 So you're good to go Kathy. Hi. Welcome everyone to tonight's meeting of the JCP C. I apologize for starting those are list watching for starting late. It was completely on me. I was a latecomer. Per the governor's order that we can conduct these meetings virtually. I'm going to start just going around the room to make sure that everyone can hear and be heard. So when I call out your name, just say whatever you want to say to know, we can hear and hear you. Tammy Ellie. Here. Peter. I'm going to present. Alex. Present. Mandy. Carrie. Present. And Andy. All members of the committee are present. And I want to note that Sean is here with us as his follows, which they have and Sonya, which they have been for almost every meeting tonight. We are turning to the report from the JCP C. And I sent everyone a copy of what I call a rough draft. I mean, this was done solely by me. I'm trying to look at notes from the various meetings. So I thought we could focus on what recommendations we want to make. And we left off the last meeting with discussing several, and I tried to capture them in the current draft. And then as I went through thinking of other points in terms of when we were looking at the five year budget comments, people had made. So I, I took the liberty of converting some of those into recommendations as well. And I structured the report. So I did take a couple of minutes. So I will come back to that. And I think I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to Sean. And then I'll go to the meeting room. I'll ask Sean. For the main recommendations regarding FY. 22, which is the year we're focused on. Coming in an executive summary. So. I mean, if it's okay with everyone, just to turn to those and we can, one way of doing this would be shown to show that it's a page and a half of the executive summary. wording I have wrong. Kathy, how do you feel maybe if I pull up on the screen the recommendation section? Yes. And we talk about the recommendations and then if once we solidify the recommendations then we'll kind of go through the rest of the report and see if there's any sort of content on the rest of the report. Absolutely. I wasn't clear. That's what I was thinking of doing. I think they're all in that first two pages called summary. But you can also go to there are some additional recommendations later that summary tried to focus on major recommendations that had anything to do with FY22. Don't mind my comments. I made some comments on the right for just little note things to update. Is this too small? Does that work for people or do you want anyone can suggest any other way of working with this document? I'm not seeing any. So this is really the bulleted list here is the recommendations. Right. So what I tried to say and it can Alex has not had a chance to do her wonderful editing that she did last time. So what I tried to say at the beginning is that we were basically endorsing the list that had been presented to us with some exceptions and modifications. So these were the recommendations. So we were recommending a total budget and in the total budget line, Sean will have to help me with this. A total budget that exactly balanced as you probably remember the proposed budget was $15,000 above the available funds. And that doesn't count the fact that there was 1.6 million in recommended debt. So this was the set of recommendations that we were working on last Thursday. And I just want to say one thing about Monson and then just turn it over to everyone in the in the minutes that Sean took. It wasn't there were two possible ways we were talking about months and one was to increase the budget so that they could do both he could do both insulation and the more efficient high back systems. But Jeremiah also offered that he could take the $30,000 of insulation out of his larger maintenance budget that was offered to us. We didn't make a decision whether we thought that was a good idea. And he had he had asked for $200,000 in a general maintenance that covered a variety of things. So this was a question we clearly did focus on. We want him to go to the the more efficient systems. So what would be the best way that was the one thing that I thought wasn't entirely clear. And I just chose one way of structuring it, which was to say increase the budget so it also includes insulation. The rest we talked about going up on the sustainability fund and I the number that was mentioned is $100,000. The resident capital request was talked about favorably and that we would take it out of this fund or use grants if they became available. And then offsetting those that that money. We were going to look at the unspent repurposing past appropriations as as much as possible, reducing school and town technology. And then this last thing we laid off of were we asking potentially to look at the Jones library laptop requests if the building is going to be closed for construction. The school van that I put in here, we had a lot of discussion that if at all possible it should be a hybrid or electric. So this was just the discussion we had. It wasn't proposed that way. And then the last but not least was the $450,000 request for the North Amherst intersection. And I asked Sean just about 10 minutes ago that not doing that authorizing that now if the town decided to delay it saves us $60,000 next year in debt expenditures. So it doesn't show up at all in this year's but it has an impact on the next year budget on the FY23 budget. So I will stop there and get any reactions either to it's missing something not worded right or other. And I'm okay. I see Kerry's hand. Kerry. Apologies. My question is with this, I fully support the recommendation to have the van be electric or hybrid. I'm just concerned that if we don't put some funds behind it that that may end up having a negative impact on other priorities. So would we want to specify as we did up above that the money in the sustainability fund might be able to go to that I just would hate to see we're already taking money out of the and I know this the school budget for the equipment that you know this they said we could take so I'm wondering if maybe we use some of that money to support the van being more expensive. I'm just I think we should potentially point to where that funding would come from or because it's the one where we don't want to just stay on this one and I mean I think that's this explicit suggestion that we add a sentence here and to the extent that's more expensive than the what the request was that we could look to sustainability fund and or grants you know I mean that kind of wording so any thoughts on that and I guess what I want to know is should we go through each of those and then come back and vote on a package would that be the best way to proceed just to get the list so any comments on Kerry's suggestion let's I'll just use my role as chair to ask for that at this point people like that idea neutral. I would put in the sentence about potentially using the sustainability fund for increasing costs with that. Okay so does everyone agree to the I mean we'll edit this so it reads right okay so there's agreement yes okay so I see Alex's hand went up and Mandy's hand went up Alex and then Mandy. So I'm just going to start with the first bullet about the months in building HVAC and I guess I want to clarify maybe a discrepancy in my notes um so when it was first presented the discussion was $150,000 and then the second time I heard and maybe I misheard that the VRF system was between 110 and 120 and that the 150 was for like insulation and maybe ceiling fan and in response to Mandy Jo's question about should those be bundled together for cost efficiencies the answer was no so I if if that if my notes are corrected if that chain is correct I guess I'm trying to figure out why we're bumping the budget by $30,000 for things that could be done at any point in time and we don't create cost savings in doing them together but perhaps my notes are incorrect so I guess it's a question and a statement. Okay so I had the same notes in terms of the insulation was adding 30 which got it up back up to 150 and that Jeremiah said he either said he had enough money to do that out of his other budget or it could be done later but then he everyone described a very leaky building that the air seeps out of it so I think this is up to us what we want to recommend so I hear what you're saying Alex that those are potentially separable and the 30 doesn't have to happen this year so so I I just jumped at leaky building save on energy because it's now going to be electrical bills rather than gas bills so it would be good to conserve energy by insulating the building soon rather than later so that was my mental thing um does anyone want to and Mandy you want to talk specifically to this I can that's not why my hands up but I left it up so I can talk to this I I also agree that that was the thing so I wonder if our recommendation would be you know be more clear that the the insulation estimate is $30,000 it does not have to go there are no cost savings to doing it at the same time but due to the inefficiencies of the building if it can be found if there's a way to fund it in FY 22 do so our recommendation is to do so but if not then please add it into the FY 23 line or something like that okay so we'll we'll rewrite this to make it clear that 120 is for the system 30 is for the insulation and then add that additional sentence you know if you can do it this year great if not it's high priority for the next year so so I guess I'm trying to understand what that means so are we giving them a 30,000 in which case I'm sure he will use it or are we putting that 30,000 toward the increased value of the sustainability fund to be used as makes sense like what are we doing with that 30,000 well maybe Paul and or Sean can find out Jeremiah I thought he said you know he was great to join us the second time that he thought he could squeeze it out of his $200,000 fund which was general maintenance and interior so I thought he was saying that he thought he could make the budget work for this year rather than it was an increase but I'm not so we're saying don't bump the budget just changing the way we're rewarding it rather than your suggestion to bump okay but maybe we we should get clarity on that on whether he really needs another 30 he doesn't have it anywhere and I think we can only even if we increase double the sustainability fund we can't probably buy vehicles do small things and buy insulate you know I mean maybe it will all work out magically with sustainability but but I think we could get clarity on this and we can just not have this be final language until we get some more information I think the not bumping but being clear that if it fits into the maintenance fund or the sustainability fund that would be a great use of it and if not please fund it in FY 23 okay unless there's 30,000 to be found somewhere anywhere but I'm not sure there is right and you know and I looked Mandy as you had earlier there's on the three years older um months and has 11,000 for interior maintenance and flooring and has um another 20,000 so it has 30,000 for interior I'm not sure what that is but could any of that be drawn you know with the same idea could any of that be repurposed to be insulation I you know so I'm not sure what the original request but it's over three years old in money okay so okay so um Alex did you have another or I mean I think each person should just go through yeah yeah no I'm just trying to go bullet by bullet so the sustainability fund so my notes said that we would increase the bucket of the amount but I don't recall a conversation about a dollar figure attached to that so I guess I was just curious if how did I did I miss that or was that arrived at somehow um so I think I Kathy said that we could increase it when we were looking at this that we could increase it to 50 and this that would be what we would look to say from either the computer lines the copier line or the or the unexpended prior year articles however again that that number's up for you guys to discuss if you think that's too high again we think that we'll be able to spend you know pretty much whatever we put in sustainability at this point because there's a lot of there's a lot of projects on the radar coming up so you know I think we can spend it um but it's up to you guys what you want to recommend yeah I don't think I don't take issue per se I just didn't recall naming that number and recommending that number was all it wasn't I don't think we did name 100 we I added the offer that he could find another 50 to 50 and got 100 and you know sort of for and so I'm I'm actually I'm actually in favor of increasingly explicitly to 100 you know doubling it since we're trying to draw on it um but uh Mandy Peter should we should we just go one have everyone speak on the the one item each time and then go to the next one I think that would work best so Peter do you want to stay on this one yeah I have nothing on this one okay Mandy your hand was up I don't really have anything on that we should probably put a number in there um um and say where it's going to come from um or where we're thinking of it coming from and I think you did in the two bullets down so so it might be better to move that bullet up so it follows you know I was trying to figure out which bullet went where because it's the that bullet is explicitly where to find the fonts okay so then Peter you were going to going I'm trying to follow the bullet sequence discussion but now that the bullets are moving I'm a little confused because because my comment is about that bullet the computer equipment so so this this idea of um there's two things in this bullet right there's repurposing past appropriations that remain unspent which I think is like uh an uncontroversial idea if we if we refresh our accounting books and we find unencumbered funds then yes we should use that free money um and then the second one is um reduce school and town technology requests so this was a little more ambiguous to me I remember Doug saying if if he needed to we could reduce uh part of the copier allocation uh and then in a later discussion to paraphrase I think a comment from Alex she was like well we shouldn't penalize just the person who was nice enough to offer up who happened to be here and present in the style of it um and then I think there was the there was the um I can't remember this is a suggestion or if I talk to Sean about this but Sean was going to talk to um to Doug to see well what of mount could we actually reduce that to so if it's just the idea of fine unencumbered past funds and offset the request for school and town technology that's that's one thing but to to put it out there without condition is is a little problematic Kathy can I speak to that real quick yep um so I was able to touch base with um Doug and Jerry after um the conversation last week so um you know I was able to get some input on them about how much they felt they could reduce it um without you know putting them in a tough position for next year um you know the computer the thought behind the computers was that because it cares you know there was a lot of purchasing of of computer devices chromebooks and laptops this year so that was one sort of area of town or school or library for that matter um that we sort of felt like we had bought a lot of it this year um but I but I think what we would do you know Paul and I would be to work with the departments to figure out how much they can reduce it without affecting their programming for next year um to allocate to the the sustainability line item and so again I have talked to Doug and Jerry I still haven't heard back from um Sean Hannon yet but my guess is he's going to be in a similar place as um Jerry so um I just I'm wondering um we can rephrase this and then Sean was also this repurposing past appropriations that was looking quickly there are some fairly big items Mandy had brought this up um that are older than three years including things like uh technology purchases for the schools um so they were it isn't a tech hardware 31 000 from over three over three years old that's still open and um so I'm not I'm not counting the uh Fort River Roof where that had about almost 100 000 had 96 000 and not yet spent so there was some thought that the school matched some of this um and then Sean was going to double as we said double check in these three areas so any other thoughts on this on terms of this was this was literally a recommendation to find the money in these possible places um not explicitly this much here this much here and this much there so it was written more generally um Mandy and then Alex yeah I I had a couple of thoughts on this the one is I figured the offset was yeah I made the point last year that I was concerned that the schools are the ones that seem to have a huge amount of FY 16 17 and 18 um unspent funds including 33 and a half thousand for tech hardware and so you can only buy so much it it it from my outside perspective it seems like maybe they're asking for more than they buy every year and it's just building up and I'm not seeing the reduction at some point in a year saying oh we can do that offset um and and I see it with buildings and grounds but with building and grounds I think it was said that that we're catching up on that spending but the building and ground was nearly the same amount unspent in those three years as the current year's request um and so I'm just concerned that the requests might be slightly higher than they need every year and it's just building up and that's not we don't know what FY 19 and 20 is even spent yet so I I want that offset to be able to find that 30,000 or even the 45 because of the other 15 but I also wanted to talk about I was concerned about the delaying summer all of the library request for laptops because the building will be closed for construction my understanding was that um they would still be used in an alternative location so I would ask for a different wording laptops can be used anywhere you know they're they're not they're mobile um so I wondered if it was for computer stations not the laptops and that the reasoning we could say is not not because the building will be closed for construction but to better match the available space to set up computers in the alternate location so we're not buying computers that don't have anywhere to go um that I think that's much better language and then that would be if it turns out they have enough space to put everything in that they're talking about then it goes through if not it gets just delay I mean I think it's a delay rather than don't buy um you know and Alex I know we weren't able to talk to Sharon you said and it's a question sort of in my mind how many laptops currently exist that are in decent shape you know that will have to be set up in some alternative space and how many more would this be um so I don't I just don't have a sense of how many total so she she did send it over to Sean yeah she I think she's I have to talk to her more because I didn't get to discuss it with her further but I think she said that we could push it off a year um but I again before I confirm that I want to talk to her more about it to understand it but yeah and I and I think to to manager's point right so there's going to be because we're we are wildly increasing the number of computers that will have in the larger space so there's sort of multiple issues right one is we get new we get new computers every year just like the school does to replace old computers and so when we move into a temporary space we still need to refresh those computers but it's the bump into like more computers that we don't necessarily need until I think it's like 2024 or whatever it is that she sent to Sean so there's two bumps for us one is the automated materials handling system and one