 I will call to order this meeting of the Waterbury Select Board on Monday, August 7th. Recording in progress. There we go. August 7th, 2023. And the first order of business is to approve the agenda, so I have a motion. Make a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Seconded. Okay, moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all of the members say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? The agenda is approved. Next is the consent agenda. We did receive an explanation of Madonna's Earth, which is the mural commissioned by Waterbury Area and by Racism Coalition, along with Bridgeside Books. And I reached there's an ID on that, authorizing them to put up, to spread a plaque explaining the mural. And they're struggling to hear us a little bit online, so I'm just gonna put this computer a bit more central. And hopefully that will help. All right, do I have a motion on the consent agenda? I move to approve all consent agenda items. Second. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Just as a point of information, it was work was the lead on the mural. Okay. The location was just by permission of the property owner. All right. Corrected. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor of the consent agenda. We'll send them by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? The consent agenda is approved. The next item on the agenda is a public session. And this is an opportunity for anyone in the public to address anything that is not on the warrant agenda. Anyone online? Can't see you, so you'll have to speak up? No? If you'll invest me, I'll just note that just a week ago tonight, Chris Lackey of the Library Center, KD4 Board, to express concern about a alleged arsonist in his neighborhood was causing disturbances. There's a lot of discussion about the lack of public safety support. And we were in the unfortunate position of saying that we were doing the best we could. Or at least that was my impression. And tonight I'd just like to note that no less than six state police officers went to that household after Mr. Neville had been brought in for observation and released to the care of a responsible adult, in this case, his 18-year-old son. And then proceeded to steal his car and go back to his residence and cause further disturbance. And in response, no less than six, state police came and spent the entire day protecting the public, making sure that no further damage was caused to his property or others around him. And then when they finally got the warrant from the court, 3.30 in the afternoon, they were able to go in and arrest the offending individual. So I would like to propose to have our town manager write a letter of thanks to the Broad State Police and Commissioner of Public Safety for the responsiveness of the state police in that situation. I think there is a lot of times when we complain about public safety issues and probably far too few opportunities to provide our thanks when they do. So I'd like to do that at the same time. I'd also like to put on the agenda for the future agenda that we continue to address public safety. Put it in the parking lot for now, for this meeting. I'm sorry, I'm going to bring it back up. I don't know that we found the perfect solution. I think we need to continue to address what we can do to improve public safety for the residents of Waterloo at Mike. I just want to personally thank Lisa Scagliodi and the staff of the Waterbury Roundabout. The article that you wrote about the case, the Neville, what? Speak up. And speak this way, I don't know what she said. Okay, the information that she provided in the Roundabout about the Neville case, I thought was very good to calm the public letting them know what was happening. And I think that's a, you know, if anything, the Roundabout is a real critical cog in our community to let people know what's going on. So thank you, Lisa and your staff. There's someone on the list. I'm really sorry. Did you make sure the volume on the computer is all the way up in the lower room? I'm just making sure that people can hear us on the best of our technological ability here. Thanks, Mike, I agree with you, go ahead. Any further discussion on this issue? All right. Well, thank you for indulging me on that. Flood response. Are we expecting Tom Drake? I believe Tom Lites is going to fill in for Tom Drake. That's the volume and that's another individual. I think people are leaving and coming back to see if there's any improvement. So Tom Drake has just seven open jobs on the list right now. We've still got two outstanding decodifiers that we're trying to find them, but we hope to return the ones to Massachusetts this week. For all the supplies, we ordered a pod that'll be here this week. So this room will be free. It's an eight by eight pod. We're just going to put it in a parking lot back. So full use of the still room again. He thinks the supplies are generally fine. He said the concrobium, which I think is the anti-mold, is getting well. Might have to order more of that, but he said otherwise, he's got adequate supplies, adequate volunteers. They're still plugging away, but it's getting to be a little more in the week today. It sounds like. Any questions for Tom? Either Tom? So. Okay. Thank you. The Natural Disaster Response Committee. Yes. That's me. Okay. So last week, I asked the select board to consider, consider thinking about the creation of a committee that would act as a body to prepare us for and keep us ready for next time, for another Natural Disaster. In my. Can you speak over here? Sure. I just, I don't want to say, I do want to pause. I have concerns about the SE Group presentation, which I think we will want to have recorded for posterity and just want to make sure that we do our best to find a solution. I'm happy to go get a laptop from home. I didn't have a chance, but I just want to make sure it's SE Group presenting on mine. I know we're all doing the Best I Can at a lot of places. They'll be here in person. Okay. I guess we have the camera here, so we can use that recorder. Sorry, I'm doing, I'm struggling a little, but I'll just go with the names and everything. All right. I imagine that they can hear you better if you speak for us today. Okay. Do you think that's true Tom? Yeah. All right, I also can speak very loud. All right, so last week, last week, I asked the select board to consider the creation of a committee that would act as a body to prepare us for it and keep us prepared for another natural disaster. In a written proposal, which I can move around after I speak from it to anyone who's interested, I laid out what the goals of this group might be. And those are essentially getting the supplies we're gonna need and then getting volunteers on a more permanent basis to keep us prepared for a natural disaster. So essentially in the event of a natural disaster, these volunteers, like we just experienced, would be deployed and hopefully better trained. Essentially what they would be doing on a day-to-day basis or on a month-to-month or however often they meet is to develop a bedrock and a system using what we'd seen this time and what we've seen during Irene to get Waterbury cleaned up as fast as possible and make sure that the residents of Waterbury are taken care of. If there's any more detail that anyone at this table would like me to go into about the proposal, I can say that I reached out to several states and municipalities regarding a essentially volunteer response corps and some had them. California has one statewide and they have a portal that you can sign up as a volunteer and then you are dispatched where you are needed most. Spokane County, Washington had their own, Oregon has their own, Colorado has their own and those are statewide but I proposed a question to someone I spoke with on the phone from California if we could scale down. And they said that would be absolutely possible and then they said well we predominantly experienced wildfires and I was like well we experienced floods and they said we just experienced a flood and I asked if they wanted to trade notes. So what I gathered was that this has been done before, there is a blueprint for it and it wouldn't be that hard of an undertaking for just the volunteer corps let alone having a committee to oversee them which I think would make it go a lot easier, it would make things move a lot faster and then management of a post disaster relief would be expedited. Do you want to just briefly go over how you've identified a few different teams? Sure, so I can read off the goals of the committee. Goal one, recruit and recommend to the select board a candidate for a natural disaster response coordinator, someone who can and would manage the natural disaster response headquarters or war room like we've been experiencing the past few weeks here in this room and various disaster response teams to draft an update to the emergency response handbook, things that we didn't use this time that we could maybe update and use. Develop a plan to establish and train a permanent volunteer corps that would be quote unquote, activated to prevent a disaster. I do recognize that this corps, the longer we go without a disaster will probably shed members and it would mean the job of the committee to get