 You ready, Anna? Yep. All right. So I'll call the order, the meaning of the airport commission for seven PM. The first item on the agenda is the acknowledgement of remote commissioners. So commissioners attending remotely. Can you please identify yourselves? Fran Oakley. When is he? Jeff Shulman. Great. Thank you. Next side of on the agenda is the. Is the agenda itself. Do I have a, do I hear a motion to adopt the agenda as presented? So moved by Greg. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Jeff. Any discussion or proposed changes to the agenda? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? We have an agenda. Item three is public form. For those attending remotely, please raise your hand in the zoom meeting so we know that you wish to speak during public form. As a reminder, we do have a three minute limitation on time to talk. And there is no dialogue or debate directly between members of the public and members of the commission or the airport staff. So when you are called on, please state your name and follow your place of residence in any affiliation you have with the airport. So right now I see one hand, which is James lease. Go ahead, James. Oh, okay. So I'd like to talk about conflict of interest at the last meeting, the airport director said that safety was something that, that the airport considers and takes as a high priority in everything it does. And I believe that this commission that every member of this commission has a conflict of interest. Otherwise, two very serious issues would be very seriously addressed. I don't think safety is at all. On anyone's mind, or at least it's below something else, which means you have a conflict of interest. If you think the airport is a driver of economic activity in Chinden County, and that counts for more than safety, you have a conflict of interest. You should either recuse yourself or resign from this commission. This commission has a responsibility to put safety at the top of everything that happens in an airport. Why is that? Because airports can do very dangerous things and have very serious accidents. It is, this airport is having serious safety issues by assaulting 1,300 children every day who live in the designated noise zone. You're hurting them physically, mentally, you're ruining, you're causing vast neurological and hearing problems for them. And you have authority to fix that. There's also a climate emergency. You could be doing something about that. And I don't know what you're doing. The airport, the Burlington city council 12 to zero passed a resolution. It's important because this is a safety issue, not just for the people around the airport, but for everyone around the state to reduce those emissions. If you think something's more important than doing that, you have a conflict of interest and you should get off the airport commission. Okay. So let's, let's talk about two. The grant assurance that the airport signed with the FAA, it requires a single standard for all airport users, but we have two standards for noise. All the aircraft using the airport, except for one must conform to the FAA standards for noise. But there is one that does not have to apply to conform to that standard, but the air, but the airport has an agreement with the FAA. That it's going to have a single standard for all airport users. That's right. That's written in the grant assurances. So how do we have two standards? One for all the users, except for one. And that one has no standard at all to make any amount of noise. It wants to make without any limit. And it's hurting all of these children every day. So if you don't think that's important, you have a conflict of interest and you shouldn't be on the airport commission because your job is primarily safety. So what could the airport do on that case? It could establish the FAA standard as the standard for all aircraft using this airport. That's what it's required to do under its FAA grant assurance, establish a single standard for all aircraft. Why don't you do that? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, hasn't anyone on the airport. The airport commission brought that forward. Let's have a single standard. It's the FAA standard. Same thing for fuel efficiency. We have a climate emergency 12 to zero. The city council voted. Let's do something serious about climate. It's hurting people, not just in far away places, but right here in Vermont. We just had a huge flood. Fire is burning. So we can't breathe safe air. Look, you can do something about that by establishing a sing by establishing a fuel efficiency standard for all aircraft using this airport. If you set something like 50 passenger miles per gallon, you would make a huge dent in the aircraft emissions at this airport and fix both problems. So you have the power. You have the power to establish safety standards. Please use that. Or if you don't think that's important and you think something else is more important, ask yourself, do you have a conflict of interest? And if you do, you shouldn't be on the airport. Airport commission. Thank you, James. Safety is more important. Thank you. All right. Are there any other members of the public who wish to speak? All right. We'll move on to item four. We'll move on to item four, which is the consent agenda. Do I hear a motion to approve the contents of the consent agenda as presented? So that's been moved by Greg. Is there a second? Second. That's been seconded by Jeff. Nick, any discussion on the contents? This is our fiscal year and report. Essentially. I want to do a little bit of auditing with the team to make sure these are our final numbers for the fiscal year. We did project that we would come in just shy of 630,000 outbound passengers this year. Of course, higher than last year, not as high as 2019. You can see our final number. Preliminary number there is just over 630,000 passengers. 634. Almost five. So that's, that's great news. And again, well, there's a couple of things I see that I want to clean up a little bit more in this, this particular report. But great news for an end of fiscal year. All right. Commissioner, is any further discussion on the consent agenda? Are you hearing down all those in favor of adopting the consent agenda as presented? You signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Carries. I move on to item five, which is federal obligation for aeronautical access. So Nick, do you want to make introductions here? Yeah, that'd be great. So after. Some conversation at the commission and other committees around the city as well as some public comment. We brought in our legal counsel on some of the. Restrictions and authorities. Regarding aeronautical activities. So I'd like to introduce Nick Klavers. He's with Kaplan, Perch and Rockwell. He's been with the city and the airport for some time now. And again, I'll just leave it right over to Nick to present exactly what this title is, which is the city's authority to restrict aeronautical activities. He does have a presentation that is posted online. And of course, we'll go through it today here. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Can everybody see the slideshow? I know that it was circulated in your packet as well, but I figured I would throw it up on the screen for, for those of you that may not have seen it. So as Nick said, my name is Nick Klavers. I'm a senior associate with Kaplan, Perch and Rockwell. We are a national law firm with a focus on represent, representation of airports. That's really a core of what our practice is and what we do on a day-to-day basis. We don't represent aircraft owners or airlines or pilots or aeronautical service providers. We are almost exclusively. Representing airport sponsors like the city. We have counseled a number of clients on potential aeronautical access restrictions. And I will talk a little bit about what that, what that means in this context and what the city's authority to implement aeronautical access restrictions at the airport is. So the, the questions that were posed to us and the reason that I'm here today is to talk about the city's legal authority to take one or more of several different actions. And those are prohibit or restrict aircraft operations at the airport. You know, there's been discussions of varying, types of aircraft operations that may be restricted or, or questions raised about that. What does the city's authority to require that only aircraft meeting a certain fuel efficiency standard can operate at the airport? Does the city have any authority to limit military operations at the airport? And does the city have any authority to limit military operations at the airport? And does the city have any authority to prohibit or limit the sale or use of leaded aviation fuel at the airport? The short answer is that the city has essentially no authority to adopt or enforce any restrictions of that nature. And the likely outcome, if the city did adopt or try to enforce those types of aircraft operations, if the city did adopt or try to enforce those types of restrictions would be FAA enforcement proceedings, informal or formal complaints from airport users or industry groups, you know, complaining about those, those actions of the city. And to the extent that the city was, you know, unsuccessful in defending against those complaints or refuse to back away from enforcement or, you know, adoption of those restrictions, it could result in the loss of eligibility for federal grant funds if that's not corrected. And I'm sure that Nick will tell you that federal grant funds are really a lifeblood of the airport. So I just want to briefly review the sources of the city's legal restrictions here and the really the four primary underpinnings of the restrictions on why the city cannot adopt the type of restrictions that we're discussing. The first of those is the grant assurances. The second is sort of a thematic federal preemption. And then there are two specific federal statutes, the airline deregulation act and the airport noise and capacity act. And I'll talk about each one of these four issues here in a minute. The first and probably the most familiar to all of you are the federal grant assurances. So the federal grant assurances are a series of 39 contractual obligations that are established by federal statute. And the city agrees to those 39 grant assurances as a condition of receiving federal grant funds from the FAA. And if you have not read those grant assurances, I always encourage folks to go read them. They're quite in depth. There's not too many pages to them, but there's a lot of good information in there. And as applicable here, the city has an obligation to make the airport available as an airport for public use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds and classes of aeronautical activities. That's the broad obligation to essentially operate the airport for the benefit of the public. The city also needs to avoid granting an exclusive right to use the airport. And also must permit government aircraft to utilize all facilities at the airport in common with other users. So there is a narrow exception to that statement about reasonable use and not unjustly discriminatory. The city does have the authority to impose restrictions on aeronautical activities. And those restrictions may be reasonable and not unjustly discriminatory in very narrow circumstances. If they are justified for aeronautical safety reasons, and they are approved by the FAA. When I say aeronautical safety reasons, what I mean by that is concerns with airspace. So we often see aeronautical access restrictions imposed on aeronautical activities that are inherently more dangerous, things like skydiving or ultralights or aircraft that cannot coexist in the airspace at a particular airport with other types of aeronautical activities. The other caveat to that is that the airport sponsor, the proprietor here in the city does not have the authority to make a judgment about what constitutes aeronautical safety. Only the FAA can make that judgment, and the FAA fiercely defends its authority in that arena. So in instances where airports have attempted to adopt safety-based restrictions, the FAA almost universally has stepped in to say, you airport cannot make this judgment without boatloads of data supporting your aeronautical access restriction, and only then after we the FAA have reviewed that data will we bless this and allow it to be enforced. As a general matter, restrictions on certain types of aircraft are rarely acceptable, and it's really only if that particular type of aircraft cannot be safely accommodated. And again, that's a consideration of the airspace at the airport and other constraints of that nature as judged by the FAA. So restrictions on aeronautical activities for reasons other than aeronautical safety would violate that prohibition on unjust discrimination. So that's any prohibition based on the amount of noise that an aircraft would emit, or emissions, or size of the aircraft to the extent that that's not based on a safety-based analysis. So I want to move to federal preemption just generally. So there are a number of federal statutes that