 Good evening everyone. Welcome to the Board of Selectments meeting for Wednesday, May 4th, 2016. Thank you Mr. Byrne. Scheduled to begin at 7 p.m., one of our colleagues is out of town, Mr. Greeley, and Mr. Dunn is on his way shortly, so what we're going to do, and I apologize for starting a little bit late, take care of some of the other agenda items, and because of the debt exclusion and legal issues, we will refrain on numbers seven and eight until Mr. Dunn arrives, which he should be here any minute. So first, request, vote of the Board to authorize the town manager to execute contracts for MWRA waterbound bond of $900,000. We have our treasurer and collector of taxes here, Mr. Gilligan. Thank you for your patience, gentlemen. Thank you Madam Chairman, and members of the Board. The request this evening is for the Board to vote to authorize the town manager to execute a contract for a loan agreement with the Massachusetts Water Resource Authority for the amount of $900,000. That $900,000 will be an interest-free loan in the form of a water bond, and it is to accommodate a local system water assistance program project that will basically install over 4,000 linear feet of water main along Jason Street, Pleasant View, and Hillside. The loan is to be repaid over a 10-year period in equal amounts of $90,000 per year. Upon execution of the contract, the MWRA will forward the bond certificates for authorization of the closing by the Board, and that will take place on Monday, provided there's an approval tonight. Thank you, Mr. Gilligan. Overproal. Mr. Curell moves approval, seconded by Mr. Byrne. Second. Mr. Byrne. Any questions, comments? I'll set Mr. Chapter Lane. No, I'm good. I should do it for question. And obviously, thank you for your work on this. Is this from the new MWRA program that just came out, maybe last month that was released, that they released all the money for new bonds? Yes, the MWRA establishes their sewer facilities assistance plan and their local water system plans over certain periods of time. So they did not re-up this at the end of last year. So this is a continuation of a previous program, but it's all new funding. Excellent. Thank you. Any further questions or comments? If not, are there a motion by Mr. Curell, seconded by Mr. Byrne? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. Thank you very much. I appreciate the time of the Board, and as soon as I get the contracts back from the manager, they'll be overnighted to the MWRA, and I'll see you on Monday night. Thank you so much. Next, we have our consent agenda. Minutes of meeting, April 11, 2016, April 25, 2016. A request for a one-day beer and wine license on May 28, 2016, Allington Town Hall for a private wedding, Jessica Fagnoli and Daniel Rosenthal request contractor drain layers license, J. White Contracting Inc., 3 Murray Hill Lane and Overmass, a request for contractor drain layer license, NCCLC Enterprises, LLC, 21 Water Street and Wakefield Mass, as well as another request for a contract drain layers license, Tufts Construction Inc. 209 Mystic Avenue in Medford Mass. Move approval. Move by Mr. Byrne. Seconded. Seconded by Mr. Carrow. Any questions or comments? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. Correspondence received. We have a piece of correspondence from Patrick Sackpibit, Professional Engineering, P.E., Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration from FEMA, which is entitled No Revision to the Effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Move receipt. Move receipt by Mr. Byrne. Seconded by Mr. Carrow. Any questions? I just have a question. This does not indicate any action on our part, does it? No, it does not. Just received. Any further questions or comments? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. Thank you, Mr. Perfect time. Yes. I've started to read quickly, as I normally do, and then I thought, you know what? Slow down. You have perfect timing, Mr. Dunn. Appreciate it. Perfect time. I apologize to everyone for being late. We have taken agenda item one, the consent agenda items two through six, and we just finished up with correspondence received, which didn't require any actions. It was just to move receipt. I appreciate you keeping moving along, and I apologize again. No worries. We will now go to agenda item seven. Discussion and vote, special town meeting, article six, Minuteman School Building Bond Authorization. I'd like to ask our Vice Chair, Mr. Dunn. Actually, it's okay. Do you want me to do a brief introduction? So tonight, what's before the board is discussion and potentially a vote if the board so chooses to either vote in support or not in support of moving forward with the currently proposed MSBA Minuteman Building Project. What's attached to this agenda item is the Finance Committee's recommendation to town meeting, which is favorable action contingent upon a successful debt exclusion for the Minuteman Project. And what you see is what I will say is a very well written and comprehensive report by Chairman of the Finance Committee, Al Tosti, who was on the board of Selectman's Minuteman Building Project Assessment Task Force, really lays out what a close call the issue is, what the pros and cons of moving forward are, and what some of the impacts of moving forward would