 All right, Andy we're recording so you can go ahead. Okay. Seeing that a quorum of the committee finance committee is pressed I'm calling the finance committee meeting for March to 2021 to order pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12 2020 order. Which I noticed almost one year ago now. His order suspends certain provisions of the open meeting law general law chapter 30 a section 18. This meeting of the finance committee is being conducted by a remote participation and has a requirement for remote participation. I would like to check that each member of the committee can hear what was being said and we can hear them so please just say something to acknowledge your presence as I call each of your name so I'll go through the committee. Lynn Guzmer. Ascent. Bob Higner. I'm here. Kathy Shane. Bernie Kubiak. Present. Dorothy Pam. Present. And Pat DeAngelis. Present. So I note that all members of the committee have answered in the affirmative so that we can proceed we do have some other guests for our first two agenda items of today. And just so that we're all in the public are aware of the order that we're going to take the agenda. We are going to start with the financial implications of the stormwater and IDD. Bylaws. Then we'll go to the Community Preservation Act. And we'll go to the library financial orders, public comment. After and finally the scheduling. After afterwards but the first two items are going to be the stormwater and the CPA as indicated in the order that's in the published agenda which is currently on your screens. So, with that information being said, I'm going to ask. Sean who's done some initial work with. Beth to research some of the issues we talked about, about other communities and alternatives for how these bylaws what they're going to cost and how the costs are being supported. So, can I ask Sean this start with the presentation. Yeah, thanks Andy. So we don't have much of a presentation. We more wanted to share what we've learned since our last meeting we've met with North Hampton and we learned a lot of valuable information from the process they went through. So let me clarify some points related to these bylaws and then see if there's any additional information that the finance committee needs in order to consider a recommendation on the bylaws. So the first piece I was thinking is maybe I'm joined by Guilford who's the superintendent of the Department of Public Works and Beth Wilson who's the environmental scientist for the public works department. And I was thinking Beth maybe you could just do a really quick overview again of what each bylaw covers just for to refresh everybody's memory. Hi. Yeah, we have we have two bylaws. The IDDE bylaw really involves releases to our stormwater system either some kind of dumping a release into a catch basin, or illegal connections to our system. Which can can be a piping coming from a building, which if it's contributing any kind of a contaminant that becomes an illicit discharge. We have some that obviously over time DPW has allowed people to connect but as we investigate anything that we find that's actually contributing contamination to our system. The IDDE bylaw gives the town especially DPW the authority to investigate a situation like that. And to enforce it. That's really what the IDDE bylaws about. The stormwater management bylaw gets into stormwater permitting for new and redevelopment projects and really looking at the designs of proposed stormwater systems for new projects, and it involves developers to submit applications so there'll be a permitting system is part of that bylaw. It gives the town the authority to write regulations that would include a process for a new permitting system for new and redevelopment projects where an application is submitted and there would be fees involved. Developers would be basically providing a package to the town proposing what their stormwater design is, and this bylaw gives the town the authority to ask for that and also to apply a fee to it I guess is the financial side of it and then also to do enforcement in case say somebody doesn't get the permit that they need, or they don't follow the requirements of the permit. The bylaw gives the town the authority to do enforcement in that kind of a situation. I think that covers it for the financial parts of those two bylaws. Yeah, that's perfect, Beth, just to reiterate that both bylaws established the penalties for for on the enforcement side, and then one of them authorizes the creation of a permitting fee. So we don't know what that permitting fee will be yet. We believe the like all other fees that sort of falls under the town manager to set. And we will share some information that was in the packet in a minute. That gives you an idea of what fees look like and some other communities around here, but the fee itself has not been set yet. So the sort of three points we wanted to touch upon based on what we heard last time was talk a little bit more about the, the operating cost question there was a lot of requests for what are the future operating costs going to look like this program. And we can give a little bit of perspective on that however, you know, I'll let Guilford wait in a second that some of that's really down the road or the next phase after this. We're talking in talking about what do we need to do to improve our stormwater system, which is really after these bylaws. The other peaceful shares, again, information on the fees, and then we'll give you a little bit of the insights we learned from Northampton, when we talked with them. Operating cost front. You know it's important to note we're doing a lot now there's a lot of activities performed by the DPW street sweeping cleaning of catch basins drainage work that the town is already doing. So when we're thinking about costs in the future it's really about again what are we doing, what are those improvements or things we have to do beyond what we're already doing and quantifying those costs. And there was a lot of discussion around the enterprise fund, which for good reason we understand that sort of a big question. The buy the stormwater bylaw mentions the stormwater or the stormwater enterprise fund potentially but it doesn't. It's not creating the enterprise fund. It's just saying that there's going to be future costs, most likely from improving the stormwater system. And there's different ways you can handle those costs, one of which could be an enterprise fund. So, again, we'll talk about that more but we're trying to decouple what an enterprise fund would do what it would look like the cost of an enterprise fund from this bylaw discussion because the bylaws are really required no matter what we do to manage the stormwater improvement costs in the future. And that'll really probably be its own big agenda item in the future for finance committee is to what vehicle do we use to manage these costs in the future. So with that, go for do you want to just weigh in a little bit on the timeline of where we are with the permit process now, and when we would start getting better sense of those future costs of improving the stormwater system. You're muted still. Well, we can't hear you. Can you hear me now. Yes. Can you hear me now. Yes. Yes, we can. So, so this is these two pieces you're looking at these two bylaws are part of a larger system or a larger permitting and overall stormwater management system that was being asked of us by the federal government. So that's the biggest thing to keep in mind there's a lot more to the overall permit we have with the federal government to manage our stormwater system. So these are just two small pieces, and the cost to implement both these are relatively small. There will be almost no immediate cost to either one to the town to either one of these bylaws, because there's a year of creating regulations and implementing regulations and the bylaws if you look at it. So once you approve the once the council approves the bylaws, we have a year for regulation. And then during that making of regulations will have permit fees and those discussions. As we move through the rest of the overall permitting, the federal permit for stormwater, we will start to see some type of implementation costs come in over the next three to five years. We'll see costs for doing test water testing, tracing outfalls sampling outfalls, and then starting to develop what our problem areas are and our approaches to the problem areas. We probably won't have a big stormwater project. We're related to this permit until sometime five years down the road when we have a good handle on what our problems are and where they where we need to go to tackle those problems. So overall that's the, that's the whole program in a nutshell, you want the detailed version Beth can show you a two page or three page spreadsheet that has all the pieces on it, but it's quite boring. And these two bylaws are only two pieces and that whole big three page spreadsheet we're working on right now. Yeah, and just to add to what Kilford said I think we did share the timeline so if anybody wanted to go back and look at the timeline I think there was one in the memo, as well as the PowerPoint. That was in the packet from a few meetings ago. You can kind of see where we fall into that process which it's pretty early on. So I guess, Andy, if you're okay with it I was going to see if there are any operating cost questions now before I go to the next section which was going to be looking at the, the different fee structures that some other towns use for their permits. Just want to clarify one thing with that to make sure that we all understood correctly. There's no capital, significant capital expenditure required for the first five years from what I understood you to say Gilford. There is no significant other than what has already been put in the capital plan. There's an item in the capital plan right now for a street sweeper that's maintenance we do now. That's something that this permit does require us to continue doing. So that cost is already in the capital plan. There are no other expenses beyond that right now for the next probably five years. And again just to add to that there is another recurring line item in the capital plan that's been there for several years for, for, I forget if it's $50 or $100,000. Gilford you may remember the number that is associated with this program and that's been there for quite a while and that's going to continue for the next few years. Yes, and we use that $50,000 to do small little things with the program we did some stormwater plan for some of our facilities and we've done a couple other things and that's basically what we use that small amount of money for is just to do a couple of small items in our overall permit. Okay. Let's see Lynn's hand up and pass the line. You said that you don't see any big implementation costs or I got the impression, or that this will actually be ready to be implemented for three to five years, meaning there will be no subdivisions or divisions of buildings coming up that it would apply to between now and then. Would you click just clarify that a little more. So there's, then there will be no cost increase and implementing the stormwater bylaw, at least for a year because we have to make the regulations. Once we start implementing the stormwater bylaw will be minor costs for overseeing the program but we already do allow the project review now and site plan review for planning department. So what we already do for planning departments, permitting review processes, we will be doing again for stormwater but with a different emphasis on stormwater than we have now. So there's not much change and actually implementing the stormwater bylaw and the ID by law, we do that do this now but we don't do it to the extent we have to do it in the future. It's probably a year of setting our program up for that too, and then we can start doing more IDD type things, the overall stormwater permit, we're not going to see major expenses probably until five years from now. And what kind of expenses would we see them. When we get to implementing when we get to finding what our problems are then you'll start seeing we need to start changing some of our piping systems that are in the ground, we may have to change some of our sanitary sewer piping systems so they don't conflict or they're in areas that we think may be contributing to some of our stormwater issues. And you may need to see us actually designing and implementing some treatment systems where we actually have to install treatment devices on our pipes before they discharge into wetlands or into their discharge areas. And that I'm fine for the moment. Thanks. All right. There we go. I'm sorry. One of the things that I'm concerned with I hear how there's this five year process and we're, I need some. I need to know really and truly when we're going to get specifics, because we got walloped with Centennial. And it should, we should