more. And then training for volunteers, we had a leadership system among the volunteers where they were trained to clean up basements and demo drywall and everything we did this time around but we had someone who knew what they were doing and could tell other people what to do and show them what to do so everyone's all trained. And then keeping a detailed catalog of volunteers, keeping an updated inventory of supplies. And then I wrote working with other committees on flood mitigation but we have this packet that was just done for us about flood mitigation. I feel like that job has been made very easy. The, yes, the acting as teams essentially, I essentially built a bedrock that could be used. I'm not saying that a committee could use it but you'd have an initial response team, a team that goes out and assesses the damage after the flood waters have receded. The team two would be the cleaning team. I mean, I assume that most teams can act in tandem and then team three would be a human welfare team which is getting food, water, disaster relief, FEMA information to victims of a natural disaster and then outside of all those teams there's procurement which I assume the procurement of supplies like what's behind you guys. Which I assume can be dealt with by the committee themselves and not have to be a separate team in and of itself. Like I think Cain did an excellent job. The only thing that I have a little bit of a question I think we spoke about it is how the emergency management director falls with. Because to me a lot of this should be the lead of the emergency management director. And I think having some of these teams are good but ultimately I think we have to have someone kind of who's in charge and if the emergency management director has been appointed how do you, if you have like kind of a team here. I know from knowing Gary, he's probably gonna just defer to this team but I think whoever is going to be, whoever's gonna be, say this team lead should probably be considered to be maybe the emergency management director. Sure, I would look at it almost as the way our volunteers, Liz Schlegel, Alyssa, Danny led the charge on it this time and worked with the emergency management director. Essentially in my mind it would work the same way. Nobody's stepping on each other's toes. Of course our current emergency management director was out managing emergencies. Well there were people heading up our headquarters here. So I think the two work in tandem. I don't think, I think one hand washes the other. I don't think that the emergency management director should necessarily be on this committee for the sake of the fact that I just completely lost my train of thought. I don't think that the emergency management director should be on a volunteer committee. I think they are already in an appointed position with the town and the handbook pretty clearly lays out what they're supposed to be doing. What we don't have is what a post disaster team looks like and that's essentially what I'm trying to build. So as the emergency managers out managing emergencies we need to prepare for how the emergency is over. Because some of this each municipality has to have a local emergency management plan. We do have an approved local emergency management plan and somehow maybe we need to look to revise that in some way to have this kind of a setup working within that local emergency management plan for large natural, and this is I think designed for large natural disasters such as Irene and what we've just had Irene kind of 2.0. So. Right. So I think of it differently Mike. Okay. The emergency management plan is really based on the format the state likes to see. It's their guidance. I think we should have a separate flood management plan. Which really goes part in parcel with what Cain is proposing. So Cain has talked about in his proposal a lead. I think if we truly want to be prepared we should have someone always ready to go with an employment agreement like a Tom Drake on day one or perhaps two people. And I think that would be in our flood management plan and then in the same way we adopt an emergency management plan each year we could make sure the flood management plan is current. On day one Bob Butler knew who to call like a salad to get us first in line for dumpsters. He didn't call the 800 number he knew who to call. That should be in our flood management plan. And every year we should refresh that data. So I think of it a little differently. I think just lead the emergency management plan as is whether or not the two should be married in some way, shape or form. They certainly should be and they would be. But I think, but just in keep the emergency management plan in the format that states used to seeing that they approve and are happy with it. And this is a little different from that perspective. The other piece I thought of which maybe would be the work of the committee, but we were all watching the elevation of the news key. The forecast was two feet lower than what it wound up being and there was a time and they actually revised the forecast downward the day before. And so I think three, four, five o'clock in the afternoon we all breathe a sigh of relief because the forecast was revised downward and the curve went like that. So I went home had dinner and then get on my phone and it went like that. And I called Gary and he said, well that was a head fake, wasn't it? So as part of our flood management plan, I think about river height and forecast river height and maybe at certain points in the forecast, not the actual, but the forecast, we just decide to pull the pin on certain things and we say, hey, we're forecast to be at whatever the number is, 425, go ahead and get those dumpsters or go ahead and get the humidifiers and other things. So the emergency plan is more about who's responsible. This would be, I think, more about an action plan too. I would agree. So we're all kind of speaking the same language, just saying it a little bit differently, I think. Yeah, I think in regards to what Tom is saying is that establishing a committee like this would essentially find that out, figure out where we need to be at certain times as the floodwaters rise, and then as the floodwaters begin to recede, they go into the next phase of the action plan. And all the while, they have been working at this to whenever the next disaster happens. They know exactly what they need to be doing. They know exactly who they're supposed to be managing. They know exactly where the dumpsters are gonna be going. They know exactly where we're getting the humidifiers from. And we'll just quicken the pace of our response. Don't disagree at all. Yeah, but I support it as well. I feel like this essentially acknowledges what happened during this past month. And it's really an important way for us to move forward in improving our resilience in response to what previous to last month, many of us thought was a once in a lifetime occurrence. And now many of us are now thinking maybe this is a once every 10 years and maybe we need to think about what's happening tonight. So, you know, I think it's a smart way for us to move forward and improve our capacity. So, and Tom answered one question I also have, which was acknowledging that to have a lead person is a huge responsibility on this. Unfortunately, Liz was in a position to step in and take on that charge all with Danny and Alyssa, who once again provided a tremendous amount of effort over the course of two and a half, three weeks. And some of that's continuing even today. But I don't think it's smart of us to anticipate that there's gonna be a volunteer willing to contribute to 24 hours a day for three weeks on end. And I would say that person as part of the regular planning work, the one way to ensure that work is to pay them. So I think it's gonna be a paid position. They're probably gonna be paid to go to these meetings to do some of this work. Just the best way to get performance. Alyssa. Well, just I support all of it in terms of leveraging volunteers and being able to do that more effectively. And what Tom is saying, and I would say big strike completely support it. And to me, it is just working out some of these things about like we evolved how we evolved. And I think we talked about at the next meeting like more of a full after action review. I mean, I feel like some of we talked about even regional folks in different areas of town and that can be really valuable in terms of knowing like what's happening in my neighborhood. And so some of the volunteers, including some in the room were really useful at saying like this is what's happening in this particular reason. I think I have some like minor questions around like I don't think we need for training schedules. I think we do want to think about how this role's coordinator overlaps with what Tom is describing and just general resilience planning. So I think big picture of huge thumbs up and it's really just about figuring out like what are those specific pieces and acknowledging like we have volunteer fire department that's incredibly effective and like what are they doing and it's working really well. And again, just making sure we're supporting and not duplicating. And I think there is a gap. I think we've seen that that's what