be. Also attached to that report is the proposed vote, historical enrollment at Minuteman, as well as both a low end and a high end of debt projections of what Arlington could pay based on lower enrollments from Arlington or higher enrollments from Arlington in relation to the total enrollment of the school. So I don't want to rehash the entire discussion, but really, you know, at least from where I come from, where this analysis comes down to is the lack of a clear cut appropriate alternative seems to inform us that this is though expensive and though certainly also having some risk to it is a safe and appropriate choice to continue providing vocational and technical education to Arlington students. So I'll close with that, but if you're ready, Dan. I'm good. Thank you. It's worth mentioning that the task force that we commissioned, recommended, I think it was 8 to 1, was a final vote in favor of the bill option. So we've got a reasonably strong endorsement from that group. We've got an endorsement from Fincom, which is definitely there are a number of people who are very torn on the issue. My thinking has changed from where I was two weeks ago, where I walked us through, you know, the no build option versus the build options and the various grades of good and bad that could come in between. And so I would like to go. I want the building to be built. And I think that if we give our unanimous approval, I think it gives it a little bit more chance on time meeting floor Monday night. So it's appropriate. I'm ready to make a motion. I move that we move favorable action on building the minimum building and support the finance commit these main motion. Second. Motion by Mr. Dunn, second by Mr. Byrne. Any questions? I just want to say one thing that's important. You know, I is that this vote is contingent upon approval of the ballot question, which is our next item. So sorry. I'm curious and what how like how does the actions of other towns playing for this? It's a good question. So there's no one who has said no yet. There are several towns that are yes, town meetings contingent upon debt exclusions. And those are mostly voting this week and next week. Belmont town meeting is voting tonight. Belmont is definitely one of the really tricky ones. Even let's imagine the Belmont boats know tonight. I still will want us to go forward and say yes on Monday. There's a couple scenarios where Belmont could be brought to the table on a future vote. And I think it's also I think we should we should take a position one way or another. Yeah. So a shorter answer is if one town votes no, then this particular bond is dead and a minute man has said they will not put it forward to a ballot. Thank you. Thank you very much. And I'm glad to have the opportunity for us to go on record with this because I do regret that even a town meeting member I will be away next week on business. So I won't have an opportunity to weigh in as a as a town meeting member. But Dan is right. I think a lot of people are torn on this. There are risks either way you go on this project. But I think that folks came down on the side of this this this proposal, you know, partially based on what do you get for your money? We're going to do patchwork, you know, over a course of years or decades with no state participation whatsoever. You know, they have been proposed improvements to the educational program, which is much more of a 21st century educational program up at the minute man, which really are only feasible if this building project goes forward. It does shrink the building from what it is now. So even though there's a lot of debate over whether it's right size, it's better size than what it is right now. There's also one factor that I, you know, I don't think I vocalized previously, but this is part of our educational offering to our students here in Arlington. I could very easily envision a scenario where when we go towards renovating the Arlington High School during those few years where there is disruption at the Arlington High campus, that some students may well find that this is a good option for them during that period of time to go to the minute man route if the educational program satisfies their needs. Thank you very much. You know, Dan has again done, you know, lion's share work on this, but I appreciate it. It was a very delicate balance to, and I know Doug had to do a lot of work with Bond Council as well, so I think we have to acknowledge that as well. Thank you. Any further questions? On a motion by Mr. Dunn, seconded by Mr. Byrne. All those in favor say aye. Aye. I suppose. unanimous vote. We now come to agenda item 8, which is the vote to authorize the debt exclusion questions for June 14th, just a sort of a prelude, and then I'll ask the town manager or town council if there's anything they want to add before we get into our discussion. I met with the Mr. Chapter Lane and Mr. Hyme around the proposed ballot questions. It seems on the high school feasibility study and the Thompson PIB's addition renovations, that that's, we seem to have come to agreement on that in hearing from all the board members and not only town council and the town manager, but town council's consultation with MSBA and previous votes and the wording. The only thing that I would note, I'm taking the two easy