have had that information earlier. So I'm, I am concerned about how we get this information and, and when we get this information about the costs. I understand that there are some ifs because you're not sure of all the problem areas, but I think there needs to be periodic check ins as you identify an area, and then you identify the costs. Otherwise, we're going to be in sad shape if it ends up being as expensive and as unprepared as we were for Centennial. Can you comment on how you'll do that. So, so we're happy to provide regular updates or check back in, especially with finance committee. You know, I can work with Guilford on when the appropriate timing is of that when the regulations are more developed and we start getting in, you know, when that process to identify the improvement starts. We're going to again need to do that anyway to decide how we're going to fund these in the future. So I can work with Guilford and the chair to figure out what's the right timing to come back with an update so that, you know, you have that information well in advance. Thank you very much, Sean. Dorothy. My questions are, what happens if we don't do this. These are some new rules by the federal government. And how strict is their enforcement that we do the work to find out how our system is working, and then build the new entities if we need to do so, and does the government supply any money for this. Thank you. So we could be a trailblazer and not doing this I think I don't think any community has not done it. If we want to choose not to do it. EPA, not the not DEP but federal EPA does have the ability to issue a notice of non compliance to us. And those non compliance would come with a fine. If we don't pay the daily fine or still stumb our nose to us to them. They can take us to court and enter into a some type of court order and makes us do this and holds our feet to the fire. It's not very, it's not, it's been done in other, in other areas where EPA has had rules and people have said they didn't want to do it, it's been done there. I really don't think anybody has done it in storm water, but EPA does have the ability to find us on a daily fine. And I think they use the, if they use the Massachusetts DEP standard. It'd be about $12,000 a day is what they're fine is. I think that's what it is. I'm not really sure. It's a nice number. And then your second question your last question was. Is there any government money to help communities do this. There are programs grant programs that happen throughout the year that help you do certain things and as we get going more and more into the storm water rule the state has says they will provide more and more programs as well. I, I, I'm actually building on Dorothy's last point, Guilford you, you did answer it but I think the other thing I think I don't know how we monitor it but we have a new administration at the federal level and clean air clean water are green is high priority so to extent our delegation can be pressing. This is just Paul at our Mindy Joe level that we really want to implement this and do it right. If there are capital expenditures get some support for doing that piece of it and I think that goes with Pat's a lot of advanced warning that sooner we can do a guesstimate of that the more we can raise the issue at the next level off the state level so it's not just wait till 4.5 years from now. When we're closer to it so it just, it seems like there is a larger social movement around water. There was just something recently on water scarcity water purification. You know that stopping us from being at risk. So it's just a embellishing on what Dorothy asked about grants not to say there might be some but let's try to actually pave that way. That was my comment. Bob. Yeah, I just wanted to kind of build on what Pat said and just to ask Guilford and everyone involved in this to make sure there's communication around whatever kinds of different things we have to do in order to comply like if we need to replace a municipal parking lot do we have to use pervious concrete or have a pervious, you know, parking lot. Would there be coordination needed with the zoning board in order to make sure that any of those kinds of requirements get built into the zoning. So I just, you know, I know that that's sort of premature right now but I think it would be helpful so that we're thinking down the road in terms of what we have to plan for. That's all bring it. Yeah, just as an aside these are new regulations these are old regulations that haven't been enforced in the last four years. I get off my soapbox now. Guilford is we're looking at rolling out we're rolling out these regulations. Do you see any state or private commercial development or changes that it might be on in the near future that would impact on our water issues here. Is there, you have any notion about if there's any private development that might be used to kind of promote improvements in the public infrastructure. Well, with the bigger projects we have going on we've been bigger projects have been going on for many years. We've actually been getting improvements to stormwater some to water and some of the sewer infrastructure as well as road infrastructure. So for larger projects that has been going on a great deal. As we now use the stormwater regulations we're now able to go down to the much smaller projects. So in those cases we can actually start to put some implementation in and to get some type of public benefit to to to those developments now as well so this actually just allows us to go a little bit lower down. And something we've already been doing for quite a while now. Thanks. Just Kathy your hands still up is that from. That's before sorry. So I just. So I guess it's some point and I'm not saying that it has to be today because I think that we want to do is report to the council but the bylaws are something that's going forward the substance of the bylaws will be reviewed also and two other committees. And we'll be dealing with the actual wording in the meat of it in a lot more right ones TSO and the others TOL. As far as the financial, I think that we're all concerned about what eventual capital expenses and operating expense information that we're going to need to know about. For you for those two categories, whether they are expenses that we would have incurred any way. As was mentioned, for example, street sleeping or noon and to the extent that they've existed before, are we able to consider transferring those expenses to a special account if we set up a special account. So I think that's information that we probably want to see developed over time but I'm not sure unless somebody tells me otherwise that we need to do it before adopting the bylaw. Okay, do you want me to just do wrap up quickly. Yeah, I mean I won't pull up the, I won't pull up the permitting fee table but it was in the packet so everyone has a chance to look at it and you can see North Hamptons is probably the one that might be most comparable but they also have a little bit of a. Some of the things in their stormwater system that are different than what we have to deal with here because of the river being so close to where they are, but you can take a look at that. And I guess the last piece I'll just touch on as we did Beth and and Amy Rasecki from the DPW we had a really good conversation with North Hamptons. DPW director and their finance director about some of the things they learned as they implemented the stormwater program and things to be aware of it and a lot of those are more specific to if we go down the utility route and the future so that those are more specific to where the group if that's the route we go again that's not anything that's going to happen anytime soon. We can share some of the lessons learned from that discussion. There's a lot that goes into it in terms, you know, things we'd have to add to our property cards around as we've heard impermeable surfaces. You know all new billing and collection procedures and it's a really big challenge if that was going to be the direction we go. So really that'll have to be its own discussion in the future. And I guess the last thing Andy is if there are any other pieces of information that anybody wants in order to consider a recommendation, then to let us know what that is. Yeah, I just want to be make sure I understand correctly. If there is a fee or a fund, the payment into of that fee, that permit fee or whatever, or that fund goes to the developer, not to individual households. So Guilford can correct me if I'm wrong as it relates to these to this bylaw the fees we're talking about our fees that the developer would pay. Is that correct Guilford. That's correct. But remember anytime you charge a fee to development or a fee for anything in town it does get passed eventually to the end user so there is. People are extremely focused right now on increased fees of any kind. And I just want to make sure we understand where this fee gets levied and how it impacts the individual taxpayer. I'll just add real quickly if we do go down the utility route in the future. Those fees, you know there's different ways to structure them but those fees would be levied on the owner of the parcel. Based on whatever metric the town decided, which in North Hampton it's a, there's different levels and it's based on the, the square footage or percentage of impermeable surface. And these bylaws don't levy the fee, don't levy the fee in that manner but just so we're all clear. If we go down the utility route in the future. That's a different story. But it would be on new development. So the stormwater fees that are based, they're part of the stormwater bylaw. If we charge it, we're going to charge a fee for reviewing the permits. Those fees are accessed to assess to the developer as any other fee. The sewer connection fee, the sewer connection fee, the building permit fee, the ZBA fee if they have to go to ZBA, the DAAC fee, going to the DAAC, the DRB fee, the all the other fees that are part of developing a project in Amherst. So yes, this fee will be going to that developer who's making this project. And then those fees, like everything else, get divided up and what they sell or what they need to make for their project being successful. So this is something that does go to the developer but it does get passed on somehow to the people using the either buying the houses or coming into the store using the store it does get passed on a little bit but that's I understand passed on. But if I buy a new home developed with these kinds of, you know, regulations and the permitting, am I going to have an ongoing fee that I have to pay every year. Based on approving this bylaw. No. Thank you. The only thing that I recall from our last discussion of it was that if there is a renovation that somebody's doing to their house that is turning part of their permeable land into impermeable that there may be a fee that they would have to pay. But not on a reoccurring basis. If they redo their their property and trigger the storm order bylaw, they pay for the permit review only. That's it. They're not assessed the next year because they changed their driveway last year. And you'll see in the, you'll see in the fee structure that there's a breakdown between residential and commercial for that for what you just discussed. I don't want to keep us moving but because I want to get on the CPI but Kathy. Okay, I realize I'm trying to beat this into the ground but go for your choosing your words, I think very carefully said not based on these bylaws so you're not bylaws don't currently have fees in them. So my question is six or seven years from now. I'm in a house that I do nothing to do. Okay, I didn't change my driveway. And the assessor comes along and says I have an impermeable whatever driveway or I have a great driveway because the water goes to it. Will I ever pay a fee. If I don't change it. If, if all you do today or tomorrow is approve this stormwater bylaw. You will never pay a fee on stormwater. Some towns, I think what you've said have set up a utility that ends at some future point charges fees correct. Right now I understand what we're approving doesn't do this what I'm asking is in the future, could this be a possibility in the, in the future the town council has the priority to set up that type of mechanism to fund projects in the town. Okay, thank you. Bernie. I think that if, if a utility is set up and the town council has to do that, then the utility may assess an ongoing fee that was one of the big arguments they had in North Hampton before certain areas in town where they'd be stormwater utility I don't think this is going to be an issue anywhere in town for residential areas. There are certain areas in town where we meet that urban standard that if, if a utility was put in place there would be fees but there's no utility now, not kind of played by these bylaws. I did understand that but it's just, it's the potential is there so