 We have a triple host. Paul has power also. That's great. I like that. He's co-host number two. Yeah, I'm number one in this case. Okay. Good morning, everyone. This is the May 19th meeting of the elementary school building committee, the full committee. Senya will change her name to, so we don't have two Margaret's. I never get the link, so I'm always Margaret. Yeah, no, that's okay. We'll start to put you on. So I think my first task of today is to both welcome everybody, but also to call out to make sure everybody can hear and be heard since we're conducting the meeting virtually. So I will do it as I see people on the screen and when more people join, I'll do the same thing. So Jonathan. Good morning. Morning, Sean. Here. Paul. Present. Rupert. Ben. And Angelica. Here. Thank you all for joining. And I realize that this is actually the first meeting we've had since the vote of the school, which as everyone knows was a resounding yes. And, you know, I have to say that, you know, I did some knocking on the doors and you had an inkling of it, but I was, I didn't know what it was going to be until the very end. So it's this incredibly strong support by the Amherst community for schools and for climate, the two themes that we know we need a new school. So we're now in the phase of making all those beautiful videos, adding the details of the design development. So I'm going to turn it over to Margaret because it's a pretty simple agenda, but the things we'll do is also at the end of it, just review the calendar for the next few meetings because we there's at least one change. And then Dennis Gold talk about what is or is what might remain to be done in June and we'll make sure everyone has a June full meeting on their calendar. So, Margaret, I'm going to just it's a, as I said, a fairly simple agenda to review what's been going on for the last few weeks with subcommittees. So checking to see that folks can see this in this short. I do just want to sort of thank Kathy for her leadership up until this point. I'm not sure everybody knows it was Kathy's birthday the day of the vote. So it was really wonderful. I was able to go to the victory celebration and hear the group sing happy birthday to her with huge grins on their faces. So that was a really great moment and I was sort of feel glad to be part of this. As Kathy said, it's a pretty simple. We're going to give up basically Dennis go is going to give updates on the subcommittee meetings that we've had so far. We have one invoice. I do want to just flag that the other really major change that's happened since we last met. As I think everyone knows is that Mike has stepped down at least temporarily from the superintendent role. And so we have had to do a little bit of scrambling to sort of sort out how to continue to organize meetings with teachers. So there's the public meetings that are going on. They're also meetings with staff that are going on. And that's made some of the scheduling a little bit complicated. So thank you for sticking with us as we sort of as we negotiate this. But that's it. There's just one small invoice from us because we've sat now completed the feasibility phase. And the next invoices you will see which won't be for at least another month will be for the next steps in the project. So does anyone have any questions before I take that down? Nope. Okay. All right. So I'm going to turn it over to Danisco to walk us through what was presented and communicated and responded to. We're going to start with site. Is that right, Tim? So I want to just say one thing, Tim, just before you start. Angela, who's been staffing this committee doing a phenomenal job, has set up the three subcommittees. And as some of you may be aware that we're now calling sustainability subcommittee. It used to be net zero, but we've merged those. So the materials people have been seeing in the subcommittee have all been put up. So if you're not in the site committee or you're not in the building committee, you can look at what people have been seeing and discussing in those. So I know, Tim, you're going to be talking about some of that, but Danisco has given us that. And we have, I think as of yesterday, we've populated all the subcommittees with those materials. It's on to you, Tim. Thank you. I am going to share, and I'm going to give the headlines from the meetings. Obviously, if we want to get into any of the details, we can go through the whole presentation, but I'm just going to give the big check for takeaways and hopefully respond to any questions that come up. But starting with the site meeting that we had on May 10th, we had a good discussion about the impacts of the value engineering decisions that were made at the end of SD and what effect they would have on the design that we've been looking at through most of the process. So this is the layout that we were shared and presented and developed during the schematic design phase. And then we accepted a few value engineering items that reduced hard escape and a few other things. And we just wanted to talk about those impacts and what that would mean in terms of the site and some of the other input that we receive at the very end of SD and how that would affect things. So here you can see a few changes, the basketball courts are pushed together. The overall