ones first because, you know, I anticipate that we'll be in agreement on that is Mr. Chapter Lane and Mr. Hyme and I have discussed, we haven't done it in the bold face, but under Tom, right now it says Thompson Gibbs and Audison additions and renovations. If you look at the actual wording of the vote, it cites Thompson School and Gibbs School. We took out the Audison based on the discussions and the vote by the school enrollment task force the other night to request the school committee to have a meeting, which I understand, I believe for Mr. Curell that they have scheduled for Monday. It's upcoming Monday. We took out Audison because it became abundantly clear that it was going to be a Gibbs option, just not what it was. And just about all of the school committee was attending that meeting and spoke to that. So what I would like to do on the first two is, if I could, because then we'll get to the meat of the matter, if anyone has any further comments, suggestions on the high school feasibility study ballot question or the Thompson Gibbs addition and renovations ballot question. Okay, so let's, oh, Mr. Curell, my only question is, I had asked Tom Council about this. I believe we have to take separate votes for each of them, is that correct? Yes, okay. Yes, I did. Mr. And I would also like to set the order while we do it. I think Thompson Gibbs is first. Arlington High is second, Minuteman third in terms of whatever. I agree. I was hoping. Okay. And sorry, just so we can, the other thing I just want to get, whoever makes the motion, I hope you include that polls open at 7 a.m. close at 8 p.m. Right. That's going to be my question, whether we're also including the language to open the polls on that date. I did stop by the town clerk's office last week and making sure that she was okay with 7 a.m. and she was absolutely fine with it. And I did also check with Marie. I did a check with Marie before I checked with the town clerk. Important to note. And I do want to note because I know we've received some pieces of correspondence that we were all CC'd on about why wasn't it a Saturday election. We've stated this before. First of all, there are no Saturdays available for Town Hall in June. They've already been booked for a year plus in advance for weddings as well as getting poll workers for that, you know, an informal poll indicated that it really was going to be a herculean task and close to impossible. And so then this committee, along with others, took into account the last day of school, fifth grade graduation and came up with a day that was least disruptive. So I understand that people are used to Saturday elections for issues like this, but it just wasn't doable. So, and I agree with that order. I was hoping I was seeing all, you know, now when we get, before we move on, I would like to ask Mr. Chaplain and Mr. Heim on either of those. I'll go first. I think the board, it would be important for the board to sort of have a public announcement of what the amounts of these debt exclusions would be based on the vote. So the board has been provided a memo that's available on Novus that has a cover memo that outlines the amounts, the Arlington High School Feasibility Study amount that would be proposed to be debt excluded would be two million dollars. The amount for the Thompson Elementary School expansion that would be proposed to be excluded would be four million dollars. The Gibbs renovation would be proposed to be 25 million dollars. And the Minuteman question, though it's yet to be discussed, would be, it's harder to say it's an exact amount because there's a variable amount, but what we would say is the maximum projected impact would be 32 million dollars. Also provided to the board is a number of charts that show what the dollar for dollar impact would be on the average single family tax bill. It's shown in several different manners and these have been put together by Deputy Town Manager Sandy Poole. We'll answer any questions about those and if there's any other variations of this that the board would like to see as this debt exclusion discussion goes on, we'd be happy to provide them. Just one question on that and I'm just going by my memory which may be incorrect because I know one of the school task force members presented some figures for the three different options, two different in terms of educational configuration and then the other one, Audison versus Gibbs. And I had it in my head that that individual member projected the Gibbs at 32 million and we're at 25. So we're higher numbers projected some time ago based on square footage cost. The architect's proposals or excuse me study that was presented had a Gibbs number and an Audison number. The Gibbs number was lower. Actual construction is just about 17 million dollars but there were several items not included in the study when you added well, I should say the study had construction and soft costs to a total of 19 million. We then added in fixtures, furniture and equipment, technology as well as construction contingency and that brought it up to just below 25 million dollars in estimated project costs. And we did so in coordination with the chair of the permanent town building committee to assure that we were on the same page. Okay and now on to Minutman which when we take three separate