it's a decision in the future. Got it. Sean one thing you've mentioned several times about information that's been provided on fees and things that you've learned from North Hampton, could you make sure that that gets put into the packet for today's meeting. Yep. And so then any members of the committee who are not sure they have it they can look back to the packet and find it. So, I just want to remind us that this I believe has to come to the council and passed by July one. Am I correct about that. Yes. So it's in front of the other committees and the question I guess before the finance committee is, do we need to have a comeback to us again and why. What I was thinking of and I was going to conclude with this and then go on is that is the next step and it doesn't have to be for the next meeting but I'd like to get it done before we get into the budget review meetings, and that is to do a draft report on what we've learned and what the council to understand about the financial have that reviewed by all of the staff who are present who've been working on it to make sure that they're comfortable with what we're proposing to say and see if the committee is comfortable with it and then we would make that our report to the council on the financial. And that's what we've learned about the financial implications of the bylaws and I don't think that we need to make a recommendation because the council has no choice but to enact bylaws, if it wants to avoid fines and we can say that but I don't think we have to make it into a recommendation then. So if that sounds like an acceptable conclusion we can go on to the Community Preservation Act. I'll bring your hand is still up and I assume that's from before. And stuff I don't say anybody else raising hands I'm going to assume that there's agreement to what I proposed as a process. And we'll go on to the CPA proposals and Marshall who's the chair of the CPA committee is here Anthony Delaney who's worked with the CPA committee and Sonya Aldrich also has worked with CPA committee are all here and so that the and we the council had a presentation of the Community Preservation Act proposals. So I did I don't know if the three resident members have any initial questions that they want to ask otherwise I just see if there are questions about the recommendations and the one thing I want to remind you of is that the one that we're not talking about today because it's sort of in a separate package and they'll be dealt with in a separate vote from the others is the library proposal. So, Bernie. I don't know if this is the appropriate time we're going to launch into a discussion I just wanted some clarification on the community housing, the Amherst Community Connection Housing. How many people are being served by that because the red up says six people at 950 months maximum for a year. That's way less than $226,000. It's up to six people for up to three years. So that's, yeah, so that's the maximum cost. Okay, so many years. There, there, there are how many people are being supported by that now. How many now in the, the, yeah, part I'm not sure that I'm not sure if that project has finished, but it was fewer. It's fewer people, I believe, because one of their reasons for now proposing or requesting six vouchers is their six, their success with running a program, a smaller program and they built up the experience. Okay, so they've, they've, they've been transitioning people they support people for a year and transitional over okay and is there their overhead money in their operating money for Amherst Community Connections. There is an administrative fee of $60 per month per voucher, and I sent sent a memo sent a memo specifically about that fee to Andy a while ago I don't know if it was distributed. To the rest of the finance committee but they follow the, the HUD guidelines for what is appropriate administrative charges for for a program like this. Okay, well thanks for the clarification. Sure. Okay. I have some questions on that particular proposals observations. And I wanted to wait to see if there are others we can stick with community housing for the moment, which is the one single proposal. So I guess that the questions that I have and this isn't unique to this proposal. That actually touches on any, any of the CPA proposals. It would be useful to hear how we are monitoring compliance with grant conditions and what evaluation process is going on to determine the success of the project and meeting its goals. I think we have a lot of Sarah or any of our staff present have a response to that question. You want me to take this on this. Oh, Anthony. Yes, please can speak about the billing. So, for each project. They have to submit invoices to the town for reimbursement. They're not given the money. All at once, but they have to, they have to get reimbursed the invoices come. They reviewed by a relevant staff person. So a historical preservation gets reviewed by a staff person in the planning department. They review it to make sure it's in compliance with their original proposal. And then they review it to myself or Holly Bowser, we review it and make sure it doesn't. It's not seeking funding for something that the CPA act doesn't allow. And so it goes through two layers of approval approval before it hits the accounts payable clerk. We're going to be doing a actual evaluation of the process of modern grant monitoring type of process to see that it's meeting its goals and making. Yeah, well we've never done kind of site visit things if that's what you're thinking of. As I mentioned it during the presentation we have. We are starting to require grant recipients to report back to the committee or at least the finance to the department. Finance department, which will then copy the committee on progress reports, either I don't remember if we decided every six months or 12 months but that's how, how they are doing. Are they spending the money are they accomplishing what they set out to accomplish. But there's never been a sort of concluding report that I know of the. As I had asked about this at the meeting you know there's no kind of completing the circle with the CPA committee about the success of the project. In this case because ACC has received money in the past they're able to talk about their experience running this and similar programs, and we can, you know, ask questions of them at the time. Did you have something else to add. Yeah, we've never really had a formal process in the past we're trying to put that in place for now, but usually the committees that recommend these projects will review that and the people would report back to them. Also, it depends on the project, like for buying a piece of land. So it's really good about coming back and saying how all that went and everything. It depends on the complexity of that. So there is a process that we've gone through but it's just never been formalized and we're working on formalizing that for each area because they're so different. Dorothy to question. It seems to me that what would be good would be a performance audit. And, you know, I'm pretty sure that they would be quite pleased to do that, because in a performance audit when first of all you, you state what your goals are, and then what progress, how it has gone. That could review other structures that would need to be worked on that don't exist I mean, some of what they're doing is, you could call it transitional housing trying to stabilize people. How well is it working or is there a very important step that needs to be provided by some other entity perhaps that's not there. And I understand that. But yeah, this is, this is would be new for CPA, you know, it's just really has been grant making it's not like the United Way of Hampshire County that does site visits of their of the project that they've been funding. Yeah, I don't I don't know. Sonya. It's not really new to CPA. I mean in the past, the proposers that came every year, they would give an update on the project that they just got approved like I said there was just never a formal process or written report required before. So, those things have been in place they just part of the should be part of the minutes or something just getting a written report out. So I now I have a question for Sonya do you mean grant recipients who weren't who were not applying for more funding, they would just come back and give an update to the committee. That's the people that were coming back every year I said, and a lot of that is in the questions that the CPA committee submits every year, you know, how is, where are you with this project. Who was it successful in the past. So, like I said, we just need to put it into a more formal process. Yeah, I'm going to just conclude with the make an observation and then I'd know there's two other hands up. This is a difficult one, because it is a very different kind of proposal. But if we're talking about how many, how much money we're spending to house one individual or one family unit. And we compare it to two other proposals that we considered, which actually which involve our providing initial funds that were then are being used, presumably to match other funds coming from the state to actually build something that has a long term piece to it. The cost per year per unit is substantially higher when you're paying rental on an ongoing basis than construction. I mean substantially higher, because if I look at 226,700 dollars to acquire six units of housing for three years. Close to the $38,000 a year per unit for Belcher Town Road which we just invested $825,000 by just there at these are actually ownership so there's no year limit if I just calculated it is 30 years and 40 units we're talking about an average of $700 per unit in Northampton Road $750,000 and that includes the CDBG and CPA money that's been allocated with 28 units and again arbitrarily just capping into 30 years we're talking about $900 per unit roughly. There's a substantial substantially greater cost and I think the question that the CPA committee we hope grappled with and that I think the council needs to grapple with this is this money that this substantial additional cost, an appropriate allocation of CPA money of this size for a three year project, or should it be held for the next major project, like Belcher Town Road or Northampton Road. And I don't think that that's a finance committee decision in the end I think that's a council decision in the end, but I sort of couldn't help but think about that. So I just want to put that on as to why I think that evaluation is something to talk about because this is more of a program than just renting a house in some ways, but I think we ought to understand that. Lynn, your hand is up. Yeah, and I'm still on the same project because I, and I think some of my question may eke over into something that goes beyond finance but at this point, no other committee is reviewing these. And if we just need to make sure that we raise those issues so you know if this is a, this is something to help people get on their feet. And so the evaluation. And so one question is, will CPA monies at the state level, given to the towns, or will the regulations for CPA I'm sorry because it's our money. Will they, in fact, allow us to do an evaluation. Are we allowed to evaluate using our CPA money. And that's only one question. I'm not sure what you mean by using money to do an evaluation. Well, I mean, you mean staff time to will will it, you know, our third party will can CPA money be used to contract for third party evaluation, or for staff time to do an evaluation. And, and it really gets down to whether or not the goals of this project are actually achieving what the project says the goals are. And the only way you're going to do that is really look at the individual cases and determine whether or not we're meeting those goals. But CPAs CPA is only funding the housing aspect of the larger program so I don't know that it CPAs. I mean we certainly hope that all the social service support that CPA is not paying for is successful and enabling the clients to stabilize their lives and employment as well as their, their housing situation but we find that you know the rental and you know and if people and if they don't place people in apartments, then they don't bill CPA so. I mean I think I would say that yes the CPA purpose is fulfilled. But how do you, how do they differentiate for instance if a person applies for these monies. Why wouldn't they apply for section eight and how do other parts of the safety net funding out there that in to this money. And it's my understanding that ACC tries to tries to pull on all the sources of support for their clients, and this is one of them, I'm, you know you as I believe we all know the what the wait for section eight, the public housing vouchers is so you know even if they're successful that leaves a lot of people without such house. And then another question that really is financial nature and