happened. So there's space for this, but just doing that really intentionally so that everyone involved does know their role. Kate, do you need further action from the board at this point? I was just going to ask to, as it's laid out in the proposal, everything says could, right? Nothing is laid out. I fully expected to debate this proposal and come up with some middle ground. So to your questions, Alyssa, it does say could. So essentially the way I saw the committee in my mind is we at least get a committee together. And then once there's the first committee meeting, you lay out the groundwork and what the committee is going to be doing. And it's discussed in that capacity. So I guess the further action from the board that I would ask for would be to, okay, at least to the creation. We don't have to recruit right this second, but I would like the committee on the books so that we can move forward. Like, the only thing I think, the whole plan is really good. The one thing I think is that next step is where this is really to get us through the disaster versus, I assume this group, and maybe you can only ask, will this group work on resiliency post, once recovery is sort of happening? I would hope so. That's the one thing I was kind of missing in the outline. Yeah, I suppose I could have scratched a little more on that. Essentially the way I pictured this committee was that we would forever have some sort of management team who will like, when the committee members eventually leave the new ones come on the committee, they would be given these guidelines so that you would have a group of folks in town who would always know what to do. Right. And I think from what's point, I mean, I know in the past, Waterbury had a long-term recovery committee that met and did all sorts of things ranging from looking at our EMA zoning regulations to some of the mitigation stuff we're gonna talk about later in volunteer. So I think if we ultimately want it to be one committee, I'm happy to make a motion to endorse creating a natural disaster response committee to more effectively leverage volunteers and come back with a proposal. I think we need to be practical and intentional about thinking about or creating three separate flood response committees. Is it one committee and this volunteer person, the head of that is the one on the long-term committee who that, you know, I'm just recognizing your volunteer, you know, off the street who's here too because they really wanna help support their neighbors as a volunteer may or may not have an interest in some of the longer-term infrastructure projects which is totally okay and awesome and just wanna make sure we make all their needs. Oh, what's your name, Mr. Driving? How about we can move forward and recognize that we will create this committee I think the scope of work of the committee and the size of it may need to be worked out over the next few weeks. Is that unreasonable? That's all right. Totally. Okay. So if we want us to make such a motion, we can move forward. I make a motion to approve the creation of the Waterbury Select for Natural Disaster Response Committee. Okay, moving seconded, any further discussion? No, no, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right, got ourselves a committee. Mission of that committee and its constitution will be developed over the next few weeks. Thank you. All right. Next is mitigation and I asked Tom to print out a copy of a report that was developed by the... Recording stuff. This is a study that was developed by Malone in that room, a engineering firm based right here in Waterbury. And they worked with the Little River Engineering firm to do a more in-depth hydrological study of the flood during my reign and then impact points that caused the water to back up. And they came forward with a set of recommendations one of which was implemented, which was to do flood remediation at the stink complex which was accomplished. And according to some, it did impact the flow of water this last time. There were a couple of other recommendations that were not implemented. One was to bring the metal across the river at the Harvey Farm down an average of, I think seven feet across 13 acres. Recording in progress. At a cost of about three and a half million dollars, that plan was presented to the Harbees and to the select board in Duxbury, neither of which endorsed the program. And it was essentially not there. One of the things that I wasn't aware of in reading the report this afternoon was the recommendation to take down about a third of the state cornfield by about five feet and create, restore more flood plain absorption capacity in that corridor as well as the, what used to be called the hayfield now, they're growing corn on it again up above that. And I think the price tag on that was more in the order of five million dollars to do all that earth work. I'm not sure why that wasn't implemented. Cost could be a major component of that. And maybe members of the audience will know as well. Maybe don't. But I thought that we should at least take advantage of the hydrological studies that have been done and explore those further as we look at this as being something that may recur more often than we did previously thought. So. I think it was us, the state, they were in the process of what was about a $130 million project to remove buildings at the former state complex. There were 49 buildings there. They took down 30 of them or something like that. And then they built the new facility. And as you said, Roger, they did do some mitigation and some regrading of the state complex proper. But whatever the price tag was, I think they just figured, well, that was too much. We concentrated on the Harvey farm aspect over here. And I don't remember what the report said with regard to the number of inches that all of this combined would reduce the flood by. But I think that's in there. A flood. A flood. And as you all know, who suffered the flood, a flood is a big deal. Being a foot is a big deal. Is a big deal. And I think now that in 12 years after Irene, here we go again, I think that that report has to be, we gotta remind the state about that. And if they're serious about giving floodplains back to the rivers, here's two prime examples of where it can be done. And yeah, it costs money. But how many millions of dollars of damage has been done not so much in Waterbury this time, but in other places? And if you can do something that's gonna reduce future flooding by potentially a foot or more, that's a huge number. And again, the reason that you and others focused on the Harvey farm is that it really does create a choke point. So that even if you do increase the amount of water that can flow down past the cornfields, it's still gonna get blocked there and then get back down. The big choke point was the peninsula, basically, of the Harvey farm pushing up against the basically immovable railroad that's not going anywhere. And you can't do anything about that. So I think you're right that without the Harvey farm being considered or somehow mitigated there, you could lower up here and it wasn't gonna give you, it was a combination of things. And this is the choke down here, right there. And I'll just say that Tom Leitz and Tom Drake and I met with Eric Monca of Senator Sanders' office on Friday. This was one of the things that we brought up among a few others, flood-related damage and the mitigation. And he's admitted that that's not his area of expertise, but that he was gonna see what might be able to be done and that the senator is going to try to get additional disaster assistance, specifically for this recent statewide disaster. And hopefully part of that could be, could address mitigation issues, as well as flood relief and recovery. Yes, Mike? Mike, we wanna, I think the whole Harvey farm project would be a good one. But I also think another possible source when I'm pretty intimate with his Ducks Unlimited, they're very much in wetlands restoration. And if we could use that floodplain, they have the largest conservation organization in the country. I don't know if it's big enough that they're gonna look at it, but as much as for production of waterfowl, they look at the wetlands have a benefit for flood protection. And then because how key this is, maybe this is not just in conjunction with just waterberry, it may be waterberry, berry, Montpelier, et cetera, that they could look at a bigger project to fund. At least we're looking at. The whole watershed, for example? Yeah. Yeah, come on up. The study that you were referencing, does it just look at the impacts to waterberry or does it consider what happens when you take out a downstream constriction to Richmond Essex further downstream? Because that constriction flattens your hydrograph. If you don't take out that constriction, you're just gonna send that peak down stream and impact down river communities, sorry. Well, the way that you're addressing it is to increase the floodplain absorption. So it's not... Which is good if you add storage, but you don't take out constrictions. You use those constrictions to... Right. To the whole water back and you provide storage upstream for it. Right. I mean, honestly, it seemed to me like a bit of both and to answer your question directly, no, they