hard escape and the play scape is reduced by a target of 15%. There was some good discussion at this meeting about maintaining the important aspects of the project, including the trail that connects to the trail at the northeast of the site. There was also a fairly robust discussion about how the playground should function and operate. And we have a follow-up meeting, or we are attempting to schedule a follow-up meeting with the school staff and administrators to make sure that we are designing to all the right parameters for the operations of the school. You will notice that one of the rain gardens was reduced in this version of the site plan. Still presents an opportunity for outdoor learning. Still does all of the functional things that it needs to do to store and move storm water on site. And all of the other program elements remain, including the outdoor classroom. And in this version that was shown on May 10th, the drop-off loops both in the north and south for buses and parents remain the same. And then there was some fairly good input from the committee, from members of the community that they would like to see the plaza and drop-off area in front of the building perhaps be a bit more bike and pedestrian focused rather than vehicle focused. And so then as we moved into the meeting about site on May 17th, we have started to adjust the parking lot and the parent drop-off loop a little bit to the north. We have shifted the area where the vans will park on the drop-off loop to the south. This gives us the opportunity to really broaden the plaza in front of the building to make it more pedestrian and human focused. It gives the flexibility for bus drop-off to be essentially right at the front door. So in the morning, all of the students could come through the front door and have the same experience. But it also leaves a flexibility to use the southern entrance of the center of the building. Maybe they'll alternate between a drop-off and pickup. But based on the sort of input of the subcommittee and the members of the public who are there, we think we're really pushing the site in the right direction and incorporating all that we need to from the SD and the value engineering comments. I can get further deeper into it and go through all the slides, but that is the takeaway of the two meetings that are any questions on the site. And we are in the process of scheduling a meeting with the school administration to go all over these aspects, just to review them to make sure that the voice of the administrators and the people who are in charge of operations day to day are absolutely on board with everything that we're doing. Kathy? Yeah, I just have a couple overarching arching questions. As you're shifting, and the same question would be about the building and then sustainability, as things shift or get refined, it alert us when something has a cost impact, whether it's a positive or negative cost impact. As we're looking at, and I know this is still, we don't even have playground equipment on the playgrounds yet. We have just the spacing of them. And I know there's been a question raised way back when about the, what I'll call the green rectangle between the two playground areas, and we have a price tag on that. So I just, as we're going through this, not just now, but over the next several weeks, you know, keeping a, what we already know before we go for the formal reestimate of all of this, it would be good to get some sense of that. Thank you. Absolutely. And that's always in our mind. And I should reiterate that between PDP and PSR, there was a significant increase in costs due to the world at large and things like that. Now that we've passed SD and there's a project funding project, now that we have a project funding agreement in place, that is the budget. We are always making sure that we get back to that. And anything that has a cost impact, we'll have to make sure that it can be accounted for in the design contingency, which is there for that, or make some other changes to account for it. So I just want to reiterate that that is always in our design process. If there are no other questions on the site, a brief recap of what we talked about inside the building. At the meeting on May 10, we focused on the cafeteria area. We met with the director of nutrition for the school, reviewed the kitchen, how it would work in terms of students coming to the cafeteria being dismissed to recess, picking up their food, returning their trays. There were no major changes. We will probably reconfigure the storage area. There is might not be enough room for collection of rubbish and potentially composting here. So these doors might move a little bit. And then we have future meetings scheduled or in the process of being scheduled with the other components of the use of the cafeteria and the platform and the practice areas that are currently connecting to the cafeteria just to make sure that all of that is working harmoniously. There was some discussion of perhaps changing the store a little bit so you can get directly into the practice space without going to the cafeteria, but they are minor changes. So we will have follow-up meetings with Food Service and our kitchen consultant, but we discussed how that will work, the fact that it is an all electric kitchen as