is the we've got switchers and routers and I mean like we're actually going to be a technologically savvy library instead of like a duct tape patched together that we are now um and the other comment I would make is this language that talks about the council endorsing the project and it doesn't matter because we're going to have to move into temporary space whether it's a repair or an expansion project so really our temporary library needs and how it impacts the budget isn't actually it's it's impacting the budget further on right if we don't expand then we won't have more computers for the 3000 people who don't have computers right but if we but either way so it's the later years that the technology is sort of fungible depending on whether we go forward or not but the moving to a temporary space and what that may or may not do doesn't matter like we're going to have to go to a temporary space no matter what so I think we just need to change that language so I think we can completely delete the current sentence as it's written and then put I mean if Sharon has already you know we asked and it turned out these could be delayed a year we can just put that in that's part of an offset for finding the money so we can just verify because that's it's $29,000 so it's if if Sharon did say it could be delayed for a year so we can um so it can be word you know delay somewhere all you know depending on and I would also base fit yeah I would also clarify too that when we move into a temporary space whether it's for a repair or an expansion that there are technology needs associated with that right um and I think that's part of a conversation that RIT is going to want to have with town so I just I'm I'm hesitant to like I'm happy to move money where it makes sense over the sustainability fund and I think that's great but I think we need to be flexible with what the needs are um as things develop so I guess that's what I want to throw out there because if we move into a temporary space and it's not wired for anything like we're going to have to do something right and what does that look like and so just the budget go toward that so I just I think it's important to be flexible and it doesn't again matter which project we choose that need doesn't change okay so that that sentence both you know anything that changes here would change in the body of the text too so we reword that sentence um and then everyone will get to see this whole thing again you know I'll just send it out and people can do it so did so Kerry you had your hand up also yeah and I was actually going to comment on the sustainability fund piece so I don't you know if anybody wants to comment on what we've been talking about to stay on track or it's okay to go back to sustainability I think that's fine okay so I guess though my only thought as we're um increasing the sustain sustainability fund is it feels like we're probably going to be this is a new fund and we might be setting a precedent of the level at which kind of the the lowest level at the I was going to say ceiling I guess the basement level so I it's not that I'm against funding it at that level but I'm thinking about especially with all the capital needs going forward with all projects and so if we just want to be I think you're comfortable with that as there's a precedent setting level that we're going to be putting it up so I guess I'll look to Paul and Sean um this this is specifically focused just on next year so the question would be are we going to be committing I think that's a good question are we committing then to a hundred every year going forward or are we saying for this particular year um we want that to be the pad of money and where we visited again next year which would be a way of wording it me andy yeah since this is the first year we might be able to say we don't know how much we need um and so we do need to reflect after you know at next year's JCPC on whether the amount was appropriate or not but but explicitly saying that instead of saying this is the floor as Kerry was saying it's a very good question Kerry brought up yeah I think can I just add to that yep um also again we intentionally left this very broad so that we can use it for a range of things such as you know and upgrading the the school van to be a hybrid or electric option um you know there's always studies but you know there's like tangible things that we could do with this money um that I don't see the need going away anytime soon as we replace more vehicles in the future so I think there will always be a you know at this level at the hundred thousand level there's going to be ways to spend this going forward I see Paul now Paul is nodding his head as well okay so I will I would put Mandy's wording in but in this recommendation but then in the body I will add that wording that there's likely to be this kind of need and it's been less flexible I'm trying not to make this um a lot longer you know I I took a stab just I I'm a fan of executive summaries which is why I put one on and the whole thing even with the executive summary is only six pages long so it is a little bit overkill to have a page and a half summarizing it but just to highlight agreement so any other comments on Mandy's hand is up and Alex's hand is up yeah I have a comment on sorry I have a comment on the what I think is the next bullet point the resident capital request for a study um I think the school committee might have voted the capital funding the regional school committee for a portion of this study so I I guess I'm asking for a change in language um if they voted it then I had said is it contingent upon them funding a portion of it too but if they already voted that then it's already there um but the other one is could we be more specific that the recommendation is that um the money be this portion of that study this portion of the money the money that's coming from the town be specifically used for town land only instead of the regional school district land I will Peter did you want to react to that yeah just a point of info so part of the capital FY 22 capital plan that the regional school committee voted last Tuesday included $15,000 and the exact description of the item was renewable energy study with Town of Amherst and so so that could be interpreted as part of this or a share of this yeah I believe so is Carrie was that your understanding as well yeah and and I actually had an opportunity over a year ago I think I sat down with Mike and the I'm sorry the superintendent superintendent Morris and the sponsors of the bill and I asked them this question about where you know why the high school you know rather than you know one of our our lots that is owned by the town of Amherst and I think that because it was a high school sponsored I'm not saying I'm just going to give some background I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this but but I think it was really important to the sponsors of the bill because they are high school students that the study be done on the grounds of the high school um now you know I hear what you're saying because it is region owned land um um but I so I I guess I would be opposed to putting in the language that it has to be on the town of Amherst I think the town of Amherst would get a benefit from it even if it is on region on land um and I know that it would go against the the the sponsors um desires but it is just a study so it is possible um it may not lead to anything in which he's maybe there we could include the town of Amherst only maybe expand the scope of it to include other sites that aren't region owned exclusively and place it where it's you know best suited but that's just a little background on the request can I clarify Kathy yeah I guess I guess I wasn't clear enough um I'm assuming the 15,000 would go to the region owned land and any additional I just want to make sure there's town owned land included on that so that the money the town is spending here is town owned land I wasn't expect I was still expecting that 15,000 from the regional school district vote to cover at least one parking lot probably the high school so not exclude the regional land but somehow say that the expectation is this CIP funds would allow us to expand that beyond regional school land to town owned land okay I can I can try to do that I just want to weigh in on this because I also feel that even if the regional school hadn't put in 15 I would be in favor of this to include the regional schools because I think we get the entire budget gets a huge benefit over this long term um and the difference in the I think we're at 80 percent are we am I right on the formula Peter and Kerry that when it comes to capital we we pay 75 or 80 it's it's back to the straight formula it's not you know better than I have done us and he may know yeah it's pretty close yeah yeah you know so um it's not the regular formula um it's actually has to do with the eqv in each town so actually so even though this is capital andy so capital is uh capital goes under a different formula it's not the same what as for the operating budget it's the eqv Sean can confirm that andy's correct um the capitals all eqv the regular budget is a mix of a whole bunch of stuff right and then what amherst share then would be in my right it's in the 75 percent to 80 percent range or somewhere like that yeah it's like 80 percent so we're talking about 80 percent of 15 000 would be the town of amherst anyway um you know that's what I just think it's such a small amount of money if that's the part but so one way of bypassing this issue so much is saying um the resident capital request for solar economies on the regional schools and the elementary schools and town land um so just to make sure it does and it would be combined with any funds available from the regional from the regional school capital budget we can write that broader yeah and I also say Kathy you know as I said with this before if we are able to