votes, do we take three separate votes to put them on and then a fourth vote for the order? Mr. Hyde. Madam Chairwoman, I would say that yes, I would vote each individual question first and then have a last vote to say this is how the order with which we want to appear on the ballot and when we want the polls to open. Okay and I'm getting ahead of myself, I just wanted just so everybody. On scenario one which is Minutman and I'll state my feelings on it and then you can see there are three options here, scenario one, two and three. I am right now strongly in favor of option one in the sense that putting something forth to the voters although I'm very comfortable now in terms of the order that might allay some of my concerns but basically when I met with the town manager and town council and I spoke to some parents and others that we've about spoken with in order to put the most concise what's on our plate, what's on the table right now into a dead exclusion ballot question, all that's before us is what is contained in scenario one. My concern in and I'll let Mr. Dunn and Mr. Attorney Hyde because both have two different versions which basically says puts forth the way I read it to be corrected that the first part of the preamble of ballot question paragraph is addressing what scenario one is which is what's before us, what we're being requested to do but then it takes it a step out, step further to say that if for some reason the dead exclusion as requested by or the monies as requested by Minutman that process falls apart but Mr. Dunn spoke to earlier this evening that we then have a backup plan. My concern with that was is you know we are going to go to the voters you know with the coordinated campaign and I'm sure there'll be somebody also coordinating another campaign. I'm not going to get into the specifics of it because I don't want to violate any you know ethics commission law, open meeting law but just looking at it and I'm fearful enough but not terrified that people who might be on the fence when they see the two Minutman options might think that we're sort of asking for you know a blank check it's either this or that you know we don't really know there could actually be even a third option who knows what because who knows what happens with Minutman in terms of what they might ask for if the original request for Minutman isn't funded or go through the process. The only thing that would change my mind right now but I will go with the majority of the board is the reason I say that is I'm anticipating that first of all I have pretty high hopes that somehow the initial request even if you know one town meeting initially says no and a lot of that is in part to Mr. Dunn's negotiations and bringing everyone to the table that probably still will move forward and then the second one which would be my question that if that did happen that it kind of fell apart and Minutman had to go back to square one just looking at what I anticipate what they would need to do in the construction schedule that would put them in line with phase two of this building rebuilding our Arlington schools which includes Minutman that when we're ready to hit the ground running after the feasibility study for Arlington High that's where number one we could put what the new Minutman option request is and number two they're going to need that time to do all that am I going to I didn't say it I'm going to take that one no I think that's fair I think if the MSBA project fails it would be probably between 12 to 18 maybe 24 months before a distinct project or plan was agreed upon can't guarantee that but and just my last comments on that is just thinking a working for a successful debt exclusion and be giving out all the information that we have before us if we sort of have this nebulous hanging in there and it's going to take them the same time as when Arlington High finishes the feasibility study and we move on and it almost seems like a natural marriage to me that you know 18 months 24 months in the future we have Arlington High School after feasibility study we have Minutman after if the initial what's before us gets turned down they do their due diligence get their feasibility plan for whatever is new architects and the two appear on the ballot the same so with that Mr. Dunn I didn't mean to I do prefer scenario two the one with the or and I think you you're correctly anticipating one of the things that I'm worried about which is that Minutman is going to cost like there's going to be capital costs associated with Minutman no matter what happens and by putting the what I'm referring to is the or version the scenario to then we get to have we have relief in our budget for either plan and so I agree that it is possible that we that it might work out that the we could do so as I mean as we voted our last meeting we said there's going to be we've got three two debt exclusions in an override in our future we've got this one that we were June 14th we've got the Arlington High School full rebuild that we've got the operating override and so we could hypothetically put Minutman on one or the other of those depending upon that I would rather do it now I'd rather get it out of the way and I feel and I share your concern and goal of getting the voters on June 14th to say yes and I