grant the FAA exclusive jurisdiction over most aspects of aviation, most notably aircraft in flight, airspace, aircraft fuel efficiency, and aircraft fuel standards are all within the FAA's exclusive jurisdiction. And the concept of federal preemption for folks who are not attorneys is that when Congress has delegated authority to the federal government in a particular arena, states and local governments cannot regulate in that area. The state and local regulations in those instances would be preempted and essentially invalidated. So local attempts to indirectly regulate in areas where the FAA has exclusive jurisdiction may infringe on that jurisdiction and therefore would be invalidated. And the FAA is pretty fierce in defending its authority in these cases. The most recent example in sort of the context that we're discussing here is Santa Clara County in California recently took some action to limit the sale of leaded aviation gasoline at its county owned and operated airports. And immediately after they adopted the ordinance in question, the FAA initiated an investigation alleging violations of the grant assurances and the Clean Air Act and a number of other federal statutes. And that case is pending currently and Santa Clara County is also facing a separate complaint from an industry group over essentially the same claims. But it's really the most recent example of FAA taking that preemption analysis very seriously. So moving to some specific federal statutes that may have implications here. The first is the airline deregulation act. And that statute has language that expressly preempts any local law or regulation that relates to the prices, routes or services of an air carrier with some very limited exceptions that do not apply here. So a regulation that for example, limited the ability of aircraft not meeting a certain fuel efficiency to utilize the airport could in some circumstances affect prices, routes or services of an air carrier. That's up for debate. And there's a lot of case law out there about interpreting the airline deregulation act. But for the city's purposes, it is important to note that airlines are extremely litigious around airline deregulation act issues. And anytime there is a local law or regulation that arguably impacts an airlines prices, routes or services, there's a very good chance that the airlines will bring litigation seeking to invalidate that regulation under the airline deregulation act. The common examples are things like labor provisions, minimum wage, benefits, decisions. All of those have been challenged with varying results, but there's a considerable chance that if the city were to adopt some type of aeronautical access restriction that may have an effect on airline aircraft that the airlines would challenge that under the ADA. The second specific federal statute is the airport noise and capacity act. And this is a procedural statute that sets out a series of hoops and requirements for adoption of any airport access restriction. Essentially FAA review and approval with rigorous evidentiary showing required for that FAA approval. This is another layer beyond the grant assurance safety based requirement. If an airport wants to adopt any aeronautical access restriction they not only have to meet the sort of more general safety based requirements under the grant assurances, they have to follow all the procedural requirements that set forth under ANCA and it's implementing regulations as well as meet those substantive requirements. Since 1990, which is when ANCA was adopted, no airport has successfully adopted restrictions on any modern aircraft. And there has only been one airport that has adopted any sort of restriction and that was on a lower series of aircraft that have essentially been phased out of today's fleet. So that's not really the greatest example at this point. So what are the likely consequences if the city were to adopt or enforce some type of restriction in the face of all these restrictions? The FAA has a vigorous enforcement policy and investigation arm where they will take action to investigate a sponsor's noncompliance with the grant assurances. If the city is found in noncompliance with those grant assurances the FAA can strip eligibility for federal grants and in certain circumstances can impose civil penalties for noncompliance. The FAA can also simply withhold federal grant funds without a finding of noncompliance. Most frequently what we see is during the pendency of some type of administrative enforcement action the FAA will slow walk grants and take time to issue those grants even if there hasn't been a formal finding with noncompliance. On the other side of things and as I alluded to in the Santa Clara case the city could face complaints from airport users, airlines and industry groups. The federal regulations that govern this area allow essentially anyone to file a complaint if they believe that they have been affected by an airport access restriction and the FAA is required to adjudicate those complaints as if the agency itself had brought them. So even if the FAA for whatever reason declined to open its own investigation it's very likely that there would be organizations like the National Business Aviation Administration or the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association that would take up the cause and more than likely file a complaint under one or more of the federal authorities that I just outlined. So that was a very quick overview of some of the restrictions that are applicable in this instance and I'm happy to take questions on any of that. I understand that that was very high level and was intentionally a little bit light on the details just in light of time constraints but I'm happy to discuss if anyone has questions. Thank you Nick. Before I turn it over to commissioners I view this as a great opportunity so please ask as many questions as you can as you have for Nick today but Nick at the table here do you have anything you want to add before we open up the floor to commissioners? No, I don't. We rely heavily on legal counsel and Nick in the firm that he represents has helped us tremendously in some recent cases so nothing for me to add because we have great legal counsel. Great. Okay. Commissioners any thoughts or questions you want to share with Nick? Great. Thanks Nick for that presentation. I have a couple of questions that can probably be answered pretty quickly. First of all I'm wondering what was the year for the federal statues for the grant assurances? When was that created? Because that seems to have a lot of sway and I'm wondering if that was something that was created in 1970 or maybe even 1950? So the federal grant assurances have evolved over many years. The initial sort of genesis of the federal grant assurances actually was part of the surplus property act of 1948 I think. You're testing my memory there but it was found as part of the transfer of quite a bit of real property after World War II and many of the grant assurances were actually deed restrictions first. And so I don't know off the top of my head whether Burlington has deed restrictions similar to those found in the grant assurances but that was really where those first began. I don't know where or what year the first grant assurances were part of federal statute but I would imagine it was not too long after that 1948 surplus property act. They've been around in some iteration for at least 50 years. I can say that with some confidence. The second question has to do with federal preemption and many of your slides talked about and used the words prohibit, require, restrict. I didn't see anything that might prevent some sort of tax use based upon per passenger efficiency standards. Do you have any information that airports that have tried to provide reasonable incentives for people who are just flying around privately with one or two people on their jet and I'm just using that as an example not that that is the situation in all cases because that's not a restriction. That's not a prohibition. That's just a reasonable tax. Certainly environmental economists talk about externalities. Those costs that are outside of the marketplace and if people are flying around on small jets then they're not really aware of the true cost of their activity. I'm just wondering is there any information that you are aware of that allows airports to invoke those tax incentives? I'll answer that in three parts. The first thing I will say is that I am not aware of any other airports like that to impose a tax or an increased fee or some additional charge on aircraft that are carrying a certain number of people and I think Nick probably knows this better than I do but I think in a lot of airports that would be quite difficult to enforce just from a staffing and operations perspective. In terms of the legal ability to do that I think there would be two pretty significant impediments there. One of the backbones of the preemption analysis is the commerce clause under the United States Constitution and what the FAA's burden in those instances whether a local restriction imposes what's called an undue burden on interstate commerce. That's an extremely fact specific analysis and I don't want to say one way or the other that a tax or an additional cost on private jets would in fact be an undue burden on interstate commerce but I think that that would be an angle that the FAA or some type of other plaintiff would probably analyze that issue perhaps in front of a federal court. The third thing is that the grant assurances permit the sponsor to make distinctions between types of aeronautical operations and the charging of additional fees may be permissible in certain circumstances but I think what the FAA would ask is that fee reasonably tied to the cost of the airport or cost to the airport of providing services to that aircraft. For example, the airport has a weight based landing fee because heavier aircrafts cause more wear and tear on the runway so it makes sense for those folks to pay more in landing fees. I'm not sure that there is a way for the airport to justify outside of the environmental impacts of course from an aeronautical standpoint to justify charging a higher fee for private jets. Thank you. Alright, Bryn, do you have questions? So following up on that question so it sounds like charging extra fees may not be feasible. What about offering incentives? Again, I don't know of any airport that has done that and off the top of my head I don't know what type of it would probably depend on the way that the incentive was written. So as long as the aeronautical user could access the airport on the same terms and conditions and there was no additional cost for that. I off the top of my head I don't see an impediment to an incentive program depending on how it would be structured. Okay. Follow up question as it relates to the existing federal laws is there anything regarding environmental justice in the airport context? I am not aware of anything. The possible area where environmental justice I suppose could come into play would be in some sort of NEPA analysis, National Environmental Policy Act and generally that is only triggered in the airport context when the FAA is making some sort of federal decision and I don't know if the FAA grant is not a federal decision under NEPA. There are certain projects where the FAA has to give approval and things like that but I don't know that environmental justice as we are sort of discussing it today I am not sure how that would come into play and I don't believe it would supersede any of these things. Thank you for the presentation. I am not sure whether this question is directed to which of the NICS. Has this presentation been given to the city council and the policy makers? Or is this just for because I know what has happened and you heard it in public comment that every so often a new idea is put forth and the community rallies behind the idea and I don't know if it is going to work or not. I appreciate this knowledge. I am curious whether this advice and opinion has been shared with the city council as opposed to just the airport commission. Great question. No one has not yet. However we are on the agenda for future meetings with this exact presentation. Thank you. Great. What is going to be my recommendation but you are a step ahead. This is for NIC the lawyer and not the director. As to the grant assurances are they included as part of every grant that the airport has received? If I want to make sure I accurately understood. In the event of arguably a breach of the grant assurances is the remedy but does the FAA have the authority to claw back grant funds that have been awarded subject to the grant assurance language or what is the remedy? I will take that in two parts. The grant assurances are part of every federal grant that the airport receives from the FAA to the extent that there are other agencies there may be other grant assurances. Many of those grant assurances are perpetual meaning when the airport took the first grant 40, 50 years ago it has continued as long as the airport operates as an airport. Others have a 20 year