efficient as possible, and meeting all of the goals of the building. And that meeting was a model for the major spaces. The next will be the library, but we do have to have the meetings with the school staff and administrators first to make sure that they are on board before we can bring it to the committee. We only had one building committee to date, so the update is brief, but that is what we talked about. If there are no questions on that, I will move on to sustainability, which was probably the most robust discussion that we've had in the past couple of weeks. We had our team from Thornton-Thomasetti for a lively discussion about a lot of it focused on the upcoming changes to the code and what that will mean for the building. And the two ways that the code evaluates energy use and conservation in the building. One measures TETI, which is thermal energy demand intensity. It is basically a measure of the envelope and how much energy it takes to heat or cool the spaces. It is a little bit technical. And it takes a lot of explaining to me and to everyone else. Luckily, we had Thornton-Thomasetti there who did a good job, I think. And then also the new code will also basically take an aggregate of the value of the envelope. We will call it a backstop calculation. So through those two measures, we have analyzed the building as it was published at SD. We are fairly confident that we are going to meet the TETI mark and then to meet the overall envelope performance. We may have to adjust the glazing properties, go from a double-pane window and curtain wall system to a triple-pane, or perhaps a double-pane with a mylar film in the middle, which we did provide a pricing alternate for at SD and perhaps added a little bit of insulation. The state will be publishing the final technical guidelines for how these calculations are done within weeks. And at that point, we will know with very high confidence what we have to do for the envelope. But it is possible and maybe likely that we will have to make a few changes. And that gets back to Kathy's point of when we are adding or adjusting things. We have to make sure that it all balances in the budget. But we are on track for our net zero goals. We are on track for an EUI of 25. The changes that we make to meet the TETI and code performance will probably push the EUI down, which is good because having a cushion always helps. And then we will schedule the next sustainability meeting when we have those results from Thornton Thomasetti to make sure that we are confirming everything that we discussed last month. Those are the headlines and the recap, any detail or questions we can get into. Tim, this is, I don't need an answer now, but I'm just curious, what do you think will be the timeline for procuring the solar panels? And is, I know ultimately it's a time decision, but is there a recommended sort of pathway for procuring those panels or can the time do what it wants to procure the panels? I'm just curious what your thoughts are on that. Rick, do you want to jump in on that? The question is, and we have time to discuss this, is if it's going to be part of the general bid, which has happened before and can be done, or if it's a separate contract to the town which would likely, which would have to happen in coordination with the construction work? Are there ways we could get pricing on both? The reason I ask is I've been looking into some different consortiums and there's various consortiums that do competitive solar panel purchasing programs, ones that we can own. And so I'm just curious, I know we're probably maybe a year before we have to start thinking about that or maybe not, I don't know, but I think about timing when we should start zeroing it on that and then I assume if it goes to the GC, there's going to be a GC markup on it, but maybe it's worth it for the coordination. Yeah, you hit the nail on the head. There are two things at play here. To install the panels on the roof, if basically the roof's got to be completed and under warranty before the panels go on and not, and inspected by the manufacturer, there are anchor systems that are recognized by I know SonaFIL has a system where it can be integrated or even come in after the fact under an owned system, but the basic roof work has to be done. So there's a coordination thing there, you want to get all the trade. There are a lot of trades on a roof before the project is done and so the solar people are really the ones that are up their last and closing the door behind them. The canopies, yeah, we've had projects where the canopies have gone in after the fact and very, very complicated sensitive porous pavement parking lots where we're not having, but it's possible to have somebody come in and do that after the fact, after the general contractor puts all the empty conduits in and everything, but from a coordination standpoint, either wait to the end or have the general contractor be responsible for coordinating it all and you not, and we'll be talking about that sooner rather than later because it'll show up. We'll have to figure out where to put it in the cost estimates. It's not a filed, it's not a filed sub bidding category, right? Or will it be? That's interesting. It can be added to the electrical. I guess my main thing is I just, if we do go through