feel like I feel like we can make the case that says Minutman is going to cost us money whether it's from column A or whether it's from column B it's going to cost us money this is the time to vote yes that said I think I think I share what something that I think I heard you say which is that I'm I'm I'm prepared to support either option going forward I prefer to but I would you know the will of the board is to go with one then I'll be happy to support that through the tonight and through the override process and just quickly and then I'll call on my colleagues Mr. Burner Mr. Curell my my only concern is if the first request is not successful if it is successful we have it there we have the money allocated if it's not successful basically what we're saying to the voters is both the second part of the or but we don't really know until a it's initial request is not successful and B we really don't know how much it is yet and my thinking is going to the voters I we all want to be very concise and precise in terms of and the town manager will do this with the assistant town manager and others in terms of this is what we need to do this is what the costs are and this is what we're asking for and my feeling is putting that or in right now we don't know that until three other dominoes fall which include you know what I would like to do is when we go to the voters if we we flip to the second scenario we already know because right now we don't know that to me which I totally respect kind of like chess we're thinking three moves out but we we're still at the first move but I'm monopolizing so when when would we have that information for the or do you know like when so for the rebuild for the yeah for the or when for the rebuild when when could we have an accurate or you know potential estimate on what that would be you know I guess there's a lot of there's a lot of uncertainty about what the path would be so this project goes down based on Belmont voting no there's a chance that Belmont asks to leave the district there's a chance they'd be allowed out of the district that would be another 40 or so students maybe a little less than 40 students and so they probably start to be talked even on our behalf about it's minimum and even viable so we probably go through some cycles of trying to figure out you know do we want to stay in are there other options what is this what does this look like at the same time the district would probably start talking about what we need to do the roof or we need to do you know maybe the boiler or whatever it might be so I think there's at least a year before there's clarity and that's I think that's optimistic and so you know in within that year that they need a new roof they you know as you're saying they need all these kind of upgrades if this that exclusion was to go through with the or rehab we would then use that potential pool of funds to make those piecemeal upgrades so and then I guess my my my thought process here is that we would you know we would have some sort of pool of funds we don't know exactly how much we really need for these potential upgrades so I'm trying to balance you know balance information coming in with funding going out type of yeah and I'd like to provide more clarity but I'm not sure that I can because if they if the if the district chooses to pursue some smaller piecemeal changes and they don't borrow and they include it as sort of operating capital I don't believe and I don't know that we fully resolve this but I don't believe that we can exclude debt because it's not debt yeah it's it's an assessment so there's there's the chance that there could be let's say significant costs not million dollar you know multimillion dollar costs but significant costs that we can't debt exclude and the manner in which they piecemeal it will be will tell us you know whether they have to borrow or not and that yet is yet to be seen and then we're not trying to muddy it but I think that's yeah no and then we'd have to take funds that we you know are lacking anyway so yeah before I call Mr. Carroll and get it not prepared to do this and if it's appropriate could I kind of put you on the spot and ask you in terms of you know what we're discussing here just from the town manager standpoint or anything else that you deem appropriate if you have any feelings on yeah so let me I'll I guess I'll address quickly administrative concerns and then let's say public relations concerns so administrative concerns is there is risk in scenario to probably low risk but risk that the MSBA would not be on board with having the or scenario MSBA does have regulations that talk about having singular questions to approve their projects and this is a little different because it's a district it's not us doing a project the district doing a project and us doing a question so is it highly likely that the MSBA will have a problem no but it's certainly a risk that we should be aware of in scenario too so that's an administrative concern from a public relations point of view and then I guess well let me go back to administrative I'm sorry from an administrative concern again low risk and the DOR has said they would approve this but there's the chance we could go back to a different member of the personnel at DOR and have them not feel clear about