lifespan so each time the airport signs a new grant they just re-up for another 20 years. With respect to the FAA's enforcement authority and mechanism the FAA has some pretty broad discretion there. It is relatively rare for them to seek a clawback of federal grant funds and usually that is reserved for instances where the sponsor has committed some type of financial issues in propriety with the funds and that is not what we are talking about here. More commonly the consequence is that the FAA will effectively put a pause on any future grant applications they simply won't deny them but they won't approve them either. If there is an adverse finding after the compliance process has run its course then the FAA can take formal action to strip eligibility from the sponsor. Thank you. I just have a couple questions. You mentioned a number of situations that are currently in the courts between municipalities or airports and the FAA has anything been settled in this respect? I think you are well aware of the issues that have been raised commissioners have, airport has, public has. You have seen today, you have seen some of the other public forum comments from the past. Seeing that body of work has there anything that has been settled in the courts? I would suggest that there is a path towards arguing that either climate or sound is an issue that can sort of is aeronautically dangerous or is that specifically a physical issue? I am curious on the other side on what has been settled. Have we seen anything that shows that is a possibility? I want to be careful about the there is a broad body of case law out there about noise. Noise is a contentious issue with the FAA, with airports, basically everyone having anything to do with airports for the last 40, 50 years or longer. I am not the noise expert and it is a very nuanced issue in a lot of different ways. I am not aware of anything to suggest that noise is a factor in the FAA's decision-making as to whether or not a restriction qualifies for that exception under the grant assurances. There are instances where the FAA has reviewed noise restrictions. Generally that is done in the context of a separate issue. It is not about restricting things for aeronautical safety. It is restricting them for noise mitigation purposes. They are taken in separate buckets so to speak. In terms of the climate side of things, that is a relatively new issue. I don't believe that the FAA is looking at environmental impacts as equivalent to aeronautical safety in that context. The closest thing is probably that Santa Clara County case that I mentioned. In that situation after the county adopted the restrictions and the FAA initiated an investigation and after some back-and-forth letters between the parties the FAA and the county signed a memorandum of understanding where the FAA essentially put its investigation on fold and said we are going to study this issue we are not going to pursue you but that MOU has an expiration date. It is not an indefinite hold and I believe there is some agreement there whereby the county is acting as essentially a test site for the FAA to implement some of these potential moves towards unleaded aviation gasoline. That is something the FAA has been working on for many years. Congress has mandated that the FAA implement a national standard for unleaded aviation fuel. It is taking FAA quite a bit of time and there are a lot of airports and municipalities that would like to see it move faster. The caveat to that Santa Clara County and the FAA have come to an understanding whereby the FAA is not pursuing its own case but there is an active complaint before the FAA from a trade organization that is alleging all kinds of violations and that is in the middle of litigation at this point. I don't know how that is going to play out but I can't put the caveat on that at least publicly because it is a complaint that they are required to deal with under their government statute and regulations. And then circling back I think it is pretty clear to me on the climate side that it is not something the FAA actively considers. There is nothing they are considering in the Santa Clara situation but nothing has been determined yet. On the noise side in terms of mitigation I think most of the concerns in our community surrounding noise are from military operations and so have you seen anything in what you have been working on to challenge the military on the noise output from its operations? I have not seen that, no. As a general matter it is very difficult to challenge not just the military but any noise issues from an airport. There have been successful cases where there are things like there are all manner of state law claims that folks have brought against airports for noise reduction requests for mitigation for some types of restrictions and by and large they are unsuccessful. When you say by and large are there any narrow exceptions that you are aware of or has it been consistent? Some of the narrow instances where folks have been successful and I want to again be careful here because this tends to be very fact specific and state law specific where some plaintiffs have been successful in reducing noise but in securing damages for noise from airports. There are a lot of old cases where plaintiffs sued for noise from military operations in some instances but also civilian aircraft and it was determined by a court that with similar fact patterns where the court determined that it was not taking and again because those are so varied both in facts and in state law I hesitate to give a broad conclusion on that but there is a body of case law out there on noise taking. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner, is there any other final comments or questions? Thank you very much. I apologize, I have one more question. Is there any instance where in the absence of an entity having standing another party and what cause of action? So it could be a tort I mean something along those lines or environmentally related I know that there are at least a handful of environmental laws where if the entity having the likely entity to have standing doesn't opt not to act but it can file a lawsuit? I think that would depend on the particular cause of action at the the FAA regulations for example if someone were to attempt to file a complaint under what's called 14 CFR part 16 is the formal set of violations that permit complaints for alleged violations of the grant assurances that has a little bit of a higher standing threshold because that person has to be directly and substantially affected by whatever restriction. Somebody that doesn't use the airport for any reason can't go in and file one of those complaints. It depends on what the cause of action would be there and whether that person I suppose has suffered some type of alleged damage or something like that. Okay, thank you. One last. All right, I think we're good. Thank you so much Nick for your time. We appreciate it. Thank you all. Thank you, Nick. Right. So we will now move on to item six in the agenda, which is the next project presentation. Do you want to kick this one out? Excellent. So this is extremely excited and I'm very happy to introduce our next project presentation. We're very happy to introduce our partners with the Jacobs team. Obviously we've talked quite a lot about our terminal phase and plans and our terminal projects. And we are now currently actively live with our bid for this particular building for only 30% design. So there's quite a bit of work that we need to do. And I think that the presentation will give you the idea to feel the new experience that we're looking for, for our passengers, for our airline partners, and of course, for the physical infrastructure needed to support both of those, both of those groups. With us here today, we have three people. We have David Docker, Craig Randall and Stu Monkrieff of Jacobs Engineering. We've been working with all three of them and the Jacobs teams for many years now. They also designed our terminal integration project in El Pas with that particular project. So what they have for you today is a walk-through, a presentation, a journey with Mr. Rangel to walk us through what you will see and what hopefully shovels will be in the ground next year. We're going to talk about the look, the appeal and if we can answer any questions about the timing schedule and some of the preliminary costs that we're looking at. Craig, Stu, David, it's all you. Okay, thank you, Nick. And I'll just kind of kick it off here on behalf of Jacobs. I want to just thank the airport commission for the opportunity to be here today and to present what we have so far to you all. Again, I'm Stu Monkrieff. I'm a project manager here at Jacobs. Also the New England Aviation Services group leader. And I was also the project manager for the terminal integration project, which was obviously as you know, was recently opened last fall. So during that project, I was asked by Nick and Larry to assist them with some support materials for some of their pursuit of funding for follow-on improvements to the terminal. And as part of that effort and to satisfy the airport's request to Jacobs for that, I was teamed up with our aviation design studio out in Denver. And that's where I first met Craig. And Craig is responsible for all of the various renderings that you've seen for the airport that are on kind of boards and easels throughout different parts of the terminal currently. And Craig is still involved. He was involved with all the vision of this North terminal improvements project. And he's sort of the vision behind what we currently have as our design at 30% currently. So Craig is one of our design principles and also on the call here today. David Ducker, he will be the architect of record. And so those are the two that mostly have been meeting with Nick and Larry, but we do also have about 15 other people on the team that are working on plumbing, electrical, mechanical communications, PA, structural, all various types of disciplines that are involved in the project currently. But I know that Craig has a nice slide deck put together and he's going to go through. And I guess without further ado, I don't think you want to hear from the project manager for too long. You want to hear about the building. And this is Craig's specialty. I'll let Craig take it away. Great, thanks to, can everybody hear me okay? Yes. Perfect. I just want to echo the thank you to everybody on the call for taking the time. So I'm going to try to be sensitive of time here, but I'm going to try to walk you through this project. And I would love to hear any questions or comments as we do so. So just to get us started, everybody's familiar with the airport, but I think it's good just to get our bearings, right? So from a plan perspective or an aerial perspective, we have north to our left parking garages at the bottom, entry drive to the right and existing building in the tip building at the center. But today we're here to talk about project next. Before we do so, I think it's important that we just sort of kind of set the stage. Everything that we do when we approach a project really focuses on the users and the functionality. So there's sort of two users in this case. There's the passengers. And then there's the airport right in all of its employees. And so we want to make sure that we're always balancing those two when we think about design, we think about projects. So let's just walk through the sort of the path of travel for a passenger. You drive in park. Just for a general generality, we'll park in the center of this parking garage. Then to get out of my car, I'm going to walk approximately 830 feet to get to the ticketing area. So this is going to include me walking over to the bridge that crosses over the entry drive down the bridge to the north into the building, entering into the building. And then down stairs or escalators to the ticketing lobby. I'm now down on first floor. I'm going to walk 380 feet approximately to get through TSA and up back to the second floor in the, in the newly renovated new tip to building. Once I'm up on the second floor, I'm going to turn around. I'm going to walk through the tip space. I'm going to walk through the existing building. And I'm going to get to the north end of the building. And I've walked another 695 feet or a total of 1905 feet give or take just to get to the beginning of this building. So hold onto that for a second. If we think about an airport and we, and we think about its functionality, we think about a couple of things. One, we think about hold rooms all along the perimeter. This would allow for maximum flexibility of aircraft and, and airfield ops, but also best practices for passengers and passenger way finding adjacent to that. We would have circulation again, allowing for optimal way finding for sight lines, for views for bringing in daylight. And then adjacent to that, we would have all the back of house spaces. So concessions, restrooms, airport ops, all of that adjacent to circulation for ease of use for all the daily users. And then in most airports cases, but I think most importantly