don't address impacts downstream. I think it was, you know, I forgot what the cost of the study was, but it was, you know, it's not the final deal. I mean, it's a preliminary kind of look and if there was interest amongst the parties to do more, I'm sure there would be more studies done. I don't think anybody was just gonna say, well, this is all there is to say. But I think that the downstream well, I won't get into it. There's a dam not too far downstream from Harvey's at Bolton. And they looked at the Bolton Dam as well to see if that had been a cause of backing up water. And they really felt that it wasn't. And that there was some means to operate that dam a little bit differently. There's no gates at the Bolton Dam. It's just a spillover dam, but they have, there's a kind of a pontoon gate that they, or a pontoon dam that extends the dam a little bit. But there's a lot of information that probably still needs to be gathered. But I think that for Waterbury's sake and Duxbury's sake, these things require additional working at. Yeah, tell me a little bit. The first, the biggest thing is the, we can talk about the local option tax, but that's significant enough revenue that it gives us the option of pursuing some of these projects, even if the state and federal government don't participate and allows us to pursue it on our timeframe. Which sometimes is the biggest challenge here, getting all these partners in line. Takes a number of years. All the engineering needs to be either refreshed or redone or done for the first time. And sometimes if you're seeking state and federal partners in a project like this, the first step is investing in the studies on your own, which can easily be six years. So I think about the local option tax. We've talked about it in a lot of contexts, one being affordable housing, but I also think of this challenge and how 600,000 dollars a year goes a long way. All right. I don't know if we need any further portion from the board on this, but I think as we've discussed it, it will be something that we'll continue to take a look at and look at some what options are in front of us, what use we can make of existing studies and then maybe as it's been alluded to, look at a broader watershed approach to this. And Mike, if you want, I'll find any friends and ducks unlimited that willing to join the effort. To me, this is a big project. It's not just Waterbury, and I could handhold people and ducks unlimited national and I would see if there's some sort of impetus because I know, I don't know how much in terms of waterfowl, it's gonna, yes, any time you restore wetlands, you're gonna probably help waterfowl, but to me, the benefits of creating more wetlands are gonna do it on a real benefit to sub-protection. And I will do some investigation. I go down there every morning with my dog and there's always a flock of gansers and mallards that we come in with, so. Yeah. Yeah. I'm not getting anything from the ducks. We'll talk to them. Okay, thank you. Unless there's a further discussion on flood recovery, I think we can move on to the next agenda and we'll put anything further in the discussion. I think long-term we should just think about who's owning this work, just recognizing we as a board, our municipal managers and staff have a lot of competing priorities. And again, I don't want to, you know, have Cain and I come each week with a new committee proposal. I just want to think about how we make sure we're keeping ourselves honest and checking in about getting this done and moving it forward. I think short-term, it's top of mind for all of us, but just on those multi-year projects, making sure we're keeping it on the radar. Right. Totally agree on that. I think maybe we should consider, rather than having six different committees working independently on a larger sub-response committee with designated chiefs in certain areas could be way to go. Okay, we can further define that. All right, let's move on to the SE presentation. Challenges. Yeah, actually, it was kind of a disaster. That's a power point, but we're not going to lose the board or projector. Do you want to try connecting to my laptop? I did read. It's a projector itself, right? You're right. So, okay, that's good. Let's try. Nope, wrong end. Take it out of the gray. Nope, that was the owl. That was the owl. That was the owl. Take that back. Should we go old school and go to a slide projector? It's very small, so this is to the projector, right? Is my input? Oh, no, I'm just, I said 30 minutes early. It's still there. The first brand-new laptop died completely. I think it's the projector itself. I can shut it down a minute ago. Yeah, because the light was on. I'm going to try that. I think we need a new idea. He's been dealing with, he's been dealing with dumpsters, but we've had, we've been trying to fix these issues for months, and I'm ready to roll it up. I want a flat screen TV that we just plug in correctly. What did, when I was in middle school, and the owl has given us something, I'm almost prepared to say that we just said we don't have a zoom option, because it seems to be such a cat. We'll see it, one of those projectors from Heisman. Oh, but the other chance, but that's a sad matter. Smartboards, that's what I was thinking of. Smartboards. I guess it's a question to Patrick. No, no, wait, hold on a minute. Let's see what my department wants in a meeting. See, you see the views on it, but then it's... Oh, there's something coming. But it's done that, it did that during the new year, when I tried to reset it, and then it goes off. What is happening? Oops, it's not the right one. All right, is Patrick okay with that slide? I don't know if we're getting anything in here. Well, it started a bit of a while. See, it's functioning, and yet somehow HDMI is long. So it's not getting the... Is the table not plugged into the ground? Outlet? Have you tried turning off the projector and turning it on? About three times. Yeah, I can do that, okay. But thank you. When did that reach that? Yeah, that's how I can offer it. All right, I think we call it as long as Patrick can. Oh, your presentation. We have copies of it. You've got a copy right here. Well, that's the presentation. Oh, the presentation, yeah. Sure. Yeah, I guess it's... Let me do that. I'm trying to figure out a little bit more. Yeah, but it's not, this is an HDMI. This is non-existent on Zoom. Oh really? On Zoom? No. Every now and then, I don't know where it was positioned to remember speaking. You'd get a little, but it's not... Interjection or good in it, but very quick and then gone. We had been using this howl. It's your... It's USB to USB. Now, I don't think any of it's gonna apply next week, but... Any different view that you can have in the area. But it hasn't been working very well. And then, so we were just on the laptop trying to talk directly in there. Those microphones are not really built for rooms this size, right? I'll do this for a mic. So the hole is, well, where do you have your shelf? That's what it turns out. Worked pretty good for a long time. So it's kind of... Subjector? There isn't a valid for anyone recording the meeting. Okay, that's it. So that's the challenge. Where's the... I need to go back and get the presentation. Oh, no, it opens for me. It opens for you. Yeah, just double click that. This one? Yep. There it is. There we go. So then... There's your screen at that. Okay, so give me a second. At the bottom of the screen. Your screen, that means that. Where do you... Where should I stay? That's good. Okay. I'll give you a big applause for this in order. Thank you. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. I think a bump up in the list pays, dude. Okay. All right, we're going to start. I don't want to hard cut me. Yeah, pass him around, please. He's a man. Hard cut? Lisa? Yeah, we're going to get one checked. Okay. Yeah, I like that. Okay. All right. Thank you. Great. So my name is Patrick Oystrad. I'm a senior thanks to Bart Decker. I'm a senior thanks to Bart Decker. I'm a planning and design firm based in Burlington. And a lot of work is focused around alcohol recreation, planning and design. So I'll give an overview of the project that we've been working on now for a while and talk about some of the plans and recommendations. So yeah, Tom, you can go ahead and go dance the slide. So this gives an overview of the project process starting with the first phase. Oh, the kickoff and existing conditions assessment. You were actually a lead on the team of consultants that also included heart and associates looking at the archeological assessment and arrowwood looking at the weapons. We also had local arborists from Tree Works, Bill DeVos looking at potential impacts to the woods from the disc golf activities. So this kind of gives you an overview also of some of our community engagement meetings along the way. One of the things we did first off to the end of the project was having a stakeholder committee sidewalk to get a good feel for all the existing conditions at both Hope, Davy and the Ice Center. And just hear insights from folks. That went into the next stage of visioning. And so we did a community visioning workshop that was held here that also included an online survey component. And from there we moved