how much was excluded as part of the DOR question and have concerns about how we raise those taxes we'd certainly fight through that and I think we could be successful but again low risk there from the public relations point of view I think there is a challenge in clearly and articulately telling the voters what they are voting for with scenario too I absolutely see and I also appreciate the want to give us budget stability and also not suffer through a public relations challenge of having to go to the ballot again you know maybe in between this in the high school project based on what happens in that that's laudable but I do fear that there could be confusion and lack of clarity by pursuing scenario too Mr. Carroll I have to say I came in here really feeling the scenario too was the way to go but now I'm definitely leaning towards scenario one for a couple of reasons some of the reasons that have been stated but also I think I'm actually somewhat swayed also by the good work that Mr. Pooler has done on the projections of impacts to the tax base those are predictive if the building project goes through but if this passes and we're looking at the capital amounts as they are planned out by the district of the future those graphs and projections don't really hold anymore they're not valid so I think it does create a communications problem and explaining what the full impact and the phasing in of this is because that's one thing that I think we also have to make clear in our communications the voters that this isn't all hitting all at once it's phasing in over four years so I think I'm leaning towards one Mr. Dunn? Two points I should have made earlier one is we have it we do have a the I reckon I totally agree that there's clarity challenged but we've done it before if you look at both of our elementary school overrides they didn't have numbers for the tax they said this is the amount of money this is what we're gonna do and this one is the same thing this is the amount of money and this is what we're gonna do so we've done that before the second point is that in terms of there's a set of people so for instance look at the finance committee which split very closely on whether or not there should be a new building but they would virtually unanimously agree that there's a lot of money that needs to be spent on Minuteman and if we make this vote only about the new building we're gonna lose some of the people in support of this third question and so that means we're gonna get from say capital planning or from finance committee we're going to get support for questions one and two and negative for three which is a model which is less clear than I've achieved I've made my case I'll make my last case and then I guess I'll call my colleagues for a motion first I would say and I'll do respect to them the finance committee capital planning committee are not policy making decision makers and it's we the board of select minutes the school committee number one number two is the person sharing the campaign to begin phase one of a two phase project I would respectfully ask my colleagues especially if you're on the fence really to make that campaign with the most success as possible in terms of going with the scenario one not just in light of the remarks that I've made but in terms of the town manager so that we can have more clarity when we go forth on the campaign trail because I anticipate if we have the or scenario unfortunately I feel the conversation around minute man will get bogged down for some people who might not be in favor or for some reason want to just talk about things focus on that part of it which we do not have all the information about and might pick up on DOR and MSFBA and it totally detracts from you know I want to have a really clear pure as accurate as possible message to the voters including when Mr. Chapterland and Mr. Poole which already have done the calculations when they ask for the same calculation on the or pod we're just not going to have that we're going to have a ballpark so I if you're on the fence someone we're all going to be working on this but I can tell you as someone who's chairing it I would really emphasize and respectfully respectfully request we go with scenario one so with that if there's any further questions or comments does anyone do you want to start with a motion just can I get a motion from my colleagues on the I actually have a question it's the bottom sorry if we what happens if we start voting down motions are we you know can we just like are we binding ourselves by voting I know we need a what a two-thirds or a three-quarter vote here so it's not like Mr. Burnett it's not like a zoning article at town meeting yeah I mean the town the board of selection can obviously come back and try to put a ballot question on what you're really dealing with is the time constraint to put it on the special election ballot for June 14th and we just don't have that much time so so I guess with that I have one more question for the town manager and that would be how out of whack would our long-range plan be if we you know looked at some of these improvements that need to be made a minimum and didn't exclude that that for you know with that rebuild language could you guess that if if it was piecemeal you know little here a little