually doesn't, um, cause anything to be removed. Yeah. So if, if case rates spike up again over a given weekend and they're, they've gone crazy again by Monday, we, we would potentially see that that would be better discussion. Okay. It's just a trigger to put it on the agenda and not to remove it. All right. All right. Okay. All right. So, uh, having gone through all of that, we have motion on the floor. Um, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed. Okay. Motion passes. Five zero. Don, you voted for that? Do you want to make sure? I said I wouldn't stand in the way. Okay. Just wanted to make sure. All right. But I heard you're right. Okay. Thank you. Five zero. That passes. Then we'll move on to the next agenda item, uh, business item five C, which is discussion and potential action on tentative agreements about shared services and boards, commissions, committees, between the town of Essex, the village city of Essex Junction. We did have a discussion with the trustees that are our, um, last joint meeting. Uh, I do, I, I, I believe that the intent is that the board wants to have, uh, an executive session discussion about their response, uh, before we have public discussion about it, or do we want to have, do we want to, anything, any board members want to say about, uh, the agreements right now? Should we take public comment? Any objections to taking public comment? Okay. Uh, anybody in the public have any comments to anything to say about the current state of all of our, uh, agreements we've been working on and her discussions that we've had, uh, um, Addie Davis. Uh, yeah. Everything you guys brought forth, uh, five stars. Hold your ground. You did great. Perfect. Anybody else? Lorraine. Was there any update on the senior center and where you guys are out with that negotiation? So the senior center was, was included in an agreement that also included, uh, access to Indian Brook and, uh, reciprocal access for, uh, recreation programs. Um, the select board had asked for some changes to that. And because of the changes we asked for, the trustees backed away from that agreement completely. So currently there is no, um, no agreement around. Um, and that's, that's one of the things we want to talk about is do we want to, and how do we, we want to counter for the, their position of, of completely backing away from it. They're, they're, well, they haven't completely backed away, but I should say, I shouldn't, maybe I'm overstating something there. They've asked us to go back to their original language to remove the language that we had, um, put in. And they said otherwise they will, they, um, will just have their own senior center and their own senior bus if they need it. Uh, Betsy Dunn. I'm unmuting. I'm sorry, Andy. Um, so we're going to basically negotiate with ourselves. They don't want to come up with something. So we have to change what we did. So we're, we are negotiating with ourselves in that case. If we, why would be back off of what we said? Yeah. Well, that makes a lot of sense. I mean, if they're going to use Indian brook, then they should, and have equal access like we do, then they should have to have the help with the care and the maintenance of that, um, entity. I think it's goofy for us to do anything else than that. They, that they have that, and they, their prized thing that their pool, they don't want to give that up for us to use, you know, equally. So, uh, okay, we're on a stalemate there. Let them go walk away. Yeah. This discussion will have as well how we want to react to that. Yeah. Thanks, Betsy. Any, um, any other public comment? Patty already spoke. I just had one thing. I just wanted to, what I said before about my friend who collects data who's 72, uh, just for your information, not a lot of town residents use that senior center. We should build our own something to think about seriously. Thanks. Thanks, Patty. Yeah, I don't, I don't know the, the specifics of the membership there. Um, okay. Any other comments? Can senior level? I'm a member of the senior center. So I can tell you that people come from other municipalities and pay their annual membership fee of $15 and participate in senior center activities. So I would think that if we did not cut a deal, we'd be a separate municipality like any other and members of our community could go to the senior center, pay the annual fee. They probably get there if you have no senior bus, obviously on their own, but I think most of them actually already are. So I just point out the policy is other municipalities, seniors from those other municipalities can participate in the senior center. Yeah. Yeah, it's not exclusive. Right. Yeah. I think the, the question is, is, which space would be used? And the, the select board had asked some specificity about um, to Lincoln Street, the property that's currently used for the senior center. All right. Any other comments? Okay. Then we will return to make the appropriate motions to go into executive session at the end of the meeting. Let's move on to consent. We don't make a motion. I make the motion and we approve the consent agenda as corrected. Thank you, Don. Do I have a second? Thank you, Stu. Any further discussion? I don't see any board member hands. Um, so all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Motion passes 5-0. Consent agenda is approved. Reading file. Any board member comments? Don. I'm going to raise my hand and make sure that we thank Jeffrey Carr for his many years of service to this town. He will be missed. Yeah. Yeah. He did a lot of good, good stuff for us. Um, Greg, I saw your hand up before Sue's. Did you have something you wanted to add? Thank you. Yes. Two things. Um, just to let people know, uh, Tammy Getchell has set up a couple of informational meetings, heading into town meeting. Uh, Don and Tracy have volunteered to host those. There's information on the town website. Uh, www.sxbt.org backslash town meeting. Um, just a chance for people to ask questions about what's on the ballot for town meeting. Um, the sessions are going to be tomorrow evening at 6 30 PM and Saturday morning at 11 AM. Um, and secondly, I just wanted to take a moment, uh, this is Evan Teacher's last meeting, um, with the select board. I just wanted to give a thank you to him, uh, who's been a mentor to me and I've learned a lot from him in the past several years. Um, just want to wish him well in retirement and take a moment to give him a little bit of appreciation, um, taking personally and wanted to let him know that. Thank you, Greg. Yes, here, here. Wish you all well. Yeah, likewise, Evan, likewise. Uh, it's to cook. Yeah, I just actually wanted to, um, show appreciation for the very clear reporting that we get from Dennis Lutz about the winter operations. I, I, I just, uh, every time I read through it, I'm like, this is like just amazing and very proactive and maybe that, that graph has always been in there, but I was like, we're even getting this like trend graph. So I, you know, I just think Dennis does a fantastic job with keeping us aware of where we are, you know, uh, actuals against plan and where we were this time in previous years. And I think it's really helpful and, um, I think we're also going to miss Dennis. So I just wanted to make sure that, you know, this is our last winter with Dennis. So just wanted to acknowledge all the good work he's doing. Thanks, Sue. Greg, your hand is up. Is it still upper? Is that a residual? Is that a new comment? Greg's hand went down. All right. So then I guess the remaining thing to do is to, um, oh, yeah, going to have the motions for executive session. So does anybody have those available? I have them. Sue, go ahead. I make the motion that slip word make the specific finding that general public knowledge of contracts would place the town at a substantial disadvantage. Thank you, Sue. Thank you, Tracy. Any further discussion? Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, motion passes 5-0. Sue, you got the next one. I do. I make the motion that the select board enter into executive session to discuss contracts pursuant to 1VSA 313A1A to include the unified manager and deputy manager and assistant manager and our town council. Oh, and our town attorney. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Thanks, Sue. Thank you, Don. Any further discussion? I don't think we're not going to take any actions. So do we need to come back to this meeting to adjourn? Or we'll just, because there'll be no action, so we'll just adjourn and close this meeting out. Or I don't know how you want to do it, Greg. Or we go to a breakout room or how we do it? I'll create a breakout room and I'll just end the meeting when the select board is done with the session. Okay. All right. So let's see. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, motion passes 5-0. We'll be going into executive session and adjourning from there. And thank you for everyone who attended. Thank you for all your comments and hope to see you at town meeting next week.