the GC, I want to make sure it's a competitive procurement because that's what we would do if we were doing it ourselves. Okay, so maybe this is just to start the conversation. It's something the sustainability working group can add to its list when you think it's appropriate. Okay. Thank you. So I see that Jonathan's hand is down. Kathy, you had a comment or question and then I have a comment. Kathy, go ahead. Thanks. Although Jonathan's hand was up, it went back down. Mostly Rick hit the things I was going to say around the file sub bid having the solar under the, since it's roof, a lot of it will be roof mounted under the coordination of the GC. To me, it sounds like it would be advantageous unless there's a real cost impact and advantage to the town another way. Yeah. I also just want to add that the parking lot coordination maybe just as complicated because it's staging error for the demolition of the building happens where, so I think we're saying the same thing. So my question goes with this set of if it were, sounds like it needs to be coordinated and integrated if we can get a separate cost on the actual purchase of them the way the federal credits work, these new credits. And this is not, I computed it two different ways and it's not a huge difference if you pay outright for them rather than fold them into a municipal bond and debt, you get a bigger credit. You know, it's a, so if it's an up to 30% credit and you get a 15% less of the credit. So it turns out to be like a 25% credit if you finance it with a municipal bond. So just, and as I said that once you're in long-term bonds, it's not a huge difference in the net in terms of it, in terms of it, but it's being able to identify the actual, what was the cost of the canopies and the roof installation as a separate item is something we will have to have so we can, as a town, apply for that credit. So as long as it's a clear line item. So I'll stop there. So I see Paul has his hand up. Just a note that Simone and Alicia are here. Okay, great. So let me just, if Simone and Alicia, if I call out your name, can you let me know whether you can hear and we can hear you? Simone? Yes. And Alicia? Yes. Thank you. Thanks for joining. This is Allison. I'm also here. Allison, hi. Thanks for joining. So the thing I wanted to add, going back to Sean to your question about timing. So I would say that sorting through the pros and cons of how a couple of these items, the solar panels, as well as the geothermal system, how they get procured, should ideally happen in design development. There's pros and cons, sort of like the geothermal has some of the same issues as the solar, like should it be part of the site work? Should it be part of the mechanical contractor's work? There's pros and cons. I won't get into them here, but it does make a difference to the way the specification is written and the way the drawings are put together. So by the time the Denisco team is starting construction documents, I think it would be fair to say, Tim and Rick, that you would like to see those decisions made, right? And that is going to be in the fall. Ideally, yes. Yes. Okay. So that gives you a sense of the timeframe, Sean. Thank you. Okay. So anything else on the meetings? Kathy, do we want to give an update on the site meetings? Yeah, I just wanted two things. The schedule that was sent to everyone for next week, there was a site design meeting set up for at nine in the morning. We're moving that to the following week, to the 31st. And what we are doing in the afternoon and anyone who wants to come to this can, we've agreed to meet with the leadership of the athletic groups that use the community fields. So a focus just on the fields. And so that will be at six o'clock on the 24th. So it's the leadership of the softball pickle, I had a pickleball conversation earlier today. But we don't have a pickleball court on these fields, but Frisbee and soccer. And then the group that also secured the applied for and there's CPA money for the fields. So that'll be 90 minute with Denisco showing the general layout and then getting, it's a listening session. So it's been asked for and Denisco agreed to do it. So people who, it's not a meeting of the site subcommittee, but anyone who wants to can go to that. And it will be just, we'll just be listening and taking notes. So I will attend that. So that's the major change from next week. So they're the only subcommittee meeting next week, Tim and, and Rick, I think is building, if I'm looking at the 24th. That is correct. And then there's such a couple we're scheduling some meetings with the school staff that we have to have before we can get back into the building. I just want to thank Allison and Tammy for making that happen. And as, as, as Margaret said at the beginning with Mike, not here for now, Allison and Tammy have, have agreed and step to step in and help coordinate the meeting with key staff on, as we go through these various issues on the details of design. So, and to find times during the teachers busy days and the staff's busy days that they can meet since we, we can't set up evening meetings with them. So I think that's the, that's the update on site. So next week is just building, but there is this community field meeting at six o'clock in the evening on the 24th, and then