here, this idea of taking advantage of the views. So most airports just have an apron, which is exciting enough with all the, you know, airplane activity and ramp activity. But Burlington has this added value of the, of the mountains beyond that, along with the F 35s that take off across, across the way. And then in addition, all the light that you can bring in. So these are things that we want to try to take advantage of. So why are we building on the North end? We have 60% give or take of the airport's passengers arriving or departing out of this, this end of the airport. So given that number, there's a few things that we need to focus on. We need to focus on improving some of the safety issues that are existing at the airport now. So there's a couple of safety concerns. One is this hallway going down to gates three through six. One, the size of it is, is a safety issue to the proximity of these aircraft park parking locations is, is overlapping with the taxiway. And that's creating another safety issue that needs to be help, needs to be dealt with. But then again, it's just increasing size of aircraft and the whole rooms that need to accommodate the amount of people that are coming off. So that's what we need to focus on. So that's what we need to focus on. So that's what we need to be dealt with right away. In addition, navigating to this space is something that is, is a, of one of the, is a major driver of this project. So unifying that experience from the tip to the North. To make this a more relaxing and enjoyable. Experiences as the passenger navigates through the space. So that's what we need to focus on. And one of the areas that project next is focusing on is renovating the existing building. And the improvement at the North. So that renovating of the existing building is, is really just removing all of the rooms that are along the perimeter edge of the building itself on the, on the East, on the East facade. That will allow natural daylight to come in. That will allow the passenger to self-orient. So that's what we need to focus on. So that's what we need to focus on as they move from the tip up to the North end. If we step in and we look at just a concept view of what that could look like. Once all those rooms are, are, are, are removed. And I'm assuming everybody here has walked that path many times. We find that passengers get disoriented in that corridor. They are often asking for directions. Are they going the right way? Once you take out all those rooms. I can get my bearings based on where I see the outside. Apron and activity is, and it's more enjoyable. It's less stress. The natural daylight is coming in. And I just feel more relaxed as a passenger. When it comes to the North improvement. Again, it's making and right sizing the gates that are in that hallway. And bringing them up to an iota optimum standard. So we're designing these whole rooms to not only accommodate current day aircraft, but, but the aircraft up tomorrow as well. So we're making sure that we have room for queuing, queuing that doesn't overlap circulation. We have circulation that accommodated in this. We have places for seating, standing, in plainments, deplanements, gate agents, things of that sort. In addition, this North improvement allows us to also think about the daily users from the employees standpoint in that we're, we're able to give the airport ops. A landside. Administration office, which will allow them to function more fluidly in their day to day. So again, if we step into that North improvement. just a glimpse of where that's at now at 30% design. There were a couple of drivers that I think it's important just for us to point out. One is the airport emphasized the importance of this being sustainable from the very beginning, a sustainability that was baked into the design. In addition, with the tip now just coming online, there was an aesthetic that had already been established that the airport wanted to pull into this project, which makes complete sense. So we see things like polished concrete, metal column covers, and then this idea of Vermont maple. The differentiator here is that the Vermont maple isn't inserted into the space. It's actually integrated into the roof structure that you see here. So we're actually designing and looking to implement a mass timber roof structure. So cross laminated timber at the deck and the beams and working through all of the efforts of making sure that we can get all the utilities off ceiling to clean that up so that it reads nice and clean. In addition to the wood structure, our mechanical engineers are designing what is currently 60 wells underneath this building that will house the geothermal, which will heat and cool the space. Another aspect of this is natural light, right? So the more light we can bring in from the outside, the less electricity we're using. So through the perimeter glass and Florida ceiling glazing, which does two things. One, it brings in that natural light and two, it allows for jet bridges to plug in in whatever location they need to along that curtain wall, which again speaks back to the flexibility importance of how an airport operates. Aircraft change, airline carriers change, and as they do, their parameters change. So that jet bridge needs to be able to flex up and down that facade, not always in great distances, but whatever distance we need to be able to accommodate that. In addition, we have the light well down the center that you see at the top left, which again brings natural daylight into the center of that space. Again, reducing the amount of electricity that we need to use. So if we look at the floor plan down on apron level, really this is intended day one to be an unfinished space. There are some rooms identified that are gonna accommodate mechanical utilities, as well as some maintenance and operation space, but in general, this is gonna be an unfinished space that will close in for the airport to use down the road. On concourse level, a big driver here was at that new existing line, was to open up that aperture or that connection as much as possible so that it feels like one space from the passenger or the user perspective. So that's something that we're targeting. In addition, we have right-sized restrooms that will minimize queuing and backups that we see at some of the existing restrooms, as well as the admin entry space, which on concourse level will give them a lobby, will give them some potential conference space that they can use there, but as well, they'll have vertical circulation that will take them up to the third level, which will give them really an appropriate land side office space that elevates them so that, I mean, as airport ops, they need to have site and kind of oversight on the airfield and everything that's going on. So this will elevate them up so they have that ability to oversee what's going on at the airport, again, as well as the fluidity of moving land side. Another aspect of this rooftop floor is the historic viewing tower that used to be available before the tip came online. They used to be available land side, right? So you didn't have to buy a ticket. People from the community could come in, they could take their kids up, they could watch the aircraft take off and land. That went away when the tip came online. That is no longer accessible on the land side. So one thing we wanted to do along with the space is give that back to the community. So we've offered up and we're designing in a airfield viewing room that will give that same amenity that the historic tower gave. You'll be able to come up to the space, be able to view the airfield, but in addition, you'll be able to come outside onto a rooftop deck and see that in the natural air. The remainder of the roof is intended to be maximized with photovoltaics as much as budget and footprint will allow. So if we step out of that space, this is what we were just looking at. There's that admin level, again, still being developed, but that outdoor space and kind of the views that that will allow. Now, if everybody will just humor me a little bit, I'm just going to take you on a quick walkthrough of the model itself. And then I'd love to answer any questions that come up as I'm talking through this. So if we come up through TSA and up the escalators and we're going to navigate to the north, we will move through the tip space, which again consists as everybody here knows, concrete floors, not as reflective as I'm showing here, but we're in a virtual land, so please forgive me. Metal column covers and then that Vermont maple at the ceiling. So a couple of things here that we're doing is we're working to relocate and open up the opening from the tip to the existing building. And then as you move into that existing space, again, everybody's I'm sure very familiar with the back of house corridor feel and kind of the disorienting sense that you get moving through that. Once we take out all of those rooms, that curtain wall is now open to the passenger and as well as the natural light and the views. So I'll just keep moving down this way. Clearly day one, we're not going to have seating all along here, but what we're trying to do is show how this could in the future be future mainline hold room space. We're designing it such that you would have at minimum a 10 foot wide circulation corridor and a 30 foot deep hold room, which is adequate to service mainline gates and 737s. So as we move into the gate seven, gate eight area, this is an area that the airport is currently starting to renovate a little bit as they're taking over that space where TSA used to be. And then as we come into where skinny pancake is and the skylights there, we get to that north portion. So we've just in essence finished that 1905 foot walk and are now entering into that north improvement. Excuse me as I take my way over here. So again, as we get into this space, as we discussed, we have the light wall of the center. We have restrooms. We have adequately sized hold rooms that accommodate all the aircraft that the airport is seeing now and we'll see in the future. And we're making sure that we again, bring that aesthetic in a way that promotes and communicates the sustainability that Vermont is shooting for. I'm gonna make my way down here to the end. Again, queuing is designed to be at the glass so that as people queue up for flights, they're not queuing out into circulation as we see at many airports. This will allow for just a more controlled hold room and then again, fluidity of movement through circulation. And then I'll end on again, just coming up to the admin level. This will be some of the views that the admin will have out over the airfield. And again, the natural light that will come into their space. And if we go out to the public deck, again, the public will also have views of those F-35s taking off of the airplanes themselves, taking off and we'll be able to take advantage of that amenity once again. So with that, I'll stop and really appreciate you all taking the time to listen. All right, commissioner, does anyone have? Oh, Jeff dropped off, I was thinking he might not. Nick, do you want anything? Do you want to add? Of course I do. Yeah. Great presentation. Thank you, Jacob, Steve. Thank you, Craig. And like Craig said, and like we've talked about many times, we're solving many, many of our challenges with this project. Challenges that we don't have on the South Concourse, that we do have on the North to accommodate those 60 plus percentage of our passengers, which I predict will grow over time with American and United Airlines in that particular concourse. One of the things that Craig said, what's the flexibility that we absolutely need with this terminal? And we do not have the flexibility of airlines using a particular gate at one day and another gate at a different day. We're looking at these computer technology programs to accommodate this flexibility to offer mainline large wide body aircraft space and to accommodate the passenger space, the elbow room that we need as well as the safety and the physical space located on the exterior of the building. I'm gonna be talking about our FAA par-139 inspection during my director's report. One of those areas that was highlighted in our inspection is the proximity of aircraft parking too close to our taxiway and the probability of gate closures because of that proximity or at least restrictions on what size of an aircraft can actually sit there. Again, this project next solves those current solutions and brings us into that next generation of an airport which we're really, really excited about and excited to get us, administration out of the way. We keep moving our offices into a location that is a prime location that should be for the public and of course the final pieces, getting accessibility to me and my office and our team here at the airport as well as the commission and the new commission conference room that would be part of this third level space. And my favorite part maybe is as Frank said to bring back that public amenity and that community space up on the third level not only as a rentable revenue source for the airport but