into kind of out of that first as a step before we got into design developing kind of a preliminary program that we looked to see how that fit on the site. So phase three, look at preliminary concepts. So we developed some preliminary concepts, shared those with the steering committee and arrived at a preferred concept. And also along the way developed cost estimates, looked at permitting, potential constraints, some of the implementation considerations and that all that packaged up into a master plan document. So that's, I think we have some copies of that here and that's what's been submitted to the slide board for acceptance. Go to the next slide. So just to give you a little bit of information about the community engagement, we have done quite a lot of this along the way to make sure we're hearing the needs and concerns of the local community. So you can see there, number one, that's that sidewalk I mentioned. Number two, the vision workshop. That's a photo of the event and that's just one little piece of how we've documented some of the input from the online survey. That's one of the, that's the preliminary concept review meeting and then onto the preferred concept presentation and here we are today, number six. And we'll move on to the next slide. So I'll start with the outside area, I said to the next. So this is an existing conditions map looking at some of the constraints and opportunities we had to work with. You'll note that the river corridor covers the majority of the site, maybe all the site actually. And we have a FEMA flood zone as well. There's also Primag soils and so we were quite aware of the threat of flooding to this site and tragically this major historic flood has since happened before we even completed this report. And I understand talking to Tom that the floodwaters completely covered the fields and got pretty close to the ice center. So we were definitely taking that into consideration from a practical standpoint of making an investment and also from a permanent standpoint as well. Let me go on to the next slide. So out of the working with the town, with the committee and all that public engagement we developed a purpose and need statement. This is kind of a simplified version of that. So we're really trying to look at accommodating, accommodating additional uses and activities including increased diversity of recreational needs. And we want to serve the needs of local residents and visitors of all ages and fiscal abilities I should mention while meeting the regular requirements given the proximity to the Manuski River. And so with those outdoor recreation activities we want to provide a nice balance of passive recreation opportunities including gathering resting places plus access to the river in addition to some of the more active uses. You know there hasn't been a skate park committee that's been looking at the possibility of a skate park at this site. And so that was something that to the beginning we knew we'd be looking at. Just also from a kind of best practices standpoint looking at the site circulation and safety. It's a very straight road. Cars sometimes traveling fast on that road. And then always being sensitive to the kind of ecological and cultural resource considerations. And then getting to some more specifics you could consider this essentially a design program of this list of goals. There's a skate park, public restroom facilities something really lacking there now. Maybe a trail for more passive recreation, improved river access, protected or reconstructed huff track it's a dirt track for bikes. Safety along the road, excuse me adding another soccer field meet that increasing demand, improving parking capacity, creating gathering spaces and meeting ADA or accessibility requirements and incorporating regional arts. Some additional goals that were considered in bringing bike skills elements, improving the mountain bike kiosk, facilitating space for events and creating playground. Next slide. So this is the preferred concept that came out of this process and I'll show you some of the brilliant adoptions that we explored along the way. So just to orient you, the white box from the center to the right is the existing ice center. And I think the most significant improvements that we looked at, you know, in terms of where they made the most sense in terms of kind of adjacencies to other uses in terms of circulation is the skate park. So that's right here. Originally it had been considered kind of more this area to the east of the existing dog park but the main driver for locating that was actually the flood risk and Steve who we worked with throughout this process and was really helpful in kind of orchestrating some of the process and talking to regulators. You spoke to the regional flood plain manager, Ned Swanberg, and he provided some really helpful guidance in terms of citing proposed infrastructure downstream of existing development. So that really meant pushing things this way kind of behind almost like the shadow of the parking lot in the building. So that also allowed us to kind of create a node of activity, building off of the existing pump track which we envisioned potentially getting a little bit of a refresh in terms of being a little bit more focused on a progressive jump lines for bikes and that the skate park could potentially incorporate an asphalt pump track loop around the perimeter of it. I think the way that develops remains to be seen. The dirt pump track could remain just that and the skate park could be just a straight skate park that doesn't incorporate that element but we thought it was something interesting to explore and could kind of provide some unique opportunities for kids on scooters, kids on skateboards, kids on bikes to use that skate park facility. And then we created this kind of central gathering space with the play area as kind of that node between those two uses and it also directly adjacent to the athletic fields. So we would envision that having the public restrooms that were part of that program, having a shade structure and really just providing a nice, very family-friendly gathering space that could be a place where family comes with kids and the parents get hanged out in that very centrally located spot, kind of keep an eye on kids. It might be doing some of these different activities. Could support even maybe some really small events and could also be a place to showcase some public art. The other improvements are a new U-12 soccer field, making use of all that open space, some additional parking given some of those current challenges. We also took the existing parking for the Perry Head Trails Trailhead out of its existing location which was really too close to the river. So to kind of correct that, we showed the parking remaining on the other side of the road, which is fine. And then you have that small parking area between the skate park and the pump track. But we've also recommended this shared use path kind of connection to this more centralized parking lot. So that distance of path is really nothing for someone on a mountain biker who's gonna be doing a eight-mile ride, 12-mile ride in this trail network. Let's see, I think those were the main components. Just some beautification, really wanted this to feel more park-like. So some street trees along the entrance, some traffic calming, stormwater treatment for any new impervious and for it to be compliant. The three-acre rule and some screening of some of this kind of back-house storage areas. Next slide. We have a larger of that area, that central area with the skate park, the gallery space, it was a small play area, and then the pump track or jump line. And then the next slide. We gathered a bunch of images, just kind of getting a sense of what we're talking about, the plans. So I'll start with the left, the concrete skate park. The one below that shows the idea of an asphalt pump track that can surround the skate park. Skateboarders would also use that as well. Progressive jump line in the bottom left. So the idea with that is that you would have a few, several lines of jumps of increasing in size to allow kids to progress in their jumping skill. I think adults would also enjoy that. And then in the center, showing a couple options for a shade pavilion, something a little bit more perhaps unconventional on the top and then a more traditional structure below that. That could be a bathroom facility on the backside of it with some picnic tables, maybe a mural on that face to pick up, try to capture some public art opportunities. Now in the play area, we're thinking maybe to just distinguish from some of the other play facilities in Waterbury, that could be more of a natural play type facility using natural wood materials. And in the right soccer field, that loop trail for that kind of passive recreation, opportunity, interpretive signage, that could be about some of the historic resources, old building foundation on site, and it's from Waterbury. Next slide. Yeah, the top left, it shows a little correctly, but so parking, accessible circulation, maybe some planting improvements, and then some of that traffic comment that we talked about, and improving that bike pad condition on the park. Next slide. These were some of the preliminary options, and I'm not