building design. And then the following week, there is a site subcommittee and a building design subcommittee meeting. And those are still set up for nine to 11 in the morning for site and 12 to two. But, but I think we, if people who particularly school staff, Ben Rupert, Allison, Tammy, if somehow those don't work for you, we can look, we can potentially look for other times because we want to make sure we get key staff in there from the schools as well as from the committee. And they're the, the subcommittee than the other comment I was going to make is to the extent there is broader interest among the 13 of us that in, in either of these subcommittees, if you let me know, we can call it a meeting of the committee of the whole. You know, if we get up, we can get up to seven as long as we've posted it, it's not just a subcommittee meeting, but it's a whole committee. So there's has been a lot of interest in this, particularly on the site. So rather than saying, you know, Ben and Rupert can't both be there or Tammy and Allison can't be there at the same time. These were not set up to try to be restrictive. So just people should let us know, let me know, and then I will post it to allow as many as seven or more of us be there. Otherwise, we can't, we won't be able to have that happen. Paul, I said that correctly, right? With it. So that I think those are the major changes from the schedule that we posted before. And so the building committee, subcommittee is next week. It is, it's still scheduled at the same time from 12 to two. So Kathy, can I just, just for my notes, a couple of clarifications. So right now I think everybody has an invite from Angela on the 24th at 9am. You should delete that invite. Okay. So that meeting is moved to the 31st. And then the other thing is, Kathy said there is also a building committee meeting on the 31st at noon. Well, my schedule had my schedule had May 31st had site at 9 to 11 and building from 12 to two on one. So I'm just confirming because Angela hasn't sent out an invite for that one. So I just want to confirm that if that's correct, we should ask her to settle it now. She hasn't, she hasn't even set them up yet, Margaret, to my knowledge. You know, we, we didn't, we didn't set up all three weeks worth, but. Okay. All the rest, all the rest of them are in here, but that one is not. So, okay. So, and then the next full committee meeting of this group is June 16th. That's correct. I'm just double checking dates to make sure. Yeah, June 16th. Okay. So that's, you know, and I see Rupert has his hand up. I am not sure that Angela sent out a subcommittee invites for each of them. I think she posted them, but we'll make sure that happens. So people both put it on their calendar, but they have an invite. So I see Rupert has. Yeah, she has sent out, except for that last one, she has sent out invites for all of them. Rupert. Looks like I have in my calendar, two site subcommittee meeting invites on the 24th. You do Rupert because we're going to, we're going to have the staff one. One of them is the staff one. Exactly. So what you want to do is for the 24th, if you need to clean up your calendar, delete the one that says ESBC site subcommittee. That's the one that was, that was going to be the public meeting. That's not happening. Okay. So in, and as you know, I set these up, you gave me the power to do it by saying go ahead and just assign us. And what I tried to do is distribute it among people, but many people on PB is not here right now, but PB said, PB said, I'd love to be on both building and site and Rupert and Ben said they alternately would want to be on sometimes be on both building and site, but sometimes only one. So there's not any easy way for me to do that on subcommittees, but, but just let me know. And we can, we can be flexible to make sure people who need to or want to come to a specific discussion. And those discussions are still listed on what the plan is to what, what we'll be focused on in each of those meetings. Are there any questions about all of this? I'm slowly but surely getting over my jet lag. So I am wide awake and I can take notes too. You mean you're wide awake at the correct times? That's, that's, well, it's not quite correct, but it's not as bad as it was the first couple days. So I'm not seeing any other comments or hands raised. And Allison, just thank you so much for being willing to help out on this. And yeah, it's, it's definitely appreciated as well as needed. So I think the other issue before opening it to public comments is the invoice. Margaret. Yeah. So there's just one invoice. And as I said at the beginning, we're coming to the end of all the billing for this phase. This is the last invoice you're going to see for feasibilities, our invoice. It's for a small amount of money. So it's easier to scroll through than others. So everybody can see it. You can see here the total. This is for the period ending April 30th. You know, as you know, the vote was my second. So essentially moving into the next phase, the total for our invoice for this period was 3,910. I do want to bring to everybody's attention. So we were able to complete the work for less than our original contract, unlike Dinesco's contract, which is a so-called lump sum contract, ours is not to exceed. So there is a