also as just a simple enjoyment up on the third level. So very excited to move this forward. We had great showings at a pre, not construction but pre-bid, what's that? Pre-qualification. Pre-qualification and pre-bid conversation with many contractors and general contractors. We had a great walk through with a dozen and a half folks that joined us just the other day. Bids are opening for this qualification process next Friday and from there we'll have a selection committee to choose these bids which is being procured through a construction manager at risk process. Essentially, as I mentioned, we're only 30% on the design right now, although the Jacobs team is moving that forward, inching that forward as we select a contractor and that's to bring both the engineering and the architect team of Jacobs and the construction contractor team together to finish and finalize the design and hopefully find those elements to save on the expenditures of this building. Right now we're looking at between $35 and $39 million for this particular building, although we're evaluating what the priorities are as well as what the funding sources are for the completion. Of course, as you're aware, we have the, excuse me, the appropriated $34 million as part of the congressional knee-directed spending for this particular project, which includes both the build-out of the new building, the demolition, the ramp, which would need to be rehabilitated as well as the redone second floor corridor that we just walked through. So there's a lot of pieces, a lot of elements to this particular project. Our hope is to finish the design through the rest of this calendar year into the spring, go through the permanent process into most likely very late this year, early next year and have a very comfortable level both from the construction standpoint through the final financing of this particular building as well as grants to schedules in the ground by summer of next year. Right, go ahead. Yeah, a question for the Jacobs group. Very nice presentation. Appreciate the effort that went into that and the clarity. And Craig, I think it was either Stuart Craig that mentioned early on that sustainability was baked into the design and such. And Craig, you gave some great examples with the geothermal, the natural light and the photovoltaic cells and such on the roof. Just wondering as the design engineering firm, is there any sort of estimated number that you can get? I mean, Burlington has a goal of net zero in terms of carbon and such. Is this going to be a net zero building or is that too much to ask? Is there a certain level of sustainability that you are shooting for as an engineering company that will give us an idea? Do you want to answer that or who made the answer? Yeah, I'll take a stab at kind of the first part of it. I think a lot of that is going to come from the geothermal. And what we have to do for geothermal is we have to get out there and do some test wells just to evaluate the capacity of the soil and of the water within the soil to conduct that heat transfer that is required for geothermal. And once we have those results, we can really start to kind of quantify what the benefit is of that geothermal system and then partner that with the PV on the roof and then start to really, like I said, quantify it and come up with hard numbers that we can look at. Thank you. Of course, the building is powered with this entire building, although we used to, utility companies is powered with Burlington Electric Department, renewable energy sources. So the geothermal was a really important part of the conversation. Obviously photovoltaic electricity and body carbon that the wood build out that he's talking about is was important, but the geothermal, getting ourselves out of using natural gas to keep this building as it is, what we were really focused on, inclusive of these other elements. All right, Mr. anything else? Nick DeGerry. I was going to say, we'll keep you updated. We'll present as the project moves forward. We have many, many milestones ahead of us and really shortly ahead of us. Most likely next meeting in September, it might be a little bit early, but our hope is to select a general contractor firm by the end of August. So we might have those final numbers and we'll have some contractual and procurement milestones to move forward with your recommendation to go to city council, to sign contracts. And yeah, we have a really exciting year ahead of us to move this into a hundred percent design and even more exciting to get shelves in the ground. Right. The board members. Me too. All right, so next up when I guess on the related topic it was Larry with the projection. Thank you, Jacob, Steve. Thank you. You guys first I'd like to introduce Kirk Hatch. He's our new airport associate engineer. That's accordingly he oversaw the air. Yeah, that's more than the same. It's more than the same. OK, OK, so the aircraft icing fluid system, he oversaw the the maintenance of that today. So he's been in the field all day. So great help. Well, obviously out there in the office. So he has experience with that system and a lot of other things too. So let me just introduce you to Kirk. All right. As far as my report, I think I've included everything. Just the highlights are that you can see the taxiway alpha instruction started from the photos I provide. You can see there was milling that was being done in area, which is our first step is is area five as this is broken up into six different areas because it's very critical on how this gets constructed without interrupting the use of the terminal from our commercial airlines. Also, some of the trimming of top soil you see is where we are adding a shoulder, but also because of that shoulder, we are adding impervious area which needs stormwater treatment system to be installed. The other highlight is a picture of the wedge. The wedge that got installed as far as gate or passenger boarding bridge at gate nine, which allows us to utilize that jet bridge rather than people going downstairs and up, you know, ladders to get to aircraft. So training started today on the use of that jet bridge. So we'll be bringing that online over the next week or so two weeks. So that you can see that Friday. That's awesome. So so that wedge was the last piece to get this moving forward. That wedge is a template. Larry said the wedge is attached to the one point seven point dollar gap rich. Yeah. Yeah. So you could get there from there unless you jump. That's right. So so very important. All right. Then the other exciting thing that started was the self apron, which is the extension of Haxway golf near the new manufacturing facility for Betas electric aircraft. What you see in these photos is these we start with the stormwater infrastructure first ensure, you know, environmental protection before we, you know, so we have a means to build from there. So you'll see the stormwater structure that we will be penetrating and also all the infrastructure that will come before that to make sure we treat that stormwater before any, if any, gets released. That's very little. So that's that with that report on the construction report. We're doing the sound set, correct? Turn to the community connection. Don't talk about the other step up. So that's all I have unless there are any questions for me or first. Any questions, commissioners? Oh, we're in the end. All right. Thanks. I am reading through the summary. It's I know you have updates in red. It'd be nice if you could just actually maybe indent and give a date of when the last update was made, because especially for the noise exposure, you know, it shows black font number 17, for example, of like, you know, kickoff meeting. But there's no sense of like when that kickoff meeting happened. And something else, I think in this section, there's references saying something happened this week. If there could at least be other like more specifics put in as to the like the date of when something happened or just modify the way the notes are taken. So it shows like when each update is happening. So it's building on each other because I do appreciate the red font showing like what the latest is. It's just hard to differentiate when the previous update was made. OK, I'll gladly do that. But I update this every month for the airport commission and I can add dates to be specific. Sometimes when I write this report, it's the week before. And obviously, things are moving at that time. So when I say this week, I'm last week and I know it was going to happen this, you know, so but so I can I can modify that. And so that's great. If that's easier to just put in specifics as to the dates, then that helps it be what's called evergreen. It's just easier to know when that reference is made. If it's last month or three months ago. OK, no problem. Thank you. Yeah, I appreciate it. All right, commissioners, anything else for there? Thank you for your report. We now move on to potential. Big thanks. Thank you. And so this report, I was because I put this together last week. I took the cash balance and the AIP receivable report to Thursday, which was twenty seven, so I did not know what the ending level cash balance would be. But I have the latest that I could provide. And I also have a preliminary June. We are still we have some small invoices that always come after here. And we try to have in conferences for them, but we'll still be shaking through our finalizing and getting all of the or a couple of revenues that we're still estimated that final numbers on because some of our vendors have 30 days to report to us. So again, it's all about timing. But I wanted to give you as good of an update as I could, as accurate as I could. So I'll just go through, you know, briefly and entertainment questions that she might have and then after this. So while we're wrapping up last year that we have, we've included in this hack in a section to go over the budget for the new year that we now one month into. So our revenues through the end, I said, April, I guess I missed that. Well, through the end of June, we're twenty seven million dollars. So I have a title here, which included one point seven million five and stimulus federal grants are operating revenues. So if I take the grants out of it that we have utilized, we are three and a half million dollars higher in this current fiscal year than we were a year ago. So just again, demonstrating that we've had a very strong and healthy recovery. And we'll see when we get to the metric sheet, we'll we look at the five top revenues that we have. And we can see how we're comparing here over a year. This has pretty much as we expected. I mean, I think certainly from what we budgeted for the year, which is always done well in advance, we certainly did better than we had hoped for. So that's that's good news. Our expenses were sixteen point four million dollars. It is higher than the prior year we had planned on this. We anticipated this. We have a full year of the QTA operation in effect. And we also one of the other things that was going on is I mean, there are some expenses that are coming in a little bit less that we anticipate being higher next year. But our expenses in general, we've had bigger projects. We did start and the month of June, we were getting bills on and paying for work that we were doing on our big renovation that we're having for the lighting system and the fire learn some in the garage. So we did have some of those bills finally start to come through. We will continue through this entire year. And then included a budget for it for those that big profit that we're doing in the garage, our cash update as of June 27th. We had six point three million dollars in the international account. We did not want to send anybody. And so I'm happy to report that, you know, as we ended one year and started another year, we're continuing to hold a very strong cash position. Included in here are the detailed numbers for the revenues and for the expenses. And so I'm pleased to be in this position of reporting that you are putting the results of very strong for the fiscal year that we're just completing. On the there is a revenue recovery slide in there with the graphics a little bit. All of our all of our revenues with the exception of the PFCs are actually exceeding 100 percent of where we were prior to COVID hitting. And that just gives us indication and how strong that both customers are coming here. They're using our parking garage, the car rental concession, the landing fees, every all of our metrics are strong. PFCs are still at 92 percent, but that is as Nick already discussed and the implements were not back to 100 for last year. We're not back to 100 percent of those implements. So that is what we anticipate that our PFC revenues are going to trend along with our plane of revenues. And then I just had the cash summary in here and the AIP receivable, which is just it is a listing of all of our grants that we have out there. And and then the reimbursements. We did borrow one of the GAN. We borrowed the June. And I expect to have a request into the FAA on that particular grant. We should be getting