that is that when a organization submits your application today to submit their annual auditable statements. That is not a requirement but I have been thinking about that. I mean, usually we usually of course their town projects but we do, you know, as in this case and others have nonprofits applying. I don't know that there's any reason we can't request that. Or maybe Sonya can speak if there's any sort of. I don't know review review review of the organization I, I don't know. Okay, that's yeah. Go ahead. I've done that in the past but I think it's great suggestion and we can add that to the process for the year. But I also wanted to go back to Andy's point that he was making earlier. I don't know if you were part of the committee way back when this first came out with the first grant to this organization. They had a hard time deciding whether to do this or not because the CPA committees goal at the time was for more bricks and mortar type housing than it was for services like this. So, I don't know if you're getting that from a past CPA. Committee but they've come back for more money and the committees recommended it so but that was the intent was supposed to be for just one year, because they didn't have a brick and mortar project but they wanted to do more bricks and mortar in the future. And to answer your question must explicitly, I was select boardly assigned to the CPA committee at that time. And it certainly was something that I recall Kathy. I'm going to just both ask a question and make a suggestion. With projects like this one and I'm not saying this is the only one but what we did when I worked for a private grant giving foundation is in the award letter. We had a one page final report closing report required for the grant that was that asked a couple and the staff just wrote it on the goals of the project with the following they copied from something and they just had they requested that the recipient fill it out. And they just withheld the last 5% or some small percent of the award before the final report came in and it was a way of filling a file cabinet, you know, not a lot. You know, I'm sort of facetious, but it was a way if anyone say whatever happened to that project. I would actually say it was a total failure. And here are the 14 reasons why it just didn't work the way we thought, but it was safeguarding the fiduciary side of the foundation for due diligence and giving out the money and it put all the burden of the reporting on the recipient, you know, and it's simple, you know, I mean this was a form that was tailor made to the project rather than a boilerplate everyone had to do an essay. So that that's just one thought that it could be in the future, you know, letting people know that you might want to do that. And then I just on this one I don't really have a question on this one as much as when Bernie flag the math. You know, I've been multiplied through by the six people 950 12 months another 60 I don't quite get to the total but I think the way you do this this is a question the way you do the payment is they bill you for it as the expenses incur, correct, you know, so if they managed to get a place for 800 bucks, you don't get billed for 950 so this is a constant that we might get more than six people a year if they can do it cheaper, or, or whatever. Is that correct Sonya so you know if they don't quite place everyone they think or they can place more you get a billable either monthly or quarterly from them. Sorry. All right I was finding my mute button. Anthony correct me if I'm wrong but don't we pay the landlords directly for those, and then whatever administrative costs is. Okay. And I don't think they could do more than six, not not at once. I think if they're successful in, let's say somebody gets an apartment, and then eight months later moves into gets a public housing voucher then they can try to put somebody else, another client so it may be more than six people but I don't think it'll be more than. Six rental units. Right. Then actually, if we're paying the landlord that answers my question on a you know track the how we track the money. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Pat. Thank you Andy. I think we're weighing apples and oranges here and saying they're the same fruit. And then your, the CPA grant is going out now to people who are in need, affordable housing like belchertown road or and or 132 North Hampton road are incredible projects, but they're off in the future, they're not offsetting need now. I think I really feel very strongly that the CPA is directing funds to what's needed now and to in any way in a fear with that would be problematic for me. I do agree that there needs to be some way of evaluating this program or any program, but it started to sound like oh well we're doing affordable housing so we don't need ACC. And I think that's mistake. There's a multi dimensional problem and this is one aspect of the community that needs support so we advocate for it. Thank you Sarah. I'll just kind of clarify see if I can clarify what I said, because I wasn't trying to mix apples and oranges but I'm glad you brought that up. Council could make an evaluative decision as to whether it wants to hold funds for the next major project for housing, or do this proposal because it is unique for what it has to offer. It's the choice to be made. I think that was the only point that I was trying to make because if you're saying, let's hold more money aside for the next belcher town road or North Hampton road that comes along, because it's so much more cost effective than to use the term. I mean it's a valid decision for the council to make, but that was the only point doesn't mean. Yeah, I wasn't saying that I was just pulling it out. I know Andy I'm sorry. I'm the I'm the old human services guy here. And my concern always with stuff like the housing piece of supportive housing is I don't want anyone put in jeopardy because of the inadequacies of an organization that's getting the money and doing support now we're paying if I'm doing a sort of back of the envelope there's about $21,000 it's going to Emmer's Community Connections for their to cover their expenses. But regardless of its ACC or anyone, any, any, anyone who gets this money should be a going concern should be a legal entity and a going concern that we can hold accountable. If, if, if something, you know, something goes wrong, or if they want to come back in terms of each and every one of these projects, there should be an outcome measure and a final report. You know, even if it's the town who's, you know, building a new pavilion at graph park, we want to know that got built that he got built in a timely fashion, and then it's functional. And if there's any money left over it's coming back to this to the CPA. It, you know, and I think this is all well within what CPA can do it's all within the well within the administrative expenses that you can charge having managed the CPA in a couple of communities. I feel comfortable saying that. So, so I think that for the future. These need to be incorporated into the end of the grant process. I'd hate to see, you know, Jimmy Joe is pretty good baseball team, get a grant to improve a field of West Pomeroy or something. Not that the field of West Pomeroy doesn't need improvement, but that the, who's ever getting the money is illegal entity that's a going concern. Sarah, do your hands is still up. I don't know if that was for. No, I just to circle back. And note that the emergency housing, the emergency rental housing program that the affordable housing trust is running uses CPA money. So this is not the only, the only time CPA funds have been put towards rent. That that program, of course, it's more, more limited, but I just wanted to know how do I put my hand down. Oh, okay. And Kathy, did you have anything for. Kathy, your hand is still up in the picture. Kathy froze. All right, I'm trying to take it down, but he doesn't appear anymore. So I am take it's down. Okay. Okay, still open my screen. That's okay. So we're going, I think we should go on to see if there are any other proposals so that people want to have questions about and lend you want to put up a list of programs so as a spreadsheet that Sonia provided or just give me a moment now if you can find it or I can. And I just want to make sure that if there are questions about any of the other proposals that we have an opportunity to hear from them. And we'll go through them quickly by category. And, well, she's looking. Sarah the historic preservation that I know the one was the, the Goodwin church. Town Hall step aside the Jones lot. Here we go. Andy's frozen for, for I was like. Notice it's Sarah's frozen. Is this the report you meant, Andy. Okay. That'll do. So, are they, let's just go through the list and see if there are any other questions that people want to ask about any of the proposals as we go through because we want to make sure that it's their questions. This is the time. To ask. So, continue moving down. Can I say that they're all listed on the council order. You don't want this. The council orders. But I have one question on that document when we get to it. Okay. No, that's the Jones library list. Yeah, this is Bob the council order. The numbers are different and some of the projects are different than what's in this report. So I assume that's just a matter of time, timing issue. You know, I'm, I'm sorry, but I don't think I have the council order in my thing. I'll have to go get it. Hold on. Okay. Wendy, would you like me just to slowly mention each project and see if anybody wants as a question. I'm going to share my screen and see if I can get it up and the council order. And what I'm going to do is I'm going to ask Kathy. To keep an eye on the hand raised function in case I don't see it. I do this. But. Oh, there. The one we've talked about is the top line. Andy, your housing. Start preservation. I don't see Andy's screen. Oh, there it is. So are you seeing the. Because I can't tell what's on your screen. I can only tell us on my own. Do you see the list for the next, the group that is. The start preservation, which is good one church. No library will all repair. Town hall. Front. Steps. Refrigeration. Oops. The question is whether. You're breaking up a little bit, Andy. Any of those proposals. You just unshared. Yeah, I don't, I don't think you have the bandwidth to share your screen and talk. Counselor Steinberg. Okay. Can I just. I can show it, but this looks like last year's. No. Yes. This is it. Yep. That's it. All right. Is Andy still on. I'm on. Okay. All right. I'm sharing now. Okay. Yeah. No, I don't think I'm sharing anymore. No, you are. So Kathy, you've. Do you have questions on any of these? No, I have a comment to respond to Bob's comment on the memo. Not exactly matching. And I think it's because the memo shows the total amount spent on the screen. I think it's because the memo shows the total amount spent in some of these categories, including debt services. And you don't see the actual new projects until you get to. The spreadsheet. Because I had, I kept thinking the debt service was in addition to the grants, but it's included. That 3, 3, 8 is included. Okay. So if you go to the line items, I think they match up, Bob. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. When you get to the spreadsheet. With new projects. The Jones library isn't in there. No, that is correct. It is not. Because that will be voted on separately. Understood. That's firing authorization. So it's a separate council order. But this also doesn't include debt because debt. CPA is a funding source. When you vote the operating budget. You don't see it on this list. You don't see it on this list. You don't see it on this list. You don't see it on this list. You don't see it on this list. You don't see it on this list. For that already been approved. Yeah. Hasn't been voted by council yet. But. You won't see it on this list. So you're going to, you have to take the whole picture in there to match. To match the report. So Andy, then I do have one question on the overall list. When we look at this. When we look at it, when we look at it. I think there's a lot of. The next so like North common project, that is an appropriation without any debt. The. Everything on here is, is cash. Okay. And no debt. Service either. Asking if there are any questions on. Any of the other projects that are there on our. List. I think that they were well explained at the council meeting and then the order. Then we've got focused on one because of its size and sort of uniqueness. North Diamond project we were aware of its size. But that's really one that we're dealing with also through other processes in the council. But certainly if there are any recommendations. This is the additional money that's being requested to add for this. For this year to come. That's in the calculation that TSO is working with Dorothy. I just have a question about the mill whatever pool. I'm just having a feeling of deja vu. I'm kind of interested. Is the pool solid? I mean, I think it's been repaired at various times. And it need like every two or three years, this kind of big resurfacing, or does it. Does it need to be dug out and redone or was that done? Or was that the war memorial pool that was done? Just kind of wanting to know where the pool is in the cycle of needing just regular maintenance and needing to be repaired or replaced. I believe it as a part of the annual maintenance has been recoding with this epoxy, you know, waterproofer at the end of the season, but it is no longer holding basically because the concrete surface is just peeling off. So that's, so that's one issue. And then the cracks, some of which are quite deep. And I gather have not been repaired. I, I mean, I haven't been on the committee for very long. I know that the filter or the pump, some of the mechanical parts of the mill river pool were replaced some years ago. I have not heard of. CPA funds being spent on the. Structure. So I just, I, I like the major structural work. I just want to make sure it's going to stay long, stay strong and be looked at appropriately. That's all. Well, it's an old pool. Major one. Really involved. Is the other one more memorial. That was when I first came to town. I think, you know, the early. No, but that was being a process. So, so I just kind of like people saying, let's have notice. I guess I'm would be interested in, in an idea when we need to do something really big on that pool. Which I know is out of your area, Sarah. To the mill river pool. I mean, some further work. Like, yeah, I don't know. That would be a question for DPW like this. We could ask, I don't think we can do it for this round, but it's a reasonable question to ask. Whether. There's a list of recreational facilities. That need significant work. I know we've talked a little bit about basketball courts. I think that. Dave's own Mac responded to that. There was money set aside for it already. And the question is what's what's happening with that money. There's other things that are coming up. Certainly the community fields discussion is going on. Excuse me, Andy. We can ask. Excuse me, Andy is Paul. Dave's a mix in the audience and he has his hand raised. Okay. I want to bring. I'm bringing in. You running or is. Hi, Andy. Can you all hear me? Yes. Yes. Yeah, I just, if I had a moment, I just wanted to respond to Dorothy's questions to give a little more background. From Sarah's answer. Yeah. I just wanted to. I just wanted to ask 10 years or so. You know, war memorial is, is a 1950s pool. We did a major overhaul of the pool some. Eight years ago, eight, nine years ago, spending a couple of $100,000 there and getting grant money to do that. But again, you know, war memorial, the, the bath house is original. It's not original. It's not original. It's not original. It's not original. It's not original there, but we, you know, we made a great progress on Mill River. Sarah was correct. We did use CPA money to completely replace the original 19, I believe in 1971, 72. Pump and. And filtration system for the entire pool. And DPW oversaw that work during 2020. So that's what some of this new money will be used for. But again, these things, what we're trying to do is, is do incremental improvements to them. To make sure that, you know, they stay up to date that they're meeting all the standards and requirements for, you know, pool water. And that we don't waste water. I mean, we pay for all the water because that's an enterprise fund. So we certainly don't want water going down between the cracks and, and between the pumping and, and a filtration system. So these, these older, older pool facilities do take a significant amount of TLC and, and over time we do need to invest in them. But I think once we get this, this pulse of work done, both of the pools should be in reasonable good, reasonably good shape. I think the next thing to consider would be where, if and when we replace the bath house at war memorial. Regarding recreation projects overall, I think staff and I, Guilford myself and some of the planning staff have certainly developed an inventory, a list of logical recreation projects. So I think that we'll need capital investment, CPA investment over time. We did spend a lot of time on the community field and high school project. And, you know, we'd love to revisit that at the appropriate time based on other capital needs, like the four major capital projects. So happy to answer questions now. We're in the future as, as time permits. It's Dave. Are there any questions of Dave? The subject that we were just talking about. So there are any questions on any of the other projects? I have a question, but I can't figure out how to raise my hand since I'm sharing the screen. Okay, just go ahead. Thank you. David, am I correct when you say that we keyed up, we queued up the. Community field. Is there a plan developed for what we need to do to those fields? And Sean Mangano and I were recently talking about this, even in the last, I think 24 hours. So we do have a master plan for the community field. And high school and middle school fields that was developed about two years ago by Weston and Samson. And that process was driven, I think, by the urgency created by the state of the track. And the field within the track at the high school, the regional high school. I think Sean and I would, would kind of both agree that we came up with a, a range for replacing a project that ranged. From $5 to $6 million in the $3.5 to $6 million range for a new track, a new turf field and a modest. Not stadium, but a modest area for people to view those facilities, you know, community members and parents and whatnot to view those facilities. So we, we never took it to the next level. I think what we need to do is work with, with Mike Morris and, and Doug over at the school to really take that to the next level to kind of drill down and see where exactly that number would be in that range of say 3.5 to $6 million for that facility. What we, we really should be investing in the fields at community field, the high school and the middle school. Those are our strongest assets. They're core to our community. They're geographically well situated and we really, we don't need more fields. We need to invest in the fields we have and explore the possibility that one turf field might be a way to really help us. Provide more playing time, more practice time and more rest time for the fields that we have. So that was kind of in a nutshell and we could, we, that, that study is available. Sean could get it for everyone on, on the call. And I'm assuming that that would only come forward at the point in time where the regional school district is ready to have it do so. Sarah has her hand up. Yeah. The region came to CPA last year for funding. And we did. And council did approve. An initial brand. I'm. I may be imagining $125,000. I don't recall. But they were also asking the member towns for. Smaller amounts. And so we agreed to do that at the time. But it was a bit, it was a bit of a tight fit. And it wasn't, It was a bit of a tight fit. And it was a bit of a tight fit. But the, the, You get in CPA grants from. Lover at shoots, Barry and impellant. So it's quite possible. The project is stalled. And, and I propose that sir, I happened to be there too and he actually withdrew it, I think, because they weren't ready to proceed in doing something but it was talking about the number you just said, but said that would only finance about half of what they needed to really redo a plan And Dave, I just, you know, I want to make a comment on the big picture plan that Western and Samson did. I don't know whether we gave them a cap to what we could spend, but a variety of people who do turf, who do track repairs, who do fields at UMass and engineers were starting to price it out and wondering how we could possibly spend that much. So I think there was a reaction that that price tag was way high and there's got to be something that can do the type of investment that you're talking about that we all think we need to do that isn't in that range. And I know Sean, I asked you, I saw Sunderland had put in a new piece and you told me that their track didn't have the same drainage and siting kinds of issues that we did. But I just like to get some comparables before we start talking about magnitudes that will mean that we never do the project because it costs too much. It's not on the capitalistic capital projects. So a plea to start out with a, if we could only spend this much, what could we get kind of request when we go out to Western and Samson types who may be planning for much fancier bleachers than we need to have in the town of Amherst. So it's just a request for the future because that money's already been spent. Andy, can I just follow up on one quick point? Yeah, go ahead. And then Sonya and I can confirm, Kathy, I do believe the CPA allocation for the region was ultimately approved. I think you were right that at the, at like the last meeting where it was discussed, I believe the region had said, you know, we're hitting some, you know, we're not going to be able to do anything with this this upcoming year. So if you don't approve it, it's okay. But I think ultimately it was approved. So it is there. You're saying it's sitting on the books now. Yeah, I think it'll be a project that was approved last year that we can, or camera was last year, the year before, but we'll double check and just see if that's where that's at. And Dave and I do check in with Doug and Dr. Morris from time to time to just see where we're at with the status of these projects. Because it's a sort of a team effort because the border between those fields is right at the top of where that track field is where it separates between region-owned land and town of Amherstown land. And so it's really got to be a joint effort as we move forward. Dave, did you have anything else to add on this? Yeah, I just wanted a quick follow-up on Kathy. Kathy, you're absolutely right. I think it's important to note that the work that we hired Weston and Samson to do was not to dive into the exact figures or numbers, cost estimates for turf fields or other improvements. Their work was to document the current status of our fields throughout town, which they found by and large to be in very poor shape. And the other piece, the other conclusion of their work, and again, it was a broad base, was really to say, do we need more fields? If so, how many? And the conclusion was, no, we don't. We have plenty of fields. It's just the condition that is the issue. And then they were to look at what could we do with the regional land and community field for the long-term, maybe a 20-year plan for how we could restore and better use those fields. What they found is that our use of those fields, the way they're configured is not optimal. For instance, the soccer field is most situated in the wrong location from a drainage standpoint, but also it is situated in the wrong direction east-west. And most fields of that sort would be north-south like the football field is. They also just suggested us consolidating field use, varsity field use onto a turf field, which could be used 12 months a year for practices and games and the community, and get away from having multiple, multiple natural turf fields which are very costly to maintain and also aren't available as many months a year for practice and for games. So that was the purpose. And I think the money that Doug sought and any other further money would really get into what you talked about, Kathy, which is let's get some realistic numbers if we wanna go with the turf field with the track, let's really zero in on what that would cost so that the community has apples to apples choices to make. So thanks. Okay, Dorothy. Well, I'm just gonna make a statement that this is a great opportunity for cooperation between the town of Amherst and University of Massachusetts. I know they did a huge overhaul of their fields and remember when I heard the price, I was quite shocked. So obviously this is a complex thing. They know how to do it though because they just did it. And I know that there have been times when they have used our fields and when we have used their fields. I just think this is a very major expense but it's the one place where there is some cooperation and if there's any way that we can get cooperation expertise and money from UMass on this, I think it would be a great thing to do. So I'm just kind of trying to put a bug in your ear. Thank you. Okay. So I think that what we need to do, I'm gonna ask one question of the public that is in attendance. We're gonna come back to public comment a second time on other issues, but I wanted to know if there's any public comment specifically about Community Preservation Act proposals that are under consideration for this year. So I'm looking to see if there are any