get a grant and get the technical expertise provided to us to do this study um you know we would also probably look to see if they could do the region some of those region parking lots as part of their study to really do like a townwide look at it um because obviously the high school roof the middle school roof and some of those parking lots are are good candidates potentially for solar so um you know it's possible that the grant would cover the region side as well at least for this first phase of the study okay so I will I will rework the so I take it that everyone is in favor of saying yes to this so the question is how how we were worded so we're clear what we're recommending correct correct yes I think so Alex yeah I just wanted to follow up Sean actually was I think discussing what my question was so my notes and and again maybe I didn't totally understand was that we were recommending that this project go forward and that it be funded by grant money that Stephanie was going after and if the grant couldn't fund it then we would pull it out of the sustainability fund which isn't exactly how this reads and so I guess I just want to confirm if that's our understanding maybe we tweak the language to read a little more closely to that okay so so it would be so it would be worded that first seek grants and then if we can't cover it with grants go to the sustainable okay and then you know when when they presented it seemed like some of what might be available was actually technical expertise to work on the ground you know that it might be a gift of labor rather than a gift of money you know that there are experts out there who would come out and work with us so that clearly would have to be worked out it's not something we have to work on Peter yeah just jumping around a bit so back to the computer town technology request so to reflect the the description that Sean gave about um that they would that Paul and Sean would work over the course of the year with the departments about what the what the capital needs were I'm sorry what the technology needs were just just adding like the words as feasible to the end of reducing school and town technology requests yep because then it says okay we're gonna try and reduce them we'll see if we can get it to a reasonable level but it doesn't it's not a hard commit that we're going to do a zero some offset where we fund in this case the months in the sustainability fund and then you know to the degree it has to it gets gets cut down I just want to make sure that there's like a it's not a you know this for that kind of exchange at least that's how I feel no I think that's fine you know I'm seeing you know Paul Paul is here and Sean is here and I know in the past what happened is magically everything just happened when we saw a revised capital request but we're not we're we're hopefully go coming with our final report and some of these can happen it it looked like there was that so adding that word is perfect makes perfect sense to me any other thoughts on this set also just I wasn't sure whether um on the at this coming fiscal year I didn't capture anything else that we were talking about in terms of recommendations so there was we've got a table with every single item on it and I don't the big one which is a little bit down below is delaying the North Amherst the interstudy the intersection study which is 450,000 and it's you know these are where you don't directly see it in the budget because it's next year's cost because it was funded by debt so I just I see Tammy's hand is up so Tammy I don't know whether I'm skipping by something you wanted to address well I just wanted to make sure you're going to fix the thing about the library because um totally the bill okay okay good you know so Sean could if he wanted we can just right now just delete all of that wording you know to say we're going to do it just a red red exit out okay good and redo it okay it's not there anymore it has nothing to do with the council voting or not it has to do with you know matching the request to the space we think will be available in delay to the exactly great and delay to the extent it makes sense great thank you okay any other on this set you know I wasn't sure on the North Amherst intersection one question and I think Sean you were answering it you know when I spoke to Paul separately he said we wouldn't do the 1.8 million without a grant but I think it was in the debt service costs for out years you know so the when you when you look at the five-year costs the 1.8 million was in those so if we think that should be grant funded not town funded it will um adjust that budget in FY 24 25 and 26 am I correct that's what Sean told me it's it's a couple hundred thousand in each of those years it goes down if we're not doing if we're not spending 1.8 out of town money with the bond so it may it makes actually a pretty big difference over the five-year period on um if nothing else it brings it back into balance some of the out years um FY 23 was 153,000 deficit and 54 was a $33,000 deficit despite going up on the share of general revenue that was going into capital so does anyone want to reopen that because it's it's a yes you do or no yes you want to reopen so Alex go yeah I I guess I again maybe it was one of those nights where I was asleep but I like I know that you and Mandy both Mandy Joe both had comments around the North Amherst intersection but I I don't feel like I participated in a comment where I was making a recommendation and so I guess I if if we're making a recommendation I would like to know more and I would like to hear from either Sean or the town manager about the North Amherst intersection and like is our is everybody like are we just signing off on something that they're already recommending I don't I don't know the ramifications well enough beyond like it balancing the budget of of us asking to delay so I just don't feel equipped to be making that recommendation so I just appreciate a little input okay Paul has his hand up Kathy if you want Paul yeah go so so this is a project that um we had applied for mass works grants for privacy previously um the um you know this year we chose a different tact and went for South Amherst for the Pomeroy and we got the grant for Pomeroy and the state found that to be a more compelling grant application which we're pleased to get but we continue to see activity in North Amherst we will need to do this intersection at some point we've we're poised we already made the investment with purchasing the gas station so you know I think it it will have to wrestle with all the other priorities we have so I think keeping it on on the on the jcpc on the on the capital plan is important you know my belief is that we should always be seeking state funds for this type of project because otherwise it soaks up so much of our capital so that's not clear guidance I don't think but it well Paul do we need to support do we as a town need to spend $450,000 to make it more likely that we get would get 1.8 million I would I would need to see we'd have to think through our strategy on that I don't have the answer for you on that okay I mean given that we just got a grant this way Andy actually that was exactly my question too whether the engineering study is an important prerequisite for getting the grand funds and I think we need to maybe we can just write it in that fashion and just say that we only recommend the $450,000 if there's evidence that spending that money would enhance significantly enhance our ability to get the grant for the entire project okay Alex does that also address your concern yeah no that's great thank you okay that I am writing as fast as I can but I think I can capture those words yeah you know and I I mean actually on this particular thing I know we earlier Paul when we applied we had an engineering study which was described to me as 25% of an engineering study you know so that we had some specs but one of the issues is we don't have 100 agreement on what it is we want to do so you certainly don't want to do the engineering study until you're sure what we're asking them to do um so we have had some some work done for some amount of money so far on this um that isn't just a traffic study okay well we reward that any anything else on this and I realized that I just sat there and took my interpretation and clearly it focused everyone's comments extremely well so is there anything missing from this list that we were when we were focused on FY 22 um do should we before we talk about anything else should we do we need to take a formal vote on this revised list as these are our set of recommendations for FY 22 should we make a motion to do that I just I don't know whether you know Mandy I guess my only question is and I'm quickly scanning now you then you had copied those recommendations down onto the end of page three into page four are there anything listed on those recommendations that aren't listed above um that we'd need to potentially review I don't I don't think so and what I would do is completely every any you know start on the inside make sure that the wording matches you know so it's not like we say it one way time and not another you know I don't think so so what I did do later on is that you know it says at the beginning too that we recommend the work that went into giving us everything early on at the very beginning we want that to become a standard practice so we both liked it and we thank them a lot for doing it um um and then later on um we can talk about the I did put some wording on the out years um so but these were I think Mandy these were the only ones that focused on FY 22 Peter so what is it you want to vote on right now well the question would be are people comfortable with these consider them revised as the set of recommendations for FY 22 that we are comfortable having in this report I mean you get to see the report again but that this is all we want to say in terms of our