that money and paying off the grant balance any day now. But before I move into the budget presentation, I do want to entertain any questions that any of the commissioners would like to have. Great commission. Any questions for Marie? Thanks for the financial presentation. No questions. No questions. All right. Yeah. Move on. You found the budget. So moving on to the budget, the budget presentation that you have in front of you today, this is what we presented to the the board of finances and the counselors for the city of Berlin till we go down and they invite each partner to take a very brief presentation. Actually, you know, 15 minutes, I think, 20 minutes at next. And we go down and make a quick presentation. So here what you have here, this is actually and this is what got approved. These are our revenues and expenses that were approved when the city council did approve the budget in June. So I'll just I'll I can go through, you know, as much detail as little detail, but I wanted to give you exactly what we shared with them. And then again, you know, give an opportunity for you to ask us any questions. But, you know, our outlook is our outlook is positive for this upcoming year. I mean, we can pair a lot of things to where we were post COVID, everything that's related to COVID. So I don't know, maybe next year we won't even talk about it anymore. But for right now, you know, we're still continuing to sort of compare and contrast where we are doing. We expect that that we're going to get closer to we're hoping that we'll get closer to 100% of our inclinements that we had prior to COVID. Those were that was the best period, 12 month period we had prior to COVID headache for our claimants. We were hitting records here at the airport. And so we are we're we're cautiously optimistic in terms of our budgeting. So we're half the balance we anticipate. And our plan is to use up the remaining stimulus budget funds that we still have available to us. And that is just taking the revenues that we anticipate plus those those additional stimulus money that we have remaining. We were we needed those in order to budget to balance our budget this year. We do have some pretty big projects that we're still taking on the garage. As I mentioned that that whole project about $2.4 million project. And that's the bulk of that we're going to see incurred this year. So we'll be doing sort of those things. We're doing a lot of planning on significant capital projects. Larry net the presentation on that that next project we were talking about. So we're going to continue to be looking at all of those things. Those drivers and always thinking and planning positioning ourselves in such a way so that we can, you know, responsibly fund those projects as they come online. Our revenues. We have a lot of our revenues are driven by the November past year we have here. And some of the things like the rent for the terminal those are sort of fixed. But most of our other revenues are going to be driven by how many cash we just would have pulled through here. And so in our assumptions, we assume that we'd be at 95 percent of our passengers from again, 2019, which is a record year for us. And our revenues are continuing to be strong. I've got some metrics in here for, you know, how they compare both the actual and 22 23 budget. I've got the detail on the revenues. I've got the detail on the expenses. Again, it's what we anticipate and expect that we need to budget this year. I think, you know, we're going to see the increases to our comparison maintenance line out and because of the projects we have coming underway. Our salary expenses are related. We're seeing some increase there. We have been short staffed, as you may remember. Maybe some of the newer ones may not know that. But we had a number of positions that we had open during the last well, multiple years now. And so we were able to go through the reorg and we're starting to hire. We're glad to have her here. And we're going to start seeing onboarding of these additional positions and bright sizing and placement here at the airport. So we will see more expenses to that, but that is adequately budgeted. And that budget does reflect all positions, whether they're filled or not. So that's a full filled budget. And that's a good point. And I want to say that we always budget for that. Whether or not we knew that we were able to fill them at the time or postponing that or having trouble filling it. We always budget. It's why typically you'll see that our payroll expenses typically are less than what we budget. They're always budget, but significantly. I think in 2023, we were about 80% of our payroll costs because we were not fully staffed at the level that we're approved to be at. So I have all the detail in there. There's a chart in there for employment, because I think the implements are always very fascinating. You see that every month anyway. So this is not news for you, but just the graphics of charts might be interesting in our projection. So I'm going to turn it up, turn it over to you, Nick, to see if there's any anything else that I missed that you'd like to convey to our commissioners about our budget. It really is a team effort to put the budget together. It's obviously the finest number though the numbers, but it's so important that all of the folks here are all quite helpful in terms of trying to figure out what is most important that we need to accomplish in the year coming up. So I want to thank my team for all their input and all their support in right sizing the budget and I certainly want to answer any questions that anybody might have. Right sizing. That's a perfect word for the financial piece and the budget, our terminal building, our operations, the first slide there, which you've seen in various other presentations of how busy we truly are here, how busy we're getting back to as far as passenger numbers go, but also the landings and takeoffs and the amount of different and variety and a variety of operations from military, commercial, private, corporate, general aviation. And as that relates to the capital projects that Marie is talking about, that certainly is a highlight that is part of this year's budget. Not just the phasing of these capital projects, which is a different presentation and a different logistical conversation, but also how to budget for these, making sure that they fit within these particular fiscal years and making sure that the physical projects are completed in a timely and cost efficient standpoint. The parking garage improvements is a great example, but we also have this terminal integration project that we need to, excuse me, not the terminal. And the project next that we have to financially plan for for the end of this fiscal year, as well as fiscal year 2025 and beyond, the, of course, somewhat changes in the operational expenses of work. We're always looking at that as we change our, or right size, our layout of the terminal building, as well as the geography out on the airfield. So many changes happening, many improvements happening, many maintenance and deferred maintenance that is being caught up on and making sure that we consistently and continually address each one of those elements by bringing in the right staff and the right people to help this team. We're going to manage a world-class, first-class airport because we are the second busiest airport in New England, commercial airport in New England. We are busy and we're going to continue to be busy as we attract new businesses and new partners to help us move into that direction. So, thank you. Thank you. Jeff, do you have any questions for Marie? Yeah. Thank you, Marie, for the presentation. Just a couple of quick questions on revenue and budget and then a process or expenses and then a process question. And on the revenues, is the increase in the parking revenue are you attributing that to increased traffic or does, I'm just trying to figure out, does parking get adjusted every year based on inflation? Like, who is that reflecting an increase in the rate or what is that number attributable, increase attributable to? Great question. Actually, that is simply traffic. More people, for monitors, Quebecers, New Yorkers, I may see every license plate in there right now are parking there. We have not increased our rates. Since I have, since before I have been here, I started here in January 2015. So, when you see those numbers, it literally is a metric of how many parking days that people are parking in there. We've been busier in there. And who, I should know this, but I don't, but who has the authority to actually set or modify the parking rate at the garage? Is that the council or director Longo or the commission? No, it's not set by a charter or council or commission. That would be the operational changes that would happen by myself and the team here. We have not, like Marie said, we have not adjusted these rates in over 10 years, if not longer. So that's something that we do and should and have been considering because the revenue is going up, which is fantastic, but we need to balance the supply and demand of the parking garage just well. Sure, probably worthy of a further discussion at some point. I don't know anything that hasn't gone up in the last 10 years. Turning just quickly to the expenses, I appreciate the explanation on salaries and this is an inclusive. And I don't want to nitpick any, but there are some pretty big swings in some of those numbers. So I don't, I'm just sort of curious, why are we seeing, for example, what's, there's a 20% increase in indirect fees, a 15% decrease in security. I'm just, those are, I don't typically see that variation from year to year. So a generalized question of like... Right, so I'll conquer like the big ones. Big changes you're seeing, like the biggest percents. Some of them, like office expenses, that's kind of small, you know, that just, that one 19% decrease, but that's just based on what we're experiencing. I'll conquer some of the big ones. Runway deicing, I went down 19% in my budget. We had, maybe it was anomaly last year, and 22, not 23, where we had very, very high year. We've also had implemented the use of some deicing and putting that into practice. Now every year can be different, and I might end up coming back and adjusting that, but between a combination of the deicing, we were able to use, use our deicing materials in a different way and have two different kind of deicing that we use on there. And that was quite helpful and beneficial. Just some other ones. You're seeing the repair and maintenance is going down by 21%, but interesting enough, if you look back a few years, these are still high, high numbers. In fiscal year 23, we did not spend $4.8 million in repairs and maintenance. We budgeted for the entire project, thinking we would be able to start it in the fall, and we couldn't. So just timing wise and everything else. So we are budgeting that, but some of that, some of that expenses hitting and already hit 23. So that was another big increase. Another thing that we're seeing, we're seeing a big increase in insurance. Most of our insurance is coming through, we have some that we pay direct bill, about 25% of that is direct bill. We get a bill from the insurance company directly based on, in agreement with us, but the rest of it is we share, the city buys the insurance in bulk. I'll say that they go out and so we get a better price. We get an allocation of that. So like car insurance and things like that. We're getting an allocation piece of that. Indirect fees, these are fees that went up. These are fees that we share and contribute to the city of Burlington. And these are things for shared resources. They're payroll, they're attorney fees. There are other things that we share. The overall management of the city of Burlington gets allocated through indirect fees to all the city departments, and us being just one of the departments. So I don't have any control all over that, but that's something that they get through. And airport security, that's an interesting one to see a decrease. We negotiate with the Burlington Police Department. They do a great job at providing services for us. And we're very happy with their service here. I think one of the struggles that they've had in the last year and a half is they have had struggled with their own staffing levels at the Burlington Police Department. And so we have had to kind of re-figure out how we can be a part of that, still get the coverage that we need here at the airport, but also be sensitive to the fact that they don't have as many officers to share with us, but how do we keep everything safe and appropriate here? And so that is why we're paying less for services because we've been able to sort of have those discussions. And so you're seeing an increase there. So just to give you kind of picking out some of those bigger changes, I hope that that gives you some context to why a number might change up or down, significantly, depending on what year to the next. Appreciate that. That's very helpful. My last question is one, because forgive me, this is my first time through, is a