raised hands that come from the attendees list for public comment on the Community Preservation Act. So seeing none, are we in a position at this point to consider a motion to recommend appropriation and transfer order FY2207, which would fund the projects that are listed in the order that is presented to us and is on your screen. I believe we are. And if so, then the discussion that we had about specific proposals can be incorporated in a report to go with the motion. So I'll choose a motion, is there a second? I'll second it. Two seconds. Okay, Kathy seconded for the second of the minutes. So I have a motion on the table and a second that the committee is recommending this appropriation and transfer order. And I will go through the committee and get the votes of the entire committee and I'm gonna ask the three resident members if they have any further comments or recommendations as we go through with the vote. So let me start with that. Bob Hegner, do you have anything else to add? No. And are you recommending that I agree with the motion? Yes, I would recommend it. And Bernie? I would recommend, you know, we kicked it around fairly well and I would recommend the passage. Jane? Yeah, I agree. Okay, so going to the council members is to vote because our rules have the council members of the ones who are voting and I'll start with Dorothy Pam. Yes. Lynn Grismer. Hi. Kathy Shane. Yes. Pat Angelis. Hi. And I'm voting yes, so it's five to zero and we will note that there was a support of the three members of the committee. So I wanna thank Sarah and Anthony and Sonia for all of their report. You're all, of course, welcome to remain as we go into the next subjects because we are going to now get into a discussion of library issues, financial issues and what we're trying to do today, recognizing the limitation on time that we have and what our goal was. We said that today we would try and identify the issues that we need to consider and what additional reports we might need to ask of staff as we develop a recommendation at future meeting. So this is about identification of issues. It's not about substantive discussion of the issues. And with that, I'm gonna ask Lynn to go back to screen sharing. She's looking, I'm sure, for the document that we were going to put on the screen but we have obtained from members of the council and from the public a series of questions. And what we tried to do was to identify, to put them into categories so that we could all see what the categories were for the questions and then also divide the category list so that it would have the asterisks as indicating ones where in our initial discussion we felt that there was financial consideration. It's worth recalling that the referral to this committee was not about the proposal as a whole, it was about the financial implications and financial issues related to the proposal that will be for the council in April. So what I'm looking for right now is comments about the category of questions that have been identified and about the, if there are any thoughts about specific things that we might wanna ask of our staff or others to help us to analyze those issues. So with that context, I'll recognize Pat. Thank you, Andy. And I hope it's in that context. Number one, the total costs. I'm concerned, I'd like to get real cost construction estimates because the estimates we've been working with are from 2019 as a start date. And so I guess I really like to know what is the estimated cost increase for starting the library project in 2022. And that's basically, and including escalations, what the escalation amount is and what the total cost would be. We don't have those figures to work with. Okay, is somebody making a record of these comments on this one? I certainly am. Okay, thank you, because we all know that I have my limitations right now, ability to do that. Kathy? I'm gonna build on what Pat did, but I also sent a very detailed list of questions, which I think Lynn's categories capture everything I sent in. So I don't know whether you want me to repeat them all now. So I know Lynn already has them, but on the total cost, when the documents that we received on Monday night in the Cune Riddle document that had to repair and make accessible options, also on page 72 and 73, had the numbers Pat just referenced. And what I notice is they're exactly the same as what went in with the grant proposal in 2017. So that's what she's referencing. So it's a question of why it's two, the last dollar in it's not just rounding era. And I know we got on Monday night, an estimate that added the sustainability and the new material that I'm talking about the base. So just to underscore, there is a specific document and I just wanna know if there is no escalation, why have found a different way of doing this that can be cheaper? And what happens if it's higher is my question, Ken, or is there some wiggle room in this that the town could be assured that it would be no more than that amount. So it's not just what the total cost is, but how do we have a risk guarantee on it? And did you want me to go just on number two? While I'm here? Yeah, you go ahead. I'm sorry. On the cash flow financing, this is more for Sean and staff that did the, what if we went out with debt and such and such a year and how much would we have to pay over a 20 year, 30 year period? I would like to have those come back to us with consistency. The option two on repair was not done at all. We just didn't have it. I mean, he may have done it, but if they were started in the same year, there was some quite, I would call it optimistic, but I'm willing to buy that we could get it for for the expansion and renovate. There was an assumption that we could go out and get a long-term bond at 2.8%. And as far as I can see, it was at a premium. So what we're paying back is just 15 million that rather than 15.751. So there's another 751. I want it that confirmed and could what would option two look like with that same financing? And I just want consistency. So it applied to the same because option two could be done in the same time period with a start date. And I just want to note, I did have a question on the CPA flow. Sony got back to me, but when we price out long-term debt for CPA, we're not using the same interest rates that we use when we did the Jones expansion. So I would just like to know, what's the upside of what if it's not 2.8? What's it three? So that's purely tell me about the cash flow and do it in a consistent way. Can we just wait there for a moment and see if others have? I just stop at those two points. I have all your questions, Kathy, okay? And I have extensive questions from other people. So I think the issue is, are these the right categories and are there broad issues? Like Pat raised up front, you seconded and that is, what is the cost now? And how do we know there's not going to be overrun? And then you've also asked for the consistency of cash flow. If we're going to do every one of these, then I didn't prepare for that. No, I won't go to the others, but Lynn, there was one I thought of this morning that I'd like to just add to the list of the category. If we went forward with this, the library would be closed for two years or almost two years somewhere in that neighborhood. And I noticed in the grant, there is an allocation to pay rent. I just wanted to, do we have a, is it going to, who's the rent being paid to? Is that a hard number? And the operating costs of the library for those two years, those two, could we be thinking of it being considerably lower than it has been? Because there won't be any utility costs. There won't be any maintenance costs. I assume we're not going to be buying books while the library is closed. So could we, that might give us some relief on the other side of the modeling that Sean is doing on what happens to operating costs if library for two years was a lower. And I didn't know whether we were planning on paying everyone. And I wasn't sure how many people will be working during those two years. So it's a, what happens doing that two years while the building is being built? That's my question to the operating budget and to where are we going to look, what, where are we paying rent to? And are, is that some opportunity that we could save money? Got that one. And of course the operating budget is under number 10. Right Andy, but I, the other operating budget is, what do we think? Yeah, I just was pointing it out, I was just arguing with you, I was just pointing it out. I'm just going to close your years, because I want to make sure it's the endowment, is the endowment sufficient to support the operating budget in the future is another set of questions. This is, I just realized it's going to be closed. The official thing will be closed and it's going to be operating on some level during the time it's closed. So, Andy? Yeah, no, I think that that, yes, go ahead. I was just going to say that what I think is being added is the question is whether operating budget will be affected during the period of construction. And actually there's going to be a period that the library is closed regardless whether we end up going forward with the grant or doing the repairs. Yeah, I realize that and both all the options had a $500,000 allocation to pay rent and relocation and storage costs. So it applies to all of them and it's just some, it's closed longer than others. So that was my, what happens in that time period? Okay. Looking for, going back to the hands, then Bernie? There's some good questions. This one is probably, I'm not sure where this sits, but I think it's simpler. One of the options that Sean talked about in the proposal that was done for the council was to in sequence like this, was to borrow the town share the project first and then invest the grant money. I know on federal money, if you invest it, if you earn any interest on it, it comes off the grant. I'm not sure that's true with the state. So I'd really like to have that investigated. And I'm just curious as to whether or not that option of borrow first, use the grant later, how viable that is, because right now, interest rates are incredibly good. So if we move forward with this, if we can borrow early and lock those rates in, that would be a real savings. Okay. Andy, I just wanted to build on that because I had that very same question about whether you can truly take the MVLC money and invest it in how is the money earned from that investment? So I'll bring back more details on that, but just so everyone is aware. So one other town has done that and we spoke with the MVLC about that very thing. And they said it was an option for us to consider. So we spoke with them at length about whether, because I agree with you, Bernie, like that's unusual that you can earn interest on something like that. And, but there was another town that they cited was very successful doing that, but that was at a time when the interest rates that you would earn on the money well as in the bank were a little bit better than they are now. However, we can borrow for less if we lock it in sooner. So, but we'll come back with more information just so to put your mind at ease. There's additive power in small numbers. So, I mean, even if we're getting four tenths of a percent on the grant money, that's four tenths of a percent we wouldn't have had otherwise. So that's good. Thank you. Yeah, I just, I had a couple of questions. The first is really about the, under the sustainability and in the presentation, they talked about achieving an EUI of 29 and how it was kind of difficult to get there. And it seems to me that, yes, we need to make sure that if we go forward with the new library that it be net zero ready, but doesn't have to get the EUI 29 in order to meet that standard and what would the cost benefit be of, you know, some other EUI that meets the standard but isn't quite as expensive. Obviously that means you spend more on utilities, but it would be helpful to have some idea of, you know, what does it cost to get to EUI 29 versus what it would cost to get to EUI 35 or something like that. And then the other question really maybe gets under, I don't know cash flow financing or timing is, is there any option to phase a new construction in any way? Whether that means we don't build out a floor for right away or I don't know what is feasible, but, you know, is it necessary that we do it all once or can we phase it in some way that might be more beneficial in terms of cash flow? That was that. Okay, Dorothy. Well, my question has been, and I don't know if we're gonna talk about it today, but it was whether the community preservation funds count towards the townshare or the library share of the fundraising. So that has been a serious concern of mine. That's a council decision. And it is when there's two decisions regarding that money. One is, are we going to approve CPA money for the library renovation expansion project? That's one. And the question is, which