going to go into detail here, but just let everyone know we did explore a range of options, some of them were a little bit more ambitious. One of them looked at re-routing the existing road coming in, so that we could have all the park amenities on one side kind of really create more of that cohesive pedestrian park space. We ended up abandoning that. I think it had to do with the flood play considerations, there's also major costs associated with that, so next slide. Yeah, sure. So, can you just elaborate on the issues with the flood because I mean, I'm not officially any more, but there's one or two people who continually ask me why I can't erode the rules. Yeah, let me move it up a little bit. Sure. So, excuse my voice, I'm at the very tail end of pneumonia, so I'm not contagious, so. The day right, Steve Lott's speech, and it's been great working with Patrick. So, Patrick mentioned that we have a lot of coordination with Ned Swanberg, who is the floodplain manager that serves this region, and what's called the River Corridor was the big issue that you're referring to, Bill. So the River Corridor is different than the floodplain. It's pretty much the Valley Wall, if you will, to Valley Wall, so it does take in the vast majority of the ice center site. The state has become more and more dedicated to allowing rivers and streams to meander within this River Corridor in their natural condition. However, when there's existing infrastructure, like the ice center, the road into the ice center, these types of things, the state will accept defending those structures. So that's, Patrick alluded to the facilities ending up essentially downstream of the ice center, kind of within the shadow of the ice center, and also between the existing road and the railroad tracks. So when we reviewed the proposal of moving the existing road with Ned Swanberg in particular, he said, well, then you really lose the infrastructure that you're trying to defend because you've moved it, and then the state is not really going to support adding facilities that then the town is gonna have to defend from any potential meandering in the river. So we're really looking long-term, the short-term, it's hard to believe the river will meander that far, but it's the principle. So does that help explain? So in other words, the skate park and the pump park, those things that are between the road and the railroad track now, because the road is there, the state will allow the town to defend the road and defend those facilities on the other side of the road between that and the railroad track. But if you move the road, and then all those things are on the river side of the road, then you can't do anything to protect them. Correct, they don't support that. And you'll notice that the parking, expanded parking kind of gets topped between the ice center and the road. So maybe you go back to the concept, the full concept, Tom. Yeah, there you go, perfect. So you can see how the parking areas that are proposed are essentially between the ice center and the road. So our thinking is that we could defend that as in that shadow of the ice town. You don't have to worry about the soccer field. No, I mean, it's really the hard, I think, I mean, it's obviously an investment, but it could be lost if necessary. I guess you could say that that's not a very fair thing to say. But the existing Lord Southern Field's example, that's been flooded a number of times just recently and also during Irene. Okay, well, that's time. Thank you very much. Okay, good. Thanks, Steve. Yeah, well. Okay, we've gone to Hope Daly Park. You just go ahead in the next slide. So this is the existing conditions map. So this is, you know, I think it was really useful to see the extent of wetlands. So that was matched for this project. It's hard to see here, you know, we got Hope Thatcher Brook with some wetlands along there. There's a rental pool down here. There's a little drainage here with the wetland. There's this large wetland over here that extends off-site. This is the boundary of the park. And that side is the more developed kind of sports field side of it. This is sort of the back wooded area with the disc golf. So go ahead to the next slide. So the purpose and need for this one, we wanted to look at applying principles of ecological and accessible design to create a more sustainable park plan. So part of that was providing safe access to the park's key recreational amenities where practical, especially in that more developed portion of it, while protecting the natural setting and habitat function. Certainly needs of local residents and neighbors, out of town visitors and people of all ages and abilities seeking benefits of active recreation, who need gathering space and multi-use passive and active recreation in the diverse environment. So it's similar themes to ice center with its own special considerations. So part of that is improving the active recreational experiences offered. I think a lot of that has to do with the disc golf and also how it kind of fits in with some of the conservative side of the park more accessible, looking at kind of the further enjoyment of the natural areas and their educational opportunities there and the ecological aspect of the park. Next slide. I have a question for you. Yeah. So you're underneath your first and third need are directly competing. So was there any conversation or at the committee level, Steve, any conversation about in essence, not trying to balance them, but choose one or the other? I don't think so. I mean, I think we're always, and Steve maybe can chime in here, but I think we're always trying to find that nice balance of the two as well as the ecology, knowing that we're not going to make everyone happy. So I think there might be some folks who don't think some activities long out there, but we're really trying to find that right balance here in different inputs from, hearing everyone's voices in the community. I don't know, Steve, I think to that, but I think balance is really what we're striving for. I'd also just challenge the premise of your first sentence that they are inherently in conflict, just because I think particularly on this site, we have more developed areas where we can improve active, I'm just saying, but just taking at face value, I think you can have more active recreational experiences that are not inherently in contact, in contrast with enjoying the natural areas. I'm not disputing that there are some conflicts in some places, but I don't think having both as key needs is always inherently bad. After me, I just mentioned that one of the key aspects that I hope Davy has said that the disc golf course precedes the current wetland rules of the state. So the disc golf course is approximately 20 years old. So it started in the early 2000s and the current wetland rules came in more around 2010. So there's a certain level of grandfathering, if you will, with the existing facility. Patrick, you'll get into some of this a little later. Any modifications are gonna require some wetland permitting. So the balance in part is the fact that we have an existing facility that we're trying to improve in terms of its compatibility with natural resources versus somehow in a conflict that we are creating. Maybe that helps to explain it. And there was, at one time, a nature path that was there. And so I think that was some of the impetus was to try to restore that. So that is something we looked at, considering the plan in the next slide. Just getting into kind of a more specific program for the park, including A to A access to the fields for building a playground, expanding the playground. I think there's opportunities for infilling with more playground equipment. Expanding parking at the rear of the fire station, as many folks know, use this park. There's kind of overflow area that just ends up being a muddy area that's hard to sustain. Improved restroom facilities. There's an existing skate park here as well that's in poor condition. And so looking at replacing that, about creating that, incorporating visual arts here as well. And then optimizing the basketball court and kind of how it relates to that skate park area. So that's really kind of a more developed portion of the park. And then in the back area with the disc golf course, the idea of creating a passive nature trail. Improving the separation or screening from the disc golf and the adjacent landowners. Establishing ecological protection priorities. Managing the disc golf amenities to improve the user experience and decrease conflicts. Again, being sensitive to the ecology in the neighbors, those considerations. Possibly an updated kiosk, wayfinding signage in protection of natural features. Next slide. Can I interject for a moment? Yeah, good. Was there any talk committee where otherwise with the facilities in and around the pavilion where the pavilion itself is falling a little into disarray and the chalet, the super cool chalet and grill that's right outside the pavilion is being eaten by the earth? So I was curious if you guys were looking into improving essentially because that place is great for barbecues. People, I seem to recall people doing that before that grill began. Yeah, I think we, I didn't observe the grill happening but yeah, I mean, I