process question. I'm aware that this budget, I mean, it's already been adopted and approved by the council. Is there input from the commission in advance of the budget that you go to the council or how does your budget process work as the, I served on commissions, but never one that had an actual operating department. So this is my first rodeo here. Sorry, no, then typically we would present this to you a little bit more ahead of time in line with the board of finances and city council processes. In past years, we've had input really based on questions and kind of a Q and A session, but no real changes to it based on the commission. This is really set by the airport team and then presented more to be passed by the full city council as your front of it. I guess that's differently. Maybe I'm not clear. Like in a normal year, would there be a budget presentation to the commission before you go to full council for input? Yes. Okay. That's what I, great. Thank you. That's it. I'll set. Bryn, did you have anything? I thought I saw your hand up. Yeah. I was just wanted clarification for the FY23 amended in the expenses chart. Does that mean actual? No, that's the amended. So that's what we had amended budget. Yes. So that's, this is just showing the amended budget that we have not the actual, because even when this is done, I only had information through like April at most at best. So it wouldn't, yeah, that would be an odd comparison. So yeah, I use the amended budget as we have when this is put together. And I mean, when my, when our team is looking to build the budget, we look at all things related to, you know, how are we doing, where do we anticipate next year, what are our needs, if it's revenue or expenses, that's how we go, just like anybody would in building a budget. Each line item, by line item, we have hundreds of light items. So you're a whole quarter behind with being able to combine, like pull actuals? Well, we, we submit this and send this to the board of finance and then it was carried forward to the city council, to all the counselors. We sent it in May. So let's say, you know, so we're, yes, we're still, you know, where it's not a perfect world. You're building a budget when you, in a perfect world, you've had all your information through the end of the year, but that wouldn't, you know, that doesn't give us enough time to put it together. So yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Being August 2nd, I wasn't sure if you had actuals available. And if this was- Oh, I see what you're saying. Real time, like to date, or I'm kind of recognizing like, no, this is the presentation that you had given to the council. I appreciate that comment, because I see, I see how that would have been, maybe we're meaningful for you to look at that. We do, because I have the financial package in there, and that goes through June. That's actually a really good, you know, that actually will show you, like, how to really end up for expenses. Yeah, thanks. That, I just wanted some clarification on that, but that's helpful. Thank you. Yeah. All right, my one question on this is, and I think, I forget which one you said, but like in plain, it's really the driver. So I just did some back in the envelope, it looks like we're mid-single digits for employment growth in 24. Just curious how that, you know, have we queried other airports in the region? How does, how does what we forecast for employment growth compare to, you know, other books around that? It's pretty fascinating right now, both in New England and around the country. It's not consistent. So there's some airports that are absolutely growing through the roof. There's others that are not, that are in the single digits, similar to us at Portland, Maine, and Manchester, New Hampshire. They're growing, or I should say recovering, at about the same pace that we are through these pandemic years, and about getting pretty pandemic numbers. You know, on a budgetary standpoint, conservatively looking at employment growth is good because we don't want to budget too much of those revenues and not hit those targets. I would say in the New England region, which is a great comparison for us, we're pretty consistent with the growth, even beyond 2019 numbers. You can, we've also looked at that during our master plan process, and our forecast that actually part of our master plan process gave us an opportunity to look at a what we call a dynamic master plan. We can plug in what if scenarios, what if we, you're taking the new airline, what if we lose an airline? Those types of things to look at a more, as accurate of a picture in a future forecast. And that's what we use. And then in terms of sort of repeating back in the parking for the question, and how much of that is, what if we're translates to revenue? Now, how much of that is more people? How much of that is higher prices? So when we translate that from an operations point, is that, you know, we look at load factors, is that more, do we have to have more flights to achieve that 5%? Can that be done in the flights that we have here and just building more seats? Like, what's the path to that 5% of more complaints? I think I'm missing the question. So what's the path on? Yeah, like, do we need more flights in and out of Brooklyn at that? Or can we do that on the existing flights just building more seats to get that 5% more complaints? 5% more. Or whenever the growth rate is, I think that's exactly that. I would, I think I would say that we need more flights. The planes that we have today are very full that are outbound. So these average load factors are above average on the monthly and the annual scales, which to me says we need another flight, whether it's to the same destination or to a new destination. Of course, we actively work on that and we actually communicate with both new and income and airlines. But that, to me, is really the added point. These planes are full, these planes are big, first of all, and they're still full. So I think the demand is absolutely there to support additional flights who could to reach those 5% costs. And just tangent to that, what is the start of the electrical load factor going out and what is it running now? So national averages are 79% on a load factor. Some of these flights average are 90 to 95%. When you learn, I don't think it's on today's report, actually. But when you look at monthly reports, we can be in the 80 to 85 on the monthly total. Or of course, the general line is a little bit shorter than the average. Thank you very much. Next up is the connection section. Hannah, you're first with the noise information. So we've changed this section to community connection, producing noise data. I'll still include and report on the noise data, but Larry will also include any other additional updates from our residential sound insulation program. So the big update I just wanted to share was the inclusion of the noise comments on the fact that I've been put on the map in addition to our heat map. The map that is from our noise exposure map that shows the 65, 70, and 75 DNL contours. So they are overlaid onto that existing map to get a better understanding. This will also be posted to btbsound.com. Each month, there will be updates as well as updates that Larry's going to share regarding to be that project I just mentioned will also be updated in time on btbsound.com. Just so I can understand that better. What's the purpose of the contours? This was something that we had talked about at a previous... Yeah, I remember that, but I'm just trying to think what's the... The purpose. Yeah. So I mean, it looks great. So it really was to compare, right? The heat map was to compare, obviously, the flight target, where the actual radar data was, and this was just to analyze. We see that, we can see some correlation to the flight track data, and we wanted to see and show is there also that same correlation in the noise contour lines, which it's different. It's not as direct of a correlation, but it's also a different viewpoint, I think. I don't know really if it's helpful or not. They're available and there's data to both of them. So, yeah. Okay, thank you. Yes, Brenda, go ahead. Yeah, I mean, regarding the overlay of the contours, I personally think it's helpful. It's nice to see the context of how it relates to the heat map. So as we look at the noise exposure map and the work that will go into revisiting that, it'll be interesting to see if there are changes that from the previous estimates to, that may or may not correlate with the, what we're hearing as far as complaints. Great. Let me get it up to you. Anything else for Hannah, before we turn it over to Larry? All right, part two, Larry. All right, part two, okay. Okay, residential sound installation programs, phases one and two, the pilot and the initial phase one. As everybody knows, there's 15 homes that are getting sound insulation. There was a company that was bankrupt that supplies windows. The good news is we've been through the buy American process with the new windows that are along lead item. So we had, there was an adjustment price. We've gone through that amendment and those windows have been ordered. We were hoping to start in August. It's going to be, it's going to be a little bit longer and we're working with those families to let them know. And we're very optimistic that we can get them done this year for those, those efforts. For any of the families that are listening, super thankful for their patients. We'll be reaching out to them, of course, every step of the way, making sure. But it's been a challenging process with this company going bankrupt. So Larry and the whole team behind this project is doing great to get these installed this year, which is, which is happening, right? With respect to the phase three, we've heard news that the grant is on the way that will allow us the dollars to do, to do the improvements, construction improvements, sound insulation and other various things for the next, the 52 homes that just got bid. It also is going to provide us the money to do the design outreach and all the programs required for the next 50 homes that we will bid for next year's round of construction monies in a grant. With respect to the balance right now, most of the first phase one and phase two were homes in South Brongton. There were a few approaching Winooski, but were rejected. It appears by this week, we will have a list of number of people we were going out to obviously more than 50 because not everybody wants to take part. And we anticipate at least around 50% of that will be in Winooski. And we are honing in on those names, locations, and hope to have that list this week that I miss hinted in. Noise explosion map. Oh, noise explosion map, okay. That process is moving forward. We've had initial meetings. I don't really have much to update on that, except for it's moving forward. I mean, it's just going to take some time and schedule and get the work done. We have the, I mean, we have the consultant on board and I don't know if you want to add to that, I don't know. Yeah, I think this is going to be a big one for the public and some public meetings coming up, which I'll describe later on in this meeting. So yeah, the noise explosion map, we're still continuing to collect data, collect radar data, work with our partners at the airport, both military, international guard, as well as other users and aircraft users of the airfield to update the noise explosion map. That noise explosion map, of course, is the key element to our residential sound insulation program or any programs eligible for the noise compatibility eligibility. So that noise map generally gets updated every five years or less than five years. However, because of a full year of operations with the F-35s here, the FAA granted us additional funding to update later this year. It'll be a 2024 existing conditions map. So it will be finalized in early 2024. Between now and then though, however, there'll be technical advisory committees, regional advisory committees, as well as public meetings. Which we're planning on hosting one in the month of September for this project. So lots going on with the noise explosion map and a lot of data being collected to input into the FAA require methodology. Great. Bryn, you have a question? Yeah, thanks for the update. How are you planning on soliciting participants in those committees? Right now, we're using the basis of our previous committees, both on the regional and the technical advisory. So technical being obviously more of the Aeron users, the military users, the tenants of the field. And then the regional folks would be municipality partners. And we also requested through municipality some residential seats as well. We have the list online from our previous committees. And that's the general concept for this one as well. But we're very open to ideas on who should be part of these committees. So am I hearing you correctly that you're seeking to invite back the same participants from the previous committees? Correct. They're the same titles and the same general concepts of that, I guess. Okay, so assuming the person in that title