little less than $25,000. So it's sort of going back into Sean's pot. It was part of the appropriation for this phase. So let me just scroll through. And to clarify, not Sean's pot, but the town's pot. Sean doesn't have a pot. As it relates to the town's finances. Sean's flush phone. So it's basically you'll see, and I believe I've introduced Cassania at previous meetings. So Cassania is transitioning into this phase. We also had reporting for the end of the phase to complete. And, you know, odds and ends there was work on the website, which, you know, is going to continue to be have a role in sort of rolling stuff out for the community to sharing community information. Cassania is going to be helping with that as well as general leadership on the project. So that is it for the one invoice. Building quickly off what Margaret said. So this is the final invoice for answer. We've paid all the invoices for Dinesco for their base fee. And the only thing left for feasibility is some reimbursables that we're working with Dinesco just to close out services provided during feasibility. And then we'll be done with that phase of the project. So I will make a motion to approve the invoice as presented. Second. Paul seconded and I will do a roll call vote. Rupert actually Rupert had your hand up your hand up before I go. I was just going to ask because I know there was a MSBA said the town is entirely on its own for a certain part of the development because it's our second try at this project. Have we gone past that zone and now we're in. So this this phase that we're about to complete is the end of that and starting anything after May 2nd really that comes in we'll start getting reimbursed for. Thank you. Yeah. Thanks. Sorry Rupert. I moved too fast to any other questions on this. So then I'll do a roll call vote. Jonathan. Yes. Ben. Yes. Rupert. I guess I should think about this before I say yes. Paul. Yes. Sean. Yes. Allison. Yes. Angelica. Yes. Alicia. Yes. Simone. Yes. And Kathy. Yes. So it's unanimous with two absent. I think two absent. Tammy and Phoebe. So thank you all. So in the in this complicated quickly what schedules change we'll as once this meeting is over I'll just confirm with Denisco and send out a clean for May 24th and for May 31st and then we'll put holds on people's calendars depending on whether you're in these subcommittees or not. So just try to keep the complexity as simple as possible. So any other questions or comments then I am going to open it to public comment. We're open now for public comment. Okay. I see one. Okay. Bruce I have allowed you to talk. Can you hear me? Yes. Well I guess I should begin by thanking Sean for his providing me with my morning giggle about how he doesn't really have a part. So I guess that means he's limiting limiting his beer intake as well. However, a couple of questions first on the building committee on the sustainability committee on the question of triple glazing. Tim I want I appreciate you don't answer this now but it occurred to me that is there the option of having not all triple glazing but some triple glazing because as we look around the building there are certain windows windows do different things. There are some larger windows in places like the cafeteria where people are sitting close to the window glazing and there are some large windows or windows where people aren't like in the gym and in the stairwell and there are small windows and big windows and triple glazing in small windows per square foot of glazing is more expensive than triple glazing in large windows. So it seems to me that there might be a cost saving involved and also one that gets us to teddy that would involve selectively making some windows triple glazing and some others. I mean I can see that there might be all sorts of reasons why that doesn't make sense but I would ask that we think at least of that before we go all or none. Second question related to the building design. I did attend three months ago now just as we were in the midst of the cost estimating a day lighting seminar for schools that was provided by Margo Jones and Lisha Hirshon who's really very skilled and internationally famous when it comes to day lighting in schools in particular and a fellow from Lamb Partners. It was a very interesting coverage of the essentially of the gardener school which is a school quite close to us which is just recently opened and I don't want to get into the day lighting part because I promised I wouldn't do that anymore after the last subsustainability meeting but one thing that was very interesting in that was that the that school they made a very conscious decision to lower the sill heights the window sill heights in the kindergarten even below the the other small kid classrooms to give the kids the toddlers really a direct view out. They had some good reasons and some very positive feedback from having done that so I would ask that we also consider understanding the window height that that school and that project used and seeing whether we might not derive a similar benefit for the very very young kids. I think that's it for me from now. Thank you and congratulations everybody for being back and in this next big phase of this project. Thank you Bruce. Okay Maria. Hi there thank you. Hartfeld thanks to Denisco and Cathy for