think we didn't get that specific with it but definitely upgrade the pavilion. It looks like it's a little worse than we are. Yeah. Use some, at the minimum fresh coat of paint or something. Yeah, yeah. I was just wondering if that was coming into the plans at all. Yeah, definitely. I think taking a fresh look at that area and the pavilion and getting that upgraded is definitely in our recommendations. So I'll kind of run through the other stuff in that area. The orange lines are proposed paths to provide accessibility to some of these different fields and amenities. That shows the expanded parking at that fire station parking area. Upgrading the skate park area so we have a safer condition and even if that other skate park happened at the ice center area, I think we still think that this kind of serves that neighborhood function and would be used. So we have not recommended just eliminating that completely. Just knowing everything is of course based on funding. Let's see what else. There was just some aesthetic kind of things. That kind of like the pavilion, like the porta bodies just kind of sitting out in the open. We thought, you know, doing some kind of enclosure. So that's not the first thing you see when you arrive at the park. Kind of making that a little nicer. There's some kind of low cost things that could go a long ways to improve things. Let's see. Yeah, and then as we get into the wooded area of the disc, of course, we have made a number of recommendations for relocation of teas and baskets to try to address some of those ecological concerns as well as concerns of the neighbor. So we're showing an expanded setback from the property line for the teas and baskets. We're also proposing creating this riparian buffer area along the Thatcher Brook. So moving some of that more active use further away from the brook and just allowing for that more passive recreation activity, maybe a little bit lower impact to really try to promote the habitat in that area. So we did suggest the idea of an overlook, the brook. So is that kind of thing should be considered with flood risks and curious to know if anybody was down there, the flooding to kind of understand how far that came up. So there are a number of suggested relocations that all of it needs to be closely looked at from a design perspective to see kind of exactly what makes sense given all the kind of intricacies of existing conditions. But we are maintaining the current 18 hole configuration or number of holes, but again, try to create more of those buffers. So the yellow path is the proposed nature trail to allow for that desired passive recreational use. And so we were thoughtful in terms of how that related to the existing conditions, both in terms of where the disc golf is happening as well as the wetlands. So we are proposing best management practices for all those for that trail. And so boardwalks over wetlands where those crossings occur. Yeah, so really trying to bring, I'd say bring the park up to more current standards with consideration for the wetlands and the ecology. I think that's it. There's also some proposed screening along that border as well. Yeah, next slide. So we're showing some images that came through some of those recommendations. Improved wayfinding, I think that's built to improve the user experience, but also trying to keep people on a more designated trail so they don't wander off trail into some of those wetland areas. It could be markers on the trees that constantly reinforce if you're on the right path. There are opportunities for interpretive signage as well to kind of really promote an understanding and appreciation of the natural resources out there. Wood chip surfacing, that was a recommendation from the harborists to help mitigate compaction from that active use. It also helps to lineate paths, which is helpful, again, to kind of keep people where you want them. And then that shows a couple examples of wood in particle-toilet enclosures to kind of improve the aesthetics, yeah. Why would you use just wood, not portal, you know, portal, that's what you see there. But, you know, like you see in state parks, you know, wooden, you know, you'll lose and stuff like that instead of, you know, because that looks like something you have to move in, move out where it's a more permanent kind of structure that just means some maintenance, as you've seen there, probably a composting poiling. You could certainly do that, that would be a bigger investment. So I think we were, it wasn't something we heard a lot from the community, so it wasn't like high on the list, it was more. It would be that much better than when I see it on the left, the other thing looks like just, I guess, so a lattice kind of thing. Yeah, that was a little bit of a surprise. There are some that, I think out of South Hero, there's that facility there, where they have a more robust structure, but it is just a portal that's in there. Yeah. And it's, yeah, so I think the design of that could be a little bit more. Because I would just like to say, because if you have a portal like you have a maintenance, more of a maintenance, actually, in some areas. Right, but those portal bodies aren't often the woods, they're right there next to the pavilion. Right. I don't think it's a huge deal to move them in and out, but some of them are kind of falling away. The two, I think, are just at the parking areas, right? Yeah, I think it's pretty easy from an access standpoint. It's pretty easy from an access standpoint. I mean, yeah, I think you could certainly go to a more permanent bathroom facility, but I think cost-wise, I don't know if it's justified at this point. That's what the one's by the baseball field. Yeah. I think at the ice center area, they seem a little bit more, there's more interest in that, having a more permanent facility. Let's hook up to the sewer system. Yeah. You've got a sewer system. Yeah, exactly. Right, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. All right, next slide. That's it. All right. Thank you. So I'm happy to answer any questions, any questions from the board. How about from the committee? Well, the committee passed a motion at our meeting last Thursday to recommend this draft to the study, to the select board. The committee's fully behind this. As you know, there's been plenty of controversy about certain aspects, especially at OTU, but they were solidly behind the 18-hole discolors behind the various improvements to the front part. I think we really see this as a work in progress in terms of some of the implementation that it will take further work with the disc golf group and getting some expertise to really refine changes to the disc golf course. So that's one major piece. Certainly at the area around the ice center, we'd love to see a name for that park. And we'd like the select board to think about a process to have a formal park. I think it deserves an identity other than just associated with the ice center. So I just put my two cents in for that. There were a lot of suggestions in the survey, some very good ones. So that could be a starting point. Certainly the skate park group for the ice center is very active and I want to continue engaging with that group. The arts group in town is very interested in promoting visual arts, other arts in both parks. So I think there's a real interest and desire to incorporate the arts into both parks along with interpretive exhibits and weight-funding and so on. So I think this is really seen as a basic roadmap and we would like to get the endorsement of the select board for the study, whether it's tonight or in a future meeting, if you really need more time to really go through and digest it, that's fine. But we really would like to see it adopted in concept, or endorsed in concept. So that's something that the steering committee also supports. I think you've done a great job of both the SE group and the committee of engaging the public, getting a lot of input, incorporating it into your plan. I think it does serve as a great conceptual guide for moving forward from both those properties. It appears that this could be done in phases. Was there any discussion amongst the committee about what the priorities are? I mean, is the disc golf the biggest priority? So was there any discussion about the priority, what comes first? Sure. So I think at Hope Davey Park, the two priorities that I heard are the improvements to the disc golf course, adjusting the holes, moving out of the aerial on Patrick Rook. And those are aligned in the study. Yeah, oh yeah, definitely. At the ADA access, there were a lot of kudos to Tom for having a sewn path built to the shelter which once existed and has long since turned to grass. That's been re-established. I think some additional ADA access, more overflow parking beyond the area of the fire station. So I think that's a priority there. I think for the ice center, it's more complex because the two projects that really are the highest priority I think are the skate park and an additional youth field for soccer. And those two really need to go, I feel, in concert with each other because of all the floodplain issues because there has to be balance, cut, and fill and they're both within the floodplain. So I really see those two projects and those two