hasn't changed, it will be the same person. At least for the technical advisory committee? Yeah, generally correct. Okay, it'd be nice to have specifics when that's available. Okay, absolutely. I don't know if those participant names are included on BTV Sound or I'm sure that there is additional interest in who's on those committees and ways that folks that didn't participate before might either be nominated to a seat or municipalities may be able to just again review the process for appointments to those committees. Absolutely, that makes sense. That would be awesome. Thank you. Anything else for Larry? I think just by way of considerations, if there are nominations or appointments that need to be made by, you know, at least by Winooski, our council meets twice a month. So by way of just timing, that would likely come to council for approval. So as you're thinking about steps in the process. Yeah, that's great. And right now we don't have a set date for any, either one of these committees, most likely later or early in the winter. Right now we're just planning a mid-September takeoff with all members of the public. Okay, I appreciate that. I, you had mentioned at a previous meeting the end of summer and I wasn't sure if that was the, you know, the school year end of summer or calendar solstice end of summer. So that's why the kickoff to be September is helpful. Thanks. All right. I'll segue now into item 10, which is the director's report. All right. I do have a quick list of updates for you. First, extremely proud to report to you that we walked away from our annual FA part 139 inspection with an extremely clean report. The entire team has worked every year, every day we've worked extremely hard. This isn't necessarily to prepare for the inspection. In fact, the FA can show up at any time and inspect us. So we need to be ready at any time, but this was an extensive inspection. Dave Karman, who's not here today, he's taken a vacation day. But he did an exceptional job with his team, both airport operation specialist as well as airport maintenance specialist. This inspector inspects everything, paint, the width, the reflectivity on the paint, the dimensions as well as, of course, the compliance with our FAA criteria, where these are light signs, you name it, our records, our fueling records, heritage aviation. Matt Collins is here from Heritage Aviation, a massive major partner of ours, because we, the airport do inspect all fueling activities, including their vehicles, again, their fuel farm and storage tanks. All of that came out extremely well. Of course, we learned various elements of how to improve that. And we always talk about what can we do next year better? And we work with our inspector onto AS, but the actual inspection and the report that we're generally giving at the end of this inspection was just incredible. And I'm really happy to report that, that we had a very clean inspection this year. I'm going right back to the noise kickoff meeting in September, as well as a combined meeting, and this is not just going to be about noise or the noise exposure map process or our residential sound programs, but our primary mission for hosting a public meeting right now, we're looking at the second week of September. Hopefully we'll confer those dates with the school district, actually, because we'd like to do this at the Chamberlain Elementary School, is to show and talk about our new recreational path, ideas for the land across the street. There's been an extensive amount of work done over the last few years on what our landscaping and what the uses of that property can be. And we want to invest and encourage the use through this multi-use bike path, as well as some of some landscaping opportunities. Of course, when we talk about across the street, and we're talking about the Chamberlain neighborhood across the street, there's going to be some questions about what is the status of the residential sound program and the noise exposure map. So we're combining these meetings to really identify both the investment, as well as the updates to our sound and noise exposure map programs. Mid-September, second week of September. Comments on our conceptual look, the plan, so the great point. So the purpose really is we're going to have boards displayed for everybody. We'll have a presentation and poster boards displayed for everybody on what this path may look like. And what we're hoping for is comments written on the board, it's written on sticky notes of, well, maybe this doesn't work that way, or let's think of a different thing, or let's make sure it's connecting a current path with this new path coming forward. This is a million-dollar investment of the airport to put this path in, and it'll take some time in phasing, and it'll be associated with various projects, including the project next that we just talked about. So it'll take time, but it is what we've been talking about for many years now, and really taking this to the final piece of presenting it to the public and moving it into a design phase. Quick update on beta technologies. They are still completing their major buildout of their manufacturing facility. This is the approximately 150,000 square foot facility on the southern end of the airport. We're hoping for a certificate of occupancy, a temporary certificate of occupancy, by August 25th, and they'll be able to move in various elements, phased elements of the building so that they can start. This also aligns with the south apron that Larry talked about before the extension of golf. They've received, or will be receiving, hopefully this week or next week, I hope, a certificate of occupancy on their smaller hangar. This is the general aviation hangar, which is located on the valley west apron. It's built, it's tested. Larry and the team saw everything from the fire safety systems to, of course, the building itself. So they're looking to move in, essentially, on that particular building very, very soon. And then, of course, their headquarters building just adjacent to the terminal building here has been up and operational for some time now. So we're, we see that in its full, full buildout, which is, which is great. And we do have various meetings over there, which is really nice because it's beautiful inside. The Burlington Technical Center, I think at some point, for those that are not aware, I did present that they were interested in building a new aviation technical program here at the airport. I am happy to report that there is a tenant that is, that is vacating a building and we had solicited bids for a new tenant to occupy one of our hangar buildings. The Burlington Technical Center was the sole bidder on this facility. We're going through negotiations and contractual, at least language with them right now, making sure what they are proposing to design fits in not only with our clients obligations, very similar to what Nick had presented earlier. We have to be very particular on what we allow in aviation hangars. So we're going through that process as well as the lease language. And this again is for the Burlington High School Aviation Technical Center to do just on this really the regional. And then staffing updates. So we have, of course, Kurt joining us that Larry introduced Larry introduced you earlier tonight. I'm happy to report we also hired two new managers as part of the reorganization, both of them internal applicants and promoted that both had long 10 years here at the airport. Stacey Levely and Andrew Geppner. Stacey is our new airport operations manager and Andrew Geppner is our new airfield maintenance manager. Very happy to report that that they've joined us and are joining Dave Carmen's team. So they both report now to Dave Carmen, which is all working to do exactly what we're hoping for as part of the reorganization. Also happy to report that Hannah, oh my gosh, Hannah Duceblan, Senator Olavastin, our main ambassador. Hannah Duceblan, she's also been promoted with a new title. Hannah is not no longer the office assistant. She is now the executive assistant to the team here. So Hannah's been here for six years and we went through an extensive and competitive process and Hannah really hit a home run in my world. So welcome to all of the new folks. We have more to go through though. Right now we still have three or four positions. We are currently advertising for an office assistant position. This is Hannah's previous position, a director of innovation and a deputy director along the two managers that would report to that deputy director. Office assistant actually closes in two days. So we'll be doing interviews and we've had an extensive application process for that. I'm happy to report that we have offered and somebody has accepted the director of innovation position. I'm not quite ready to introduce that person as we're still going through the transition. I think you will not see them in September. They'll be starting mid-September timeframe. So in the meeting after that, possibly September, if I could get them into the meeting, you'll meet our new director of innovation and marketing, which is very, very exciting for the whole team. Deputy director position we've done many interviews and we're still considering our options as well as going through other interviews. We have not hosted the two managers yet and I report to that position because of course I want to hire the deputy director to be part of that selection process for the managers. But we'll keep you updated on that. But everything overall from the new the new staff joining the team to these positions that we're filming now is working to the reorganization plan, which I'm incredibly happy for. And then two last quick things. One, we are planning, embarking and we'll be bringing to you or playing the next month or two, a acquisition plan for new vehicles, all of which will be fully 100% electric vehicles in various departments. One on the airfield, one in operations, and one on general use for facilities and administration. So we're now moving into really acquiring 100% electric vehicles for the airport as much as we possibly can. And the final item is a program that we are truly trying to initiate to help the the state specifically through flood relief efforts. Hannah Dana Pyleberg really is leading this effort. She's with our administration team. We're going through the logistics of the how and the what items are needed to help our communities and our partners and of course our our neighbors throughout the state with flood relief efforts. We have worked with the state and reached out to the state transportation department initially to make sure that any airport related help we can help with with the other state airports. Thankfully none of the other state airports really have seen any damage because of the floods nor have we of course here in here really in Chattanooga County but here at BTV. But we look to start offering a fill the fill the trailer, fill the truck type of scenario with some much needed items for these residents and then bringing them to these recovery relief facilities. So we're going to be advertising that over the next few weeks and then setting up daily drop offs right here at the airport as soon as we finalize some of the logistics with that. That is all that I have on my report for you today. Okay. Commissioner, is there any follow-up questions for Nick? All right, same time. We'll move into follow-up items. So 12-1 is the due permits for taxi, Nick? Oh, sorry. So I thought that, yes, commissioner items. I don't know why. It's probably because I didn't get any advance, but commissioner, is there anything that anyone else would like to bring up at this time? Okay, Alex has a follow-up. You'll see it's a shortened list today. We did pull off one of the items. Maybe I did everything, surely. Yes, I did. Jess? The next project. Because of the print? Yes. So we'll circle back with you, just to see if there's any point left. Due permits for taxi drivers, we're still working with the vehicle for hire board, making sure that our charter and legal requirements are met as far as raising the number of due permits offered here at the airport. More importantly, we're trying to move into a more advanced technology stage to offer as many drivers to access the airport as possible. Right now, I have nothing further to report or to ask the commission to change anything with that right now. As I mentioned in the past, we've put additional signage and are working with many of the drivers out front to make sure that the focus is on the taxi stand and the taxi lanes out front, which seems to be working. We also have the consideration to go through of making sure there's availability of taxi drivers after specific time of day, really 11 p.m. at night time frame, when there's not enough out of there. So we're going through that analysis again with our partners, and right now I have nothing more to request. So we'll retain that for next, correct. Alrighty, so I have 13s in adjournment. If there's no other business, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved by Greg, second by Chip. All those in favor? Those, we adjourn.