there it wouldn't be dramatic impacts but there would be impacts if there was a larger scale project that was not that excluded you know a full rehab it would have catastrophic impacts meaning if they did a 60 million 70 million dollar repair that was not MSBA reimbursed that wasn't this project and we didn't have a debt exclusion that would be very challenging and I would say if the board voted on scenario one tonight and that situation occurred as challenging as it would be I would certainly be advising that a further debt exclusion vote would need to be considered in the future so but I think I'm I'm leaning towards option two here one I think and I realize that probably gives us a 50% split which is probably not where obviously not ideal when there is four of us here tonight it gives your chair who's going to chair that's a vote no but yep I think for you know to do if we're looking at you know our long term you know our long range plan for example I think that it's a safer option to you know build in some you know some leeway for us if we do face a large scale expense at Minuteman and you know and that being said if there's and I wouldn't and I wouldn't want a minute like I would not want a large scale Minuteman project on the same debt exclusion as a our high school I think that that would be much harder to take being that there's you know though those would be too massive exclusions like that would be 30 on top of I think what would be a larger exclusion than we're facing here with the gifts and I think that is something I'm considering so I do feel like option two is a safer play right now can I ask the town manager if say we did option two because in the first pod failed and Minuteman came out with this outrageous rebuild that we pre-approved in this debt exclusion for 70 to 100 million we would be bound to fund that versus no no so this only would allow us to to debt excluded town meeting would still need to approve the borrowing so there's there is that protection it doesn't automatically make you spend money here so the way it's written is that it says that the option to the whore is written is it says for any it only can be used to pay for bonded Minuteman projects and any bonded Minuteman project town meeting has the opportunity to reject it in the exact same way the town meeting has the opportunity to reject it on Monday well I guess how how strongly you feel about this because I feel very strongly about this I've had many conversations with some of the core group that we've had interesting thing I think Diane is that you and I are doing we have the exact same motivation which is to get the overrides the debt exclusion to prove and we have different degrees on the easiest way to do that I think I believe that we are absolutely aimed at the same goal but we but we are not in agreement about the methods I can support the option one with a smile on my face because it's a good option I think you want to make that motion I think it makes it harder for us to win on June 14th see I think the other way I know it makes it easier having worked on since when they want to close bracket appears moving forward just knowing the nature of exclusions all the ones that I've worked on the first one failed which I felt very strongly about at that point and was basically asked to be quiet and and that's the first one that I moved that we adopt version one is there a second I'll second it any further discussion I'm happy to support it as well all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed on a motion by Mr Dunn seconded by Mr. Curell I thank you so that is for scenario one on Minuteman rehab or rebuild Madam Chairman I'm sorry man yes I just want to be clear that the board of Selectman has voted to place on the ballot for June 14th debt exclusion as described in scenario one for the Minuteman rebuild is that that was my the intent of my motion yes would you like us to vote again nope thank you Mr. Dunn okay second motion Alex set from one of my colleagues regarding the high school feasibility study in its language I will move the language is presented here by Mr. Curell seconded by Mr. Byrne any further discussion all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed and then third on what will be known as Gibbs and Audison addition renovations Gibson Thompson I'm reading that's why you have a vice chair Gibson Thompson Mr. Byrne the language is presented Mr. Byrne motion by Mr. Byrne seconded by second Mr. Dunn any further questions or discussion if not all those in favor say aye aye aye all those opposed and then the next motion can we take can it be two part a establishing the order of the ballot questions as well as the details of June 14th yes Madam Chair motion by I move that we go the order of Gibbs Thompson first Arlington High second Minuteman third and then the polls be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. on June 14th second motion by Mr. Dunn seconded by Mr. Byrne and Mr. Carroll so I'll leave that to Miss Kruppelke any further discussion or questions if not all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed unanimous vote and we now will recess recess and down to tell me I move by Mr. Dunn seconded by Mr. Byrne all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed unanimous vote thank you so much