recommendations to the manager considering what was originally presented to us where we're assuming not none of those line items are changed but we're reacting to that set so so do you mean the items themselves or or how they're they've been worded as revised in the last half an hour as revised in the last half an hour okay that I would find a little harder to vote on just because we're watching the edit real time and we're trying to like unless unless you felt there was like a major process efficiency to be gained um no I don't I don't feel that but that's just me so my question then would be um we have a tentative meeting for next week so a revised version of this can come back to everyone and we can meet quickly next week because there's you know if people want to see the wording changed so that that's just you know in last week we didn't want to vote because we didn't have wording so this you know so revise the wording and come back for short meeting next week because I don't think we can't do it um virtually we can't just send around the revised report um I'm looking for any kind of guidance on this on getting to a final version of the report Peter yeah I mean I'm fine doing whatever people are comfortable with I think I think this process of of editing real time and getting it to what we think is final is good then we have some time to like read it after after the meeting and then I think like you suggest we should be we shouldn't be able to come back next week if we get through everything today um with with it either unchanged or with with minor changes that people bring from after having read it um I don't know does everyone agree with that way or approaching this okay so then maybe you know so there are a couple areas that um you all have the memo but I have it in front of me too later on I flagged um Mandy had made a comment that um looking at out years um to the extent possible coordinate with CPA so if anything is on the list that could potentially be spent off the CPA tax money so I put that in as a recommendation and then the other one I um and we can show and can probably find these and happy to reword them is if you look in out in the out years we go we jump up to 10 percent then we jump up to 10 and a half percent capital and this is so we can get all four of the big building projects in and the school isn't is a debt service override so it's not actually in it but that will be that is going to put some pressure on decreasing spending on roads and others you can see it in the line items and I just thought we should recommend that when paul presents this to the world that he uh highlight the fact that these are some choices that are being made or will require choices to be made even if we're not approving this time all five years we are looking at the five-year budget roads drop down by about half of what they are and some of the other lines drop down a lot because debt service goes up by about that's just looking out so I I put in some wording on mainly encouraging the manager when he presents this to also say something about those those out years but alex so um I have some words I think they're words nothing but I don't know I I don't know whether I can just send them to you offline versus you know um doing it here per se but um we had sorry I'm trying to scroll through where so there were um recommendations I guess I recall I guess where are we where should I be commenting but you know Sean has the whole document so I think it would be fine for people to call out you know on page whatever so that so on the recommendations which I think is the next section um there's language in there about the proposal of a building maintenance fund and again I remember conversation about that but I like I'm I'm having this disconnect between like conversations had and recommendations that we're making and I don't necessarily take issue with creating a proposed maintenance fund to support projects but I'm I'm not sure what that means and what were like are we like I think Peter had talked about like instead of people doing high level budgets like you you know take that excess and like I guess I just I want to understand what that recommendation what does that mean what does that look like yeah I think nice speak to that real quick um so I think that that's just um that's not anything new I think it's just maybe the way it's captured here is a little bit different um so we've always had sort of a general building repair project so I think it's just the way it's being captured here you know it sort of is a maintenance fund because it is sort of for general projects that come up throughout the year um but it isn't um it isn't like a new thing because we have done that for so of several years okay so maybe we've fixed that to clarify that we think it's important this continues or I mean I don't I don't know that we've called this out in the past so I guess I'm trying to figure out why we're calling it out which I don't take issue with I just used to be clear that it's not something new yeah I think in some ways it is good to call out because there has been there have been a lot of questions on maintenance and things of that nature so just good to I think highlight that we have um you know this project that is specifically for general maintenance throughout town but you're right we should make it clear that it isn't a new thing it's just it is increased this year because of the accessibility study so Mandy Jo I don't know if you want to I mean I can keep going in that section or if you've got a different section like my next comments in the new JCPC process section so okay so I guess the only thing I other thing is the next paragraph I feel like we are proactively talking about sustainability and all the money we're throwing toward it and then we sort of like sweep under the rug at the police station that we're possibly choosing the less sustainable option which I don't take issue with I just you know um like let's admit we're not doing a full VRF system right like it's okay but it's it's the choice that wasn't recommended didn't make sense but I guess I just want to be consistent in how we address things and so you know if we want to say a wholesale you know replacement of the existence with a full VRF to you know whatever I just want to be consistent and not pretend not pretend but you know what I mean like okay like we have to make choices right we have to make choices about where putting money towards the most sustainable option makes sense and where it doesn't and I think if we aren't being 100% candid about that it doesn't serve anything so that would people can feel otherwise that's just my thought okay so I think you're asking to put the words full VRF that gets us off fossil fuels because it was the double thing of when when Jeremiah went through the extent to which right we're still moving we're still moving to an electric chiller which is great but it's not right like let's at least be honest okay okay so that yellow highlight that I put in there is purely that if we are recommending a balanced budget we're saying it has to be $15,000 lower I don't know whether we need to say that or not but the budget that was given to us was $15,000 above the available funds and Kathy we did um just as a reminder we we have a unexpended prior year article that's roughly $15,000 which would increase the funding side by that amount so that that's sort of what my comment is that we can talk through how to okay so we can we can just reword that you know after we met this happened you know that it's now in it's not you know the sheet the sheet that is in shows a negative 15 so that would be one that we could potentially just revise I mean we yeah okay and Andy and just going back quickly up to the police station again my understanding of part of what the recommendation was from Jeremy was that because solar is a possibility for that building it it creates a difference and that he was just factoring that in as to why the technology didn't need to exactly be the same as months and because I was really troubled by it a lot at first in trying to understand it and if I don't understand it correctly might be good to just have somebody check with him just in the single foot one of us calling him to make sure we have it right the building is a 24 seven building and so it has continuous demand for reliable HVAC and so we want to make sure that we understand this and have it right okay so I think all these suggestions are right right this longer with maybe a few sentences rather than a simple one my he did in fact say you're asking for a huge amount of money and closing the building for a while to get no real energy say you know no cost savings but um and therefore chiller make chiller as proposed makes sense but we can reword all of this and put some pieces of solar as a not just a possibility but I know we're thinking about looking at that for the because the roof is big enough right and it's oriented in a way where we could get solar okay andy is there more on that or is your hand just no that's fine okay other sections moving down peter um let's see uh top of page five right above where new jcpc process starts okay okay stop um that was fun um so so this first sentence here at the very top is from from from the things that I'm engaging in this process on is like one of the most important sentences for me so I'm glad you included it that it's ambitious and will likely result in pressure on operating costs um my personal preference would be to strengthen that language because it is my main concern um with our capital expenditures uh this year and in the in the coming years um to whatever degree that people are comfortable uh with the language so something like would result in intense pressure or will result in cuts to level services across the town um just given the the likelihood of the the one to one and a half percent operations budget that the chan's been talking about um