setting up the meeting for next week. We really genuinely appreciate the opportunity to speak with you about the fields. A couple of quick small things. I know that the basketball courts are now adjacent to each other but with that very acute angle between them. I'm wondering if you could consider keeping them adjacent but making that making them parallel I think partly for safety in that corner and also having being able to have just benches kind of go the entire length you know or kids or adults standing the entire length. It's it I think that might be a better solution than that very acute angle in there. If it is at all possible could and you might have already have this developed but it's it would be really helpful to have an be able to overlay the current site with the building and the paving with your proposed just because when it's really helpful to walk the site and to get a sense of proportion and and that kind of thing to be able to overlay those two things and see what how will this look different in real life and also some dimensions and the wetland delineations that would be extraordinarily helpful if you could do that and appreciate all the work that's being done on sustainability and yes it looks like there's going to be some additional costs there but I think spending our money on sustainability accessibility and safety I think is all money well spent in the long term so I appreciate the work of the the net zero slash sustainability committee to to make this building as good as it can be for a long time. Thank you. Thank you Maria. So I think that is it for public comments. Kathy can I ask Marga a question real quick? Sure. Marga I think we did have one more invoice from Denisco but you may not have had time to review it and look at Tim if he can confirm but I do have another invoice that's just reimbursables for April through April 30. Is that from yesterday? I thought it came a little while ago but once you pull it up I went back and looked for invoices and last one I had was from from Denisco was from February but I could have missed one. Yeah I will share it and then Tim I don't know if you if you know if this invoice completes the billing for Denisco for feasibility or if there may be additional but again this is the invoice there's no base fees that's been fully billed. So yeah there's some reason geothermal. Yeah I so I will say I checked in with Donny yesterday and she said there is going to be a little bit more billing on this but I would definitely that is correct. There's one more reimbursable. Yeah okay but this bills the majority of what hadn't been billed which was the geothermal. Okay that makes sense because there was a lot that was still remaining on that line item. So this is the invoice specifically for the wetlands. Got it. This is the invoice from the vendor itself. That's all the concom stuff yeah for the meeting. And then this is the invoice for the geothermal component and the invoice itself. So unless anybody has any objections I'd move that we approve this invoice as well. Change seconds so I need to go through and take a vote and Sean will make sure that we don't pay it twice if we breathe. No this is this is um I have folders for when new invoices come in we have it approved this one. Right okay we definitely yeah I definitely don't have that one so our system won't let us pay the same invoice twice. That's great. So Jonathan. The good sister. Paul. Yes. John. Yes. Ben. Yes. Rupert. Yes. Allison. Yes. Elisha. Yes. Simone. Yes. And Cathy is a yes. So we are it's the same total yeses with two not present Margaret for that. Thank you all and thank everyone I thank everyone for the active participation on these subcommittees and what I this is kind of a pun but the attention to detail which is where we are right now. And so we're we'll be meeting together as a full group on June 16th and then we will send out the revised on the site site and building subcommittees we don't have a sustainability one scheduled again we will schedule it most likely in July based on when the state's new regs will come out and so we'll we'll send I'll send those out again and if people as I said if people want to come to one of these subcommittees where they are not on it just let me know and I can post it differently I can change the way we post it so we can we won't have the cap of seven people can't show up. I think that's Cathy can I just add I mean I I hope this feels you know we're sort of trialing this out you know having the subcommittee and then bringing the summary of the committee but this feels like it's been pretty productive in terms of use of people's time. Do people generally feel that way? Yes Jonathan's giving us a yes. No I think so and you know when I came back I was able to watch the tape and then look at the minute so I didn't feel like I had missed the discussion but it saved me time on having not to have to be be there so so all of these these meetings are all being recorded if someone wants to go back and see what the discussion is as well. So I think with that comment and please do email me I respond or text me if you have questions or any concerns about any of this as we try to move through this phase. Seeing no hands up I think we are adjourned at 9 20. Have a good weekend everyone. Have a good weekend.