column does it go into? Okay, so, and I don't believe this committee is, should be, I think that's a broader council discussion. On a lot of this, our goal is to make sure that we on behalf of the council are investigating and reporting on these issues, but that doesn't mean we're making recommendations on the issues because this is a big enough issue that the council is gonna have to make the decision. It's not gonna be bound by a committee decision anyway. It's really gonna be the council itself that's gonna make it. Our goal is to make sure that we are providing as much of the financial information to the council as possible. Kathy, your hand is up, I don't know if it was before. No, it is, I just, you know, sticking with just finances, Lynn and I agree, that's a later discussion on the cash flow financing. My request of Sean is to show us the library piece is 15.751 million. What if it was 14.751? I'd just like to see what that is in terms of over the 20 years. Because CPA is also financing over a 20-year period, so there's debt on both sides, but just what does that do, whether that influences our decision or not, Lynn? I wanted to see what it does off the general fund if it's a million less because we are counting CPA toward it. Pure modeling question. So I'm gonna throw in one of my own and that is that we've been hearing some questions from members of the community who are concerned about their ability to support an override, not in the question of voting it, just paying for it and additional taxation. And the question of, if we go forward with the library under what was presented to us by Sean in our previous meeting was a model that had us using, going for the one override for the schools. And the question that was sort of being raised was whether the decision on the library might free us up from requiring an override to do the schools and still be able to address all four buildings. And I think that the only way we can get to that is development of a more complete model for what the financing and cash flow will be under the scenario of not, having, not using the MVLC money but doing the renovation according to the Coon Riddle Estimates. So that was at least another piece that I sort of saw as needing to do it in order to be responsive to questions that have been raised of the council through community comment. Andy, I have a question that builds on that but raises the issue because, and I know some people are critical of the fact that, gee, the numbers for repairs seem to come very close to what the town would have, okay? You don't get the same building and just gonna be very clear about that. But the reality is that either way where the town is gonna have to come up with somewhere around, you know, 15 to $16 million. So whether we do it because we're taking the grant or we do it because we're just doing repairs of the existing structure, it's still a debt. So I don't, I've never seen what the question is. I mean, unless we just say, well, we're just not gonna do the repairs like that. And I'm not clear if that's an option because of the way they were presented. Yeah, I just, in terms of the Coon-Riddle estimate, I'm, and maybe it could be my fault for just not being as attentive as I should have been. I'm concerned that estimate may not show all the costs associated with implementing the architectural access boards rules. I have a note to myself that didn't look at all the accessibility issues, the Coon-Riddle piece. I mean, we're gonna, the amount of renovations we're gonna end up doing to library, if we don't build a new one, you're gonna trigger the access board rules. And, you know, so I don't know how far Coon-Riddle got into that, because that will be a, that will be a definite cost driver and it will affect the functionality of the library because of the changes in space requirements. Bernie, they actually refer to the study as an accessibility study. Okay. And so it actually was done with the fact that it does trigger all of the accessibility rules. Okay, so the Coon-Riddle numbers are meeting the access boards required. Yeah. Thank you. And the document is really long because they cite the code and then they show you what they have to do to meet the code for a bathroom, for a stack, for a whole, you know, they really went walking around the building saying doesn't, doesn't, what do we have to do? It was quite thorough. Well, I need to do more homework and thank you. Okay. Are there other questions? I have one all issue. And I, and what I'd like to propose, Andy, is that between now and the next meeting, we work with Paul and to identify how we can help people understand public bidding and construction. So because the, it's different than when you build your own home. I'm just gonna say it's very different. And I feel like many of the questions that we've received come from a background of not understanding public construction and how it happens, okay? So I'd like the finance committee to have a better understanding of that. Okay. Well, you're the keeper of the questions. Got it. So let's see if we can find somebody who has done project management either in Amherst or in other community who can sort of be available to speak to that issue. Yeah. Kathy? I agree with you, Lana. You know, I went back to the grant proposal, which itemized this, you know, how much is the OPM? How much is the architectural fee, the engineering fee? Cause way at the bottom of the 36 million is 24,000 for the building, you know? So you can see this layering on and then the rent. So one of my questions, and then I just want to go to another one is, do we have, is there any flexibility in that when they go back to re-look at the numbers when we actually go out to bid and get construction? You know, if we want to bring it down to no more than that number. So my bigger question is we've got just one more meeting scheduled on this, Andy, two weeks from now. And there were detailed questions. If we want to get answers back and then write a report that's just about the answers that we received, you know, not a judgment at all. We're going to have to get information. And the question is, do we have enough time? Should we tentatively, cause it's scheduled to go back to the council on April 5th? Could we either move the council date off by two weeks, Lynn, and give finance one more go at it? Or do, could we schedule another finance meeting? There is one more Tuesday before that, that would be two weeks, just because there are a lot of, there's a first, a third, and whatever. I don't know how we're going to be doing that. So my question is we need answers to questions that we're sending and not just categories to write a report that says, we looked at these things and here's what we found. If we get all of those next two weeks from now, that would be great. And then we'll have enough for a report, but should we pencil in a possible other date? If we, if some of the answers can't, it would take more time to generate the answers. That's my question, just allowing us time. I definitely support the idea of having another meeting. So I think what you're suggesting is that we would do, we would have a meeting on March 30th. Yes. Yeah, that's the two, that's the other Tuesday, that if we're not meeting again until the 16th, that we have a meeting, at least tentatively scheduled for the 30th, which leaves a few days to write up the report for the council and still have the council meeting on the fifth. But it means that if there are unanswered questions or if the answer to a question generates another question, we can be, do a better job at reporting back. Frank, I definitely would like to see us seriously considered then. And if we go with the 30th, that means we're not conflicting with CRC. Dorothy is shaking our heads. So can, are there any members of the committee who would not be available for an additional meeting on the 30th if we schedule it? Not hearing anybody speaking up and I only see Kathy's hand is up, which I think is because she is, when it was raising the question. So I'll just ask everybody on the committee and our staff who's working with the committee to hold the 30th available on your calendar for an additional finance committee meeting in case we need two meetings beyond today. And what I was going to suggest is that we see how we can do this. Maybe Lynn, since she's the keeper of the questions, we'll send it back to me. And after the two of us work them, we can send them to the committee rather. But you cannot comment to each other. There's no comment to all allowed because of open meeting law. But at least you'll have a chance to see it and we'll be able to get comments back to the two of us who were actively working on trying to put together the questions. We'll try and do that as a quick turnaround so that we can get staff to try and work with us. And to the extent that we need to reach out to the library, trustees and staff to assist us with any answers, we'll have opportunity to do that too. So that's kind of like a reasonable process. Yes. Okay. And some of the questions I think can only be answered by the library. Others can be answered by staff, you know. Correct. Yeah. Yeah, the staff, I mean, there's two ways to get to the library, the help from the library. One is for the staff to ask the library and the others to the library. If there are questions that seem better to have the library just come back to the finance committee. And that's a judgment call. It has to be made along the way. What I would like to propose is, because I'm very sensitive to public comment. And I said I would come back to public comment again. Is to allow us to do public comment before we complete the library discussion. And see if there's any members of the, the public who would like to comment. Recognizing that. This is the time, a good time to do it. So pause to see if we have any hands that come up. I see. And for those on the phone, for those on the phone to, to raise your hand, you dial star nine. There is one person who's in the. On the phone. So I'm going to go ahead and recognize Tim Neil and ask that he come into the room for the purpose. And then I'll keep an eye on the. Attendees list for a little bit longer to see if there are other requests. Hi, Tim. Hi, how are you guys? I was not able to scroll down. Lynn's complete list of the major. Categories, but one category. I was, I think it's important. Is to understand the financial. Benefit to the town of the various of the repair. Versus the renovate slash expand. Option and what I mean by that is increased library visits. Thus increased. Citizens downtown or visitors downtown and increased use of shops and economic commerce. Versus an assumption that that won't be necessarily the same. If we simply repair the library. Now I don't know how one really gets into the weeds of that economic analysis, but I think that's important. When one considers. This project. So that my category would be look at the, not only just the cost side. But the rent of you. Revenue slash benefit side. Of things. Yeah, it's an interesting question. I don't know how we can. Prepare to do it, but we can ask several people both within the. In the chamber and within the library, whether any work has ever been done on this question. Okay. Well, that would be good. I mean, that would be my, I think that should be looked at. Okay. Thank you. So I'm still going to have an eye on the list. I'm not seeing any other requests for. Public comment. So. I think we'll declare the public comment period. Completed for and. Get back to the process that we're in. So is there agreement that what we talked about before adding the one question. That came from public comment. To the list that we will. Try and formulate the questions. Lynn and I and. See if there's any comments and. Get our staff working on it. And we are scheduling two meetings. Potentially. To, to. Get the reports back and respond. If there's agreement on that. There seems to be, I don't think we need to vote. I don't think this is a motion because we're not taking any action. It's more of a process question. Then I think we can go on. Where we do that. May I mention. The format that we have set up for the public forums. On the library. One of which is tomorrow night and the second of which is Saturday. Two. Is that Sharon sherry has. Been able to line up a couple of their different. Expert consultancy, their architects. Person who knows. Historic tax credits. The LPM. They can't all be there for all the meetings. And they can't be there for the full two hours. And so what we're going to be doing is asking people. And remember, this is for the public. Is asking people. Is asking questions. That might be answered best answered by. Some of the consultants. And then at some point, some of the questions we have. For the finance committee. They also require the chair and asks them to come with her to a finance committee meeting. And then the second half or the second portion. And then, you know, expressing their opinion or whatever the else they want to say. But we wanted to give the public an opportunity. To ask the kinds of questions that the council. Had the opportunity to do. Last Monday. And that the finance committee will have to do. Coming up. Okay. I just wanted to mention that. You know, that's very helpful. Into the extent that questions come up. That are exactly in line with what we. Get onto our list and they're responded to in the public forum. By the people at the library have invited to come in. We will try and note that so that. Those of you who are able to. So through the public forum will be able to go back and know that it's there to look at. Great. Thanks. So I think that. That concludes our discussion on the library and. I would ask that we turn to the so that we can conclude our work for the day. Okay. I think we have a few financial orders that are. Fairly routine of the kinds of things that. Used to come before town meeting all of the time. They're just in. Things that needed to do to manage the finances of the town. So. You have a hand in the, in the attendees list. I don't know if you want to take it now, but. There is a hand raised. Yes. Okay. So. I think we. Bring. Ron to introduce yourself and. What part of town you live in and give your comment or question. My name is David. Let's go. I live in. The Cushman area and North. Amherst. I apologize for the late question. And I apologize for my. Amateur ability to phrase it, but. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. At the February 16th report. Projecting the costs in the future. And. A question arose that. In my mind, it would be very helpful. I'm not. Sure. I know how you would do this, but it would be very helpful. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Those projections. As absolute numbers. They could also be expressed. As a. Percentage of. The towns. Anticipated GDP using. Conservative. Assumptions for the. For the. Economic growth of the town. Over the 20 and 30 year period that we're looking at. I don't know if that's. Feasible, but I know it would be very. Helpful for me personally to see. Those projections as a percentage of GDP rather than. In addition to just seeing the absolute projections. If that question makes sense. I'm going to ask Sean or Sonya. They have any follow up they want to ask. Yeah, I don't. I don't know if, and maybe the commenter can. Respond to this. I don't know if GDP would be the right. Metric to compare to. I don't know if there is a Amherst GDP. Metric. I'd have to look at that. But maybe the metric that's sort of similar to that would be the. The EQV or the property tax, which measures growth in town and. And, you know, the financing ability of the town is tied to the. The taxable property values. So that to me would be the number that would be more. I think it might make more sense. Then GDP in this particular circumstance, but. I could be missing. Maybe I'm not aware of that metric for Amherst. Were you looking for a response from me? Yeah, I mean, do you, does that sound okay? What I, how I described it, or are you aware of a GDP figure for Amherst? No, I'm not aware. I. I'm not aware of that. It only occurred to me as I was listening. To the discussion and listening to Tim Neal's. Comment. I'm just trying to, in thinking out loud. Trying to place. Those projected costs in the future into a. A broader, more comprehensive, meaningful context. Because the absolute numbers 20 years from now. Don't mean much in the economy of 20 years from now. Well, it's not that they don't mean much, but they. They, they take on a very different meaning. In the context of the inflated economy of 20 years from now. And. And the reason I bring this up is that. If the town continues to be a vibrant. Attractive growing community. The, the town's economy. I will grow faster than the. General economy of the surrounding. Towns and states and the town will thrive. And those costs will be relatively lower. If the town does not make. You know, certain investments, then of course, they're. It's a very different scenario. If the town's economy doesn't grow, then those. Those costs become much larger and relative terms. And so when, when the, when the town council is considering. These very substantial. Financial commitments. The town council has to look at them. In the context of investments in a town that's growing or a town that's. Withering under various projections. If all that makes sense, I'm just thinking a lot. I don't mean. Throw a lot of mud into the. Into the. You know, into the discussion. I'm just. Trying to think of all of this, you know, within. The larger context of the. Towns future. Yeah. No, we can absolutely think about that. And in the model, the current model does to an extent and that we. Do consider the growth in town on the property tax side, but we can Sony and I can give some more thought to. If there's other metrics that might align with what you described. Thank you. Thanks for the time. That was very, very helpful. I think when we look at property tax. Of course, we're looking at ability to pay back bonds. And. But then. There's also the question that Tim raised in that you've added to about whether. Things we do might generate other revenues or. The town. Or other things that promote the health of the town. And so we'll give that some thought. So thank you for the comment. So going back to where I was, because I'm really trying to get us concluded. When do you want to share screen or on the two orders? Or do you want me to try and do it? No, I can do it. Oops, I can do it. Okay. So. There were two orders. One was. Having to do with property tax and one was having to do about. Portion of. Debt that. We no longer are required to use. We just want to be able to make a recommendation to the council on those two orders. If you have any responses to questions that may arise. It's a transfer, a free cast, a stabilization fund. Not. Property tax. Right. Okay. You heard me for a minute. And I. Been a long day. I don't know why I'm on the agenda. So we see the financial order before us. And. Provided us with a separate memorandum that explained. This. In a little bit more. Complete language than. Is in the order. Are there any questions. From the committee. About this particular order. Do you want me to explain this at all? I'm seeing if there, if there's no questions, you're. I'm going to assume that your memorandum. Because I found it very complete. Yep. I appreciated it very much. It was very helpful. So if there are no questions, I would just see if there's a motion to recommend. Appropriation and transfer order. FY 2112. To the council. So moved. Second. So this motion is second. So I will go through the same process that we went for through before. And ask the resident members if they have any recommendations to for the committee. And then go for ask for a committee to vote on the motion on the floor. So Bernie. Any. This is fine. This is fine. Jane. I'm in favor. I'm good. And. I agree. It's, it's a makes sense. Okay. So then. Let's just do votes and I'm going to do it in order that they're showing up on my panelists list just to get through. Kathy. Yes. Dorothy. Yes. Pat. Yes. Lynn. I. Yeah, I mean, yes, so it's five to zero. So we should switch to the other order. Yep. Ready to pull up. Second. Yes. Okay. So I'm going to pause just for a second. So. This motion is to rescind. Access and unnecessary borrowing capacity. The previous voted. Explained in the memorandum. It was provided again by Sonya Aldrich and. So this is a second one that we. Need to consider. I'm going to go back to looking at the participant list and see if there are. Any questions. So I'll look for raised hands and see if there are any questions about this particular order. No questions. Is there a motion to recommend. Order F. Why 2113 to the council. So Pat has made a motion to recommend. Is there a second. Grace. Second. Motion has been made and seconded. And again, same question out. Bob Hegner's there. Any. Comments or recommendations you have to the. No comment. I think this makes sense. Okay. And Bernie. Fine. Jane. I'm good. Okay. So. Go through. And I'll. Lynn. I'm going to start the voting. Yeah. Fine. Dorothy. Yes. Hi. Kathy. Yes. I'm a yes. Again, it's five to zero. So that brings us then to the final. Issue of the day. Other than. If we have any other business that I'm not aware of any other business. Is the. And that is the question of what we're going to do about additional days in May, how many additional days. And Sean, I don't know if you've gone over the list and thought about how many days you feel we're going to need. So today I, we had a department head meeting. And I asked department heads to let me know what Tuesdays and Thursdays between two and four, they would not be available. So nothing yet, but I expect in the next couple of days, we'll hear back if there are any conflicts. And that'll help sort of guide where we slot people. I think last time around, we met. Twice a week for felt like at least three or four weeks. To get through all of it. So I would expect we would need. Roughly the same this year. And we did. And we also mentioned having a conversation at some point about how do we structure the department presentations to make them as efficient as possible. I believe that didn't we meet on Wednesday, you know, Tuesdays and Thursdays. Last year. Yep. Yes. Okay. And we, and we've moved our meetings. I think we're going to have a problem this year because of. We have a problem with CRC. CRC meets on the. We can meet every Tuesday. Yeah. Yeah. The CRC meets on the 11th and the 25th. And so the meetings that we would have available are. Tuesday, the fourth. Thursday, the six. Thursday, the 13th. Tuesday, the 18th. Thursday, the 20th. And Thursday, the 27th. Unless we add in another day of the week. That gives us six. Times to meet. So then the question is whether Sean can slot everyone in, in six times, right? Yeah. Yeah. And I had sent you the list of what happened last time. And. I think we had eight meetings last time. We did. And that included. Two meetings, which were to review drafts and approve one to review a draft on the report. And the other to approve draft to the report. So we could make them, I mean, I don't know if this works for everybody. We could make them three hour meetings as opposed to two hour meetings. And that might give us the extra hours we need. So we don't have to schedule any additional meetings. For me. It works for me. So why don't I'll try to, I'll take it. First pass out at Andy looking at it from a three meeting standpoint and send it to you guys to take a look at. Three hour meeting. Okay. And did you get the dates down that. I'll probably need to get those. Can you say them one more time? Or do you want me to just connect with you after I can just give you the dates and not get into the day of the week. Okay. So I'm assuming we'd begin at two o'clock at each of those or. Or earlier. Two to four. I mean, two to five. Is there anybody who cannot. I think that doesn't work for. And it is the two to five. Interrupt year. And maybe it's over by that point. The. Was a TS was the one meeting we moved for JCPC. The TS. I was the one meeting. That I'll need to check on and I'll get back to you on that. And we might be done. I think we're going to be done with JCPC by May. So then. Theoretically. So can go back to its old time slot. It's all time slot. Starts in the late afternoon at five or. Does the committee want to meet at one o'clock during May? Can we do that? I can do that. I can do it. I can. Perfect. Dorothy. You're the one who has. I'm not hearing you because you're. Yes, yes, I can. I teach an eight o'clock class. So I can, you know, starting earlier, it is not a problem. Jane. Andy, would you check with Jane? So we're talking one to four. Is that right? Yeah. Okay. Yes. So we're talking one to four. Is that right? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Just those. TSO started for 30 on, on some Thursdays. That's good. Yeah. So we would. The early meetings would be on. Just days that conflict with TSO meetings. We don't have to do it on other days. We'll send you out a complete schedule. Send me a schedule. Very quickly. I just want to confirm at this point, we're holding March 30th, but we also meet on April 6th and April 20th. And those would be at two o'clock. Yes. Yes. Okay. Okay. We have a variable on the Thursdays. You're going to, you're just going to send us a list. We'll put it down. We'll send the list with the times. Yeah, good. Those are, I have no other business that was not considered as anybody has. Other business that they want the committee to consider. And this is a question for both staff and for committee members, things that were not anticipated. I think we can consider the meeting adjourned at. 435. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you everybody. We did a lot today. It was a tough meeting. Thank you all.