you know I don't I don't want to use this as a opportunity just to drive some argument um but it's just the general theme of the zero sum pressure that capital costs these five years are going to be putting on the operations budget um this is something that I would like to have clear in the report okay can I I just want to um I'm perfectly willing to put the word intense in I guess I do have a question of Sean and Paul because they there was a recent revision on revenue forecasts so I don't know to what extent um FY 23 24 25 you know if those also are going to revise some of the pressure will be less intense the the worst year by far was going to be the FY 23 year you know in terms of various things so um but it FY 23 is intense and Sean when he did this Sean can speak did not divulge what 24 25 and 26 look like Sean so think we just saved $200,000 by you know kicking North Amherst intersection down the road so that that'll help everything a little bit um but a more serious note so there's a couple things one you know even when I guess even when we have two and a half percent increases which is sort of our normal there have been cuts to level services at you know for various department budgets um so I guess I would want to distinguish you know we just talking about because we're not at the two and a half percent or it it was it because we're not going above two and a half percent so that's sort of one thing I'm thinking about and then the second thing is you know there's there's still a lot that's going to play out I think over the next couple years with the you know the federal stimulus that came out now and so we don't have a ton of information on that and we're still looking at how that fits into the picture but but I would hesitate to say you know this will result in cuts to level services um you know in a year that we haven't got to that year yet um so that's sort of where I'm at I think it is right to say that you know going to ten and a half percent will um you know put is ambitious and will maybe put stress on sort of this relationship but um but I think we still need to get there and see what things look like before we say it's going to cut have a cut to level services Mandy yeah I would have I'm with Sean I would object to using the word intense because we saw that when that first capital plan came out the recommended operating budgets were only going to increase one to one and a half percent or something and now we're above two you know and so that might ease the actual pressure on next year's budgets anyway because they're already higher than we expected when that first plan came out but but beyond that it's not just what you know particularly for the regional school Amherst's increase is not necessarily our limiting what what our financial guidelines are for the Amherst assessment for the regional school is not necessarily the limiting factor on whether the regional school district has issues with its regional budget um some of that's on which assessment method you pick um and so to lay it all on Amherst and this financial plan when for some of the operating budgets it's not just Amherst I would have a problem with so I I'm okay with the language as is but I would object to making it stronger in the way Peter asked for it Angie yeah first following up on what Mandy just said I tend to agree because I the push for a switch in the method for assessment is not being driven by an analysis of what is best for the health of the school budget it is being driven by what is point of order point of order yeah so we're drifting into items that are regional school committee policy questions I didn't I never brought up the assessment method I understand this is an opinionated people have strong feelings but we're now getting into items that appear on a quorum I'm sorry appear on the the agenda of other committees that there are some members here on so I don't mean to to tell people not to share their opinion here but I never mentioned the school budget I never mentioned the regional school budget I never mentioned the assessment method and I understand we have disagreements on those topics but if we could keep it just to the topic at hand that would be appreciated okay well I Mandy could respond if she wants but she's it did start with the question the dude raised about putting a extra word on um preceding pressure and the point that was being made was is that there's lots of different reasons why there might be pressure but that it's not necessarily it shouldn't necessarily fall on our policy but let me um having said that go on to just one other topic for information purposes um that we do know that there's a fair amount of stimulus funds that is coming to Amherst and uh Paul has been working on trying to get information about the exact amount and what the rules are for how it can be used and over what period of time it could be used um it will go on to a finance committee agenda as soon as there is actually something to talk about when we have that information and we'll try and get that information around publicly that that discussion is going to take place when we have the ability to have that conversation so so Andy are you suggesting I mean this would be information we could add here um you know we see the stimulus funds may ease the pressure are you suggesting putting a sentence in something about stimulant you could say that because I mean it is going to be additional revenue for the for the town the question is is questions of how much and how it can be used and how quickly it has to be used are really what we're talking about would are going to affect some of these questions I don't know if Sean or Paul have anything to add to that because they've been actually more intensely involved in trying to figure this out and what to say to the finance committee than I have I've just been waiting I think Sean had his hand up yeah I mean I I guess I would hesitate to put that in here explicitly I think we got this is a recommendation to Paul and he knows about it so I guess I would hold off putting it in there until we have more information Alex yeah I guess I mean as as you know I mean and Andy Tammy and I have all been on the JCPC you know for for a while now and I guess like the paragraph and I think maybe what some of the older members are taking issue with is it's not a surprise that like you know that the that the capital budget's going up to 10 and a half like 10 was the plan all along and you know COVID was definitely a difficulty and you know the decrease in roads and sidewalks like this is this was all the plan and and I guess the way it's written makes it feel like like we've discussed this new development and it's not a new development I mean it doesn't make it less difficult doesn't make the conversation you know any more challenging but it's not new information I mean this is the way it's been so I guess maybe you know I don't know maybe it's just phraseology and word choice around like right I mean if you go back to JCPC you know presentations for the last like six years they're going to talk about this plan and how it's going to play out so I just I guess I just I don't want it to read like you know you're taking up something new and this you know like oh my god we're just realizing like the difficulty it's going to be I just that's phraseology and I would also say too I guess I would ask Sean that preceding three paragraphs above or is that accurate like have we made decisions yet like this reads like things have been decided to a certain element and I guess again being sensitive around the library words like as much as relative to the town which the town like I just the language reads in a way that to me as a library trustee I'm not comfortable with it feels agenda driven versus fact driven and so I guess I would just ask that those three paragraphs be revisited for what's known and what's not known and be written in a way that mirrors that okay I mean these we we none of we really did not focus much on the whole five-year set other than to look at it and see what's no but but but I would argue that these paragraphs no no I know I like an agenda rather than the fact I know I so I'm thinking just um take the discussion out take I see what you're saying Alex and they can be reworked you know one of the things Annie and I talked about when this first came to us um the the larger capital plan is that we haven't actually sat down to say this is the plan this was one possible way of making it all happen you know and you have to put out one possible way of making it all happen including the fire station and DPW happening at the same time a school and a library you know rather than over a 10-year period this if you do that this is what it starts to look like so I think this just can be reworded a lot to just say this is a possible view of what this would look like with these things coming in period you know that we didn't we didn't know pine in this committee right we specifically removed the five capital projects right no exactly we we did not at all you know so this is the dual pine on one methodology versus another doesn't make any sense to me I'll just I'll just rework them substantially just to observe that because they're all coming in this is what you get in a fight in over a five year over the five years okay revise next Mandy said new JCPC process she had comments in this section yep so if we're there it's to the last paragraph though we also suggest consider ways to profile major capital expenditures I just thought it could be reworded to be clearer I had a suggestion to say profile major capital expenditures in the enterprise funds and through the community preservation act in public presentations for a more comprehensive summary of capital improvements across all funding areas and I just thought it was a little wonky and what was worded that's all okay so can you just send me that word yeah you know and this was just um you know that the thought is this is a capital plan that focuses on part of our capital and so trying to get that you know meanwhile we're spending 11 million dollars for a centennial plant over in an enterprise fund you know just that in some way of bringing those together that'd be great and Paul I don't know what you think of that recommendation but it's it's in a capital plan you know when you're coming up the capital improvement plan even if JCPC is not focused on those they feel like they're part of the bigger picture for the town so just try to think of some short way of without making the report be longer I understand I also just wanted to mention that Shawn is having internet connectivity problems that's why he dropped off so that's why you lost the image so I apologize for that he'll be back on I'm sure okay so Mandy has a I have that yellow I have yellow shaded anyway you'll send me wording for that any other comments and the other thing I say if it's you know lines in the way they're written I think it's fine just to send me all of those as well you know and then I will incorporate what we've done specifically here and it's Thursday I can certainly get them back to you by Monday morning you know to have a revised draft because it's not a you know if anything was missing this is quite a bit shorter than it's been in the past I did have a few questions on appendices right now Shawn is going to copy in the big spreadsheet that shows five years of how many vehicles we're buying all the way down should we add the vehicle inventory we got if it will be end up being like a 30 page 40 page document you know vehicles just go on or should we reference them and a link um so it was a question just purely on how big you want this report to be if someone is downloading it we have the report from that we received at the very beginning that has all that information in it so we could just put a hot link to it rather than put vehicles into here I think we need to put the detail that's not there yet on the five years of what we were looking at in out years but okay so shorter no vehicle doesn't get put in here and I couldn't Shawn sent me the spreadsheet but it's landscape and trying to bring a landscape version into a portrait version without um he he'll do that toward the end yes Mandy yeah I was wondering so so appendix B the the detailed spreadsheet do we really need to include that um you've included all the projects for funding for FY 22 but I assume your your appendix B or whatever it would be would be the the sort of line by line that just goes on that shows what would be potentially funded in 23 24 25 and 26 and I'm wondering if it's just easier to include the hot link okay I I'd take anyone's suggestion it's what you looked at Mandy when you asked about some of the things that could this be funded by over at CPAC could this be funded so it was looking at the specific items I I'm fine either way I mean Paul is going to have this in the final report so Alex thought on that I'm a fan of hot links yeah short printable reports with hot links I mean because most people want the people who want to click on the link will and the people who don't wind up not wasting as many trees so that's and and those pages if you remember them they there are lots of them even though they're landscape and microscopic font so shown we're getting a strong recommendation not to bring in the detailed spreadsheet that goes out five years with all the line items and just do a link and not to bring in the vehicle so short it's just the much shorter appendices I'm not even sure I'd include in now that I see the unspent funds it's all in that report we could just hot link to that one okay so then it'll just be the one five-year one that because we're talking about that with the 10 percent to 10 and a half percent okay that's that's easy okay well we will we also have a future placeholder wants the building inventory like right now I wouldn't put the building inventory in because it's outdated but is that like just so we don't drop it in the future is that all should that also be a hot link in the future yeah I know I think and we can put it we can put one in now because they have it it's in the same place you know one to vehicle one to building we can just say this is going to be available but Sean didn't think the building one was as accurate as the vehicle one you know I agree a hundred percent I wouldn't put it in I just didn't want it to drop like next year I just wanted to like mentally put a placeholder for it Kathy can I speak to that one sure um and what we you know unless Jeremiah can do the full review of all the facilities by the time the town manager presents this which I don't think he can you know what we'll probably do is take out the conditions of the buildings but still leave some of the other information about you know the zone it's in and um you know the the assessed value and some of that stuff we can still leave in there so it's still useful to some extent but we'll probably take the conditions out until those can be updated and Sean could you put I see your hand is up Andy but I just want to ask one so then for vehicles and for this you know we can link to the whole report you gave us at the beginning or if you can pull vehicles out to be its own report somewhere and this unspent funds then we can link specifically to that we can talk about that later right now it's all in one large document except for Sean very nicely gave me everything as an appendix so yeah we can we can do whatever um however you want to set it up it's fine okay Andy I guess that uh I feel like uh we may have punted a little bit on the five-year plan I actually think that the five-year plan is important and we didn't really give it the attention that we probably should have and it also serves not only an educational purpose for us but for all of the elected boards and for the community at large that would give you one example just because the neighbor made this inquiry the other day and that was Puffer's pond the beach and the dredging as to when it was going to happen and if it was going to happen and the only thing I had to look back on was the most recent five-year plan that I could lay my hands on but it was important to have it and I have to think that that's an important expenditure that we need to be planning for but if you know part of our role is to be thinking about what are the needs of the town in the long run and are we making adequate plans and prioritization for it and what are our recommendations because ultimately it is about recommendations we don't make the final decision we just make recommendations so I don't know that I would I would include it in the report in its entirety but I think that we need to say a little bit more to and even give an example of a section or something maybe the summary section so that anybody who looks at this report will understand the significance of the five-year plan and why they should be looking for that hot link so Andy could you I'd be happy to write so I think you're saying add a few paragraphs at least describe what's in it and then create the link so I mean you know you can go across and see how much we'd be spending on roads for example or how much on vehicles over the five-year period without having to because right now the suggestion has been remove the detailed excel just so looking at the past couple years of JCP reports we never talked much about any in any detail of what was in those five years but the excel spreadsheets were always there so you could you could see it so I'm just if you could say what whether you want to write some have some additional words put in here yeah I mean I think that you've you've stated it exactly right and not a whole lot of words but enough words that people understand what it is that they're going to be looking at if they look at the link okay and you know down to the fact you've not done had to name a project but to say that to see what is being proposed for funding in future years over the over the five-year plan that information is available at the link okay so I will take a stab at a draft of that just as a separate piece um you know and and the other thing that isn't here at all is the things that aren't on the list you know Sean gave us that what didn't make the list so if people want to find the new senior center it's not in the five-year plan right now you know so it's um so I'll take a stab at a short paragraph that makes you eager to go and find the detailed spreadsheet not just huh there's one that exists somewhere yeah but an example you gave is perfectly good one because if somebody's interested in the senior center and they if you just give them enough to go to look at the link and then they can say wait a minute it's not here why is it not here at least they've gotten that much information that's and I think that's sufficient okay Kathy can I say something on that too um so just on the the Puffer's Pod one because that was raised I think that was on the pending list and the capital improvement program that we discussed so that you know that's why we created that list it is on the radar um it's just not on the plan yet because it it didn't rise to being something that would be done in the next five years without grant funding um at this point in time and then the only thing I would caution is to and maybe I'm viewing this wrong I view this again as a recommendation to the town manager and that a lot of the information that you're talking about is going to be in the town manager's capital improvement program and that's probably the more public facing document that we would want to make sure has all the information that you're talking about because that'll be what goes to council and um and to finance committee gets voted so I just want to make sure we don't spend too much time trying to add things here to that will that are sort of already in that capital final capital improvement program that'll go to council then maybe what Kathy will consider writing is not um is simply that what would we like to see in the plan that can't that the manager is going to submit so that there's some direction there and maybe that is will meet the need yeah no I think that's I think that's the right way to go and again all the feedback from the very beginning of this process has been really helpful at trying to make that package as good as possible before it goes to the council so I think that's the right way to go Peter yeah Sean you brought my favorite topic the pending list um so uh Paul um you've you've heard my soapbox on this um the notion that we do feasibility studies but before they are discussed and greenlit by the appropriate committee they should not be on the pending list or at least on a list that says they're pending as soon as we get the money is this is this something you're in agreement with so I've heard that your your comment on that Peter um you know we we do have to recognize that there's work that needs needs to be done in our capital building so you know Sean and I have had some preliminary discussions about exactly how to recognize that need um and whether and where it shows up you know there there are a number of things in there that I don't really have an answer for you because we you know if you want to make a recommendation this committee can make a recommendation yeah just to add to what um the town manager said is you know we we're sort of waiting to get the feedback from this committee to then circle back to the original sort of package that we shared with you so that we can make those adjustments so you know we're sort of looking for this committee's input on how that was presented um to see if we should and we've got obviously Peter we've got strong input from you on on your thoughts on that so um if there are other you know if anybody else has input on that um we would take that into consideration too before making the final draft I guess um Kerry's hand is up so I think I said this like I don't know first to second meaning but regarding that list I just felt like um it it almost seemed like that we could have made two lists or maybe like make different categories within the list so that um there are things that are just delayed but are kind of for lack of a better term like shovel ready but you know aren't on the list yet and then there are things that um are vaguer you know in the sense that Peter's talking about where they need to go through all of these additional steps in order to get approval and you know I like the fact that there was a range and we didn't pick a specific number for the cracker firm thing but it did feel like it was out of place on that list and either we need to add in more similar types of projects I'm sure the cracker firm schools aren't the only um buildings that are going to need that kind of level of investment in the future so I just it it stuck out to me because it just felt like one of these things doesn't like the other and and finding a way to um recognize that while also recognizing that the fact that cracker firm is likely going to need some sort of investment in the future so would people so I think the suggestion now is on the five-year plan to make sure recommend to the town manager that he highlight what is on that plan and what is on a more delayed list um um with a couple examples and then do we also want to say and then have this future list include these our recommendation was two kinds of categories one we will go if we find grant funds but it's grant fund depending and the second would be we haven't really formulated exactly what what elements would go into it but we know we're going to have to spend money and we just haven't determined what that is yet it hasn't gone through all the processes do we want to make that as a recommendation I mean he's clearly heard what we're saying so um and Mandy yeah I I think I would like it as a recommendation in that section um just so it's written down that that you know there was some um uncomfortableness with the way that particular page was presented and all and I do definitely like Kerry's um idea of shovel ready versus not shovel ready but known you know I mean because other than the schools most of them look like these are things that we just couldn't fit into this plan right now but they would go if we could and they're ready to go and then there was the schools and you could add to that the library the not the library the senior center the hickory ridge improvements potentially you know there's a whole bunch of things you could add to that that say here's some things that are on a horizon that we don't know what their costs are we know that there's going to be something that dealt with but we don't want to lose track of them so we didn't want to not put them on somewhere in this document okay okay Sean can Sean heard this too so he can help me word it so what you'll see it in a draft with not me just looking at my handwriting um peter and out so I like that suggestion about being able to articulate these the shovel ready versus um whatever the language is but something that denotes you know further consideration or process is needed and again just because this is a public meeting I I know I'm a broken record but I have to say I'm not saying this because I'm against any specific items in the crocker farm study because I know that there are some members of the public which is perfectly fine who feel one way or the other on some or more are all of those items it's it's it's the process it's more thinking about the the involvement of the greater school committee in terms of a thing that would require a school committee decision Alex yeah I guess I'm kind of following up with the idea I I like the idea of not having 8 000 hot links and 8 000 documents and I'm wondering um if there is a suggestion in the future right like if we have a vehicle inventory and a building inventory like are those documents that we can somehow use or do we need like a third document I'm trying to think how we have a place where we can sort of see all of the things and where they are from a condition versus need at some point in the future and and and just helping people to understand like we see all of these things and like I don't know I'm just trying to figure out I don't have a suggestion I just like I think to the extent that we could sort of contain things in the smaller packages that are manageable for the public to be able to pull up that would be good um and I definitely like the idea of maybe instead of us having all the hot links in our document instead making recommendations about what the town manager puts in his document I think that makes sense so it might be that we recommend um there is a web page called the capital plan or something like this and then you could have something called vehicle inventory building input and it would get updated whenever um so it could you could just say recommend a page that captures both the word document and others um okay got it because right now we can't hot link to anything other than the report we were given on February that was drafted on February 5th or 11th there isn't a hot link to a vehicle inventory um so other other suggestions just conscious of the time I think we've done a lot of work um so um I will commit to getting a draft back by Monday morning um if there were sentences everyone has the word version of this just send me anything we didn't mention you know sentences when you look at it didn't set you right um if alex wants to do a read through I can send her the edited version or we can just all come together next week um you know to say do we have a final document does does that work for everyone and I'm just looking we have we actually have no public attendees right now I was going to say now we could call for public comments if we're finished but I don't see any public we either outlasted them or they they're waiting to watch the film no one's no one's heard any complaints that like they couldn't get into the meeting right which is odd to me that we've had zero um we've had very few attendees throughout this process we have had a couple um but we've had very few I don't know if it's a seven o'clock time slot or or what maybe it may be the time slot you know I um I've heard only one person asked to get the um the zoom tapes up sooner so that they could be watched later and so I think it's possibly that we're working through people's dinner times okay good as long as nobody's heard anything I'm fine as much no one has told me that they couldn't figure out what Sean's worried about is Sean is worried about his ratings yeah I mean I thought this process I thought this you know this group's done good work this year so you know you haven't had a lot of publicity on that front no I and I just want to um just say again and we can tell you that next week to me it made a huge difference what you gave us at the very beginning I mean just it it made you know I started Sean read my very first draft of this and I tried to mimic the draft from two years ago and that was still written as if it was going to the town meeting to try to explain each article but it was like okay we know we're just giving advice to Paul you know at this point um and trying to focus it down and you gave us enough information to to work with and I we really appreciate it so I think unless anyone has um anything else you know the minutes for this meeting will be that we revise the report and we'll have a revised report come out and Sean gave us minutes last week so we're actually up to date on minutes um and I think everyone very much including patients with me writing a sentence down which you would like to just throw out or totally rework I think that actually was a good thing to have happened and that meant people read it so thank you all and we'll see you next time thank you thank you thank you for the work Kathy yeah thank you very much you're welcome