groups working together. I think there needs to be some engineering, there needs to be further cost estimating. And I think both groups are very dedicated. Tami C, of course, for the skate park group, are very dedicated to fund raising, significant fund raising. And they're funding opportunities that are outlined in the study where some of the private funding could be used to leverage some possible public funds and really minimize the impact on the town budget in terms of tax rate implication. So I think that's important to keep in mind but I really see those as the main priorities, Phil. What should we think? Yeah, a few words here at the United Center. I'll actually be out there with Capital Soccer next week. Capital Soccer has a long-term lease on the full-size soccer field there. It's covered in silt. So we're gonna meet with them and public works and see how much work it's gonna take to repair it. But I'm also gonna ask the question about the net soccer field and if we're there with it and I don't have any true understanding of what it takes to build a soccer field. But if we're out there with heavy equipment with the hopes that they can use that field in the spring, maybe we can have a conversation about the second field, too. It doesn't strike me as a lot of work to build a soccer field, but I truly don't know. As part of moving on to Hope Davy as part of that, we will submit a grant that we got authorized a few weeks back to work on the ADA pass. We'll have the results of that grant by the time we work on our budget, so we get funded. We can hopefully go before on that pretty quick. On the disc golf, I like the idea of some of the whole realignment here. I also put a proposal to the Recreation Committee and talking with some of the neighbors about maybe establishing some hours for the disc golf course. One of the neighbors, and that Recreation Committee meeting was canceled because of the flood, talked to a neighbor recently who told me an interesting story. He said he lived in Colorado and he lived near some multi-use pass. For years there were essentially hiking paths, but mountain biking grew in popularity and there was a lot of conflicts developed because of that and I said, well, was there a solution? He said, yeah, the solution was alternating days. So I thought, well, that's an interesting thing to talk about and maybe there's a way to reestablish a nature trail and give a quiet period by alternating days between that and disc golf. To those things can be talked about in the meantime, I like the concepts of relining the holes here, which I think effectively addresses some of the lens issues. The other piece that's a little bit beyond this and only one long term I just wanna raise because I'm developing this and I wanna talk to Catarina about it and give it some time, possibly a couple years, but the feeling I'm getting about our parks is that we have demand for more soccer fields, particularly the full-size fields, which we don't have a nearly potential way to accommodate that would be to cannibalize baseball fields. And at least in year one, it appears to me that that's not an irrational thing to think about given the use of the fields that I see. I'm not prepared to make any recommendation. My feeling into the first year is soccer is growing, baseball is not growing as much, we're not growing at all. And what I hear from the soccer organizations is they'd love to have another full-size soccer field, which we've got one at the ice center and one down here, and I think three or four youth fields. Is the full-size soccer field under regulation size? Yeah, yeah, I wasn't a soccer player, full-size, I don't know what exactly it called, but yeah, same language. So I just wanna toss that out there because it's becoming a conversation internally. I was a little confused about the balance between the existing skate park behind the fire station on Maple Street and the basketball court there. And I saw an initial recommendation just to dismantle the current skate park because it was in disrepair and potentially dangerous. Disrepair dangerous. And so I don't know if anybody on committee or Patrick, you could clarify what the recommendation is on that because it does seem like that could also be a fairly reasonably priced short-term outcome. Yeah, I mean, Tammy, I don't know if you wanna comment on that first. I can speak. So it says repair and replace. We heard from a lot of the center, Library Center folk, and that center skate park gets used tremendously. There's no other really skate park around the area, so it's very high use. We know it's in disrepair. We're actually meeting there tomorrow night to go over it and look at it. We just were offered a brand new ramp. So we need to figure out the logistics of dismantling the one that's in disrepair, dismantling the new one, moving and doing all of that, and talking with the town about doing that as well. In the bigger picture, we'd like to see a bit more separation between the skate park and the basketball courts for safety reasons. Not proposing the basketball courts go away at all, but we're looking into doing up a sketch plan, so to speak, to propose to show that there is enough room to have that happen. So that's the plan. So tomorrow night's a big meeting to do that, actually. No way you say we, that's the skate park. Excuse me, the skate park coalition. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Are you meeting at the skate park? We are. What time? 6.30. And if it's rainy, we're hoping to go under the table. Like, this is probably a question for Tom. What is our liability for, you know, because I'm not saying skateboarding is really dangerous. I'll read another. I'm amazed by, you know, if I was, you know, 13 years old again, I'd probably be right there shredding it up, but it can create injuries, and how does the town deal with that if we liable for it? That was, when I was growing up, my skate park was skated at your own risk. You get hurt. No, I know, but we're in a litigious society now. Just to interject, if you look at studies, skate park is kind of low on the list in regard to the bigger injuries of this. I don't compare it to skiing and stuff like that. No, comparing to a lot of other head injuries, like with soccer and other sports that happen, it's actually not as high as you think. So we've talked with the support about that when the coalition first started. I remember that. This idea. The answer is, in theory, there's some liability in risk for any activities in parks. There's no more liability for a skate park. Viewed by insurer, then there is for people playing soccer or baseball. All right, there's all kinds of things here. The key is to keep the facility in good or bad. Yeah, I think that's where we can get in trouble. If you have something that has an unpredictable risk, you know, like something breaking like a lid or something jabbing out, you know, I think that's more of a liability issue than a well-designed. Plus, I can't even say whether the ramps are in disrepair. Yeah, the actual ramp material on the top is in great shape. It's the foundation. All the wood underneath is rotting now. So there's nothing for, like, to band-aid it. We can't put more nails or screws. There's nothing to grab it. That's kind of what sparse might is, you know, if we have something that's in disrepair, you know, it's probably a lot more liable than if we have, you know, stuff that's up to date. Yeah. All right. Well, I'd like to thank Patrick and the committee for all the work that you put into this over the past year and a half. It's really, I think, a tremendous effort. Do I have a motion? I have an omnicomotion to approve the Waterbury Hook Davy and Ice Center area parts master plan. Second. Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right. Thank you. Great. Thanks for your support. Yeah. Thank you. Yep, thank you, Patrick. For your participation. We want to rest and share those statements. I know we just stop, share, so we can see our comments. The statements were a big deal after Irene, where many people had to be evacuated from their houses or evacuated themselves from their houses for a period of months, not so much this time, but perhaps you can just give us an overview of the situation as you see it. As it stands now, we have one abatement request formally. We also informally have a couple of phone calls about it. We've also got a couple of phone calls about buyouts. And just to give a little layer to another layer to it, Dan Sweet, our Lister, so not in fact this year, but future years, has the ability to apply depreciation to properties. And that was done in a pretty substantial way after Irene. I believe it started relatively small. And at one point, it peaked about 30% for the flood impacted areas. And that was based not just on who was flooded but the flood maps. And then that depreciation over the years was removed because the market did not distinguish between properties in the flood zone and properties out of the flood zone. Dan is researching that now going forward and going to take a close look at that. The challenge with that is we have something in the neighborhood of a couple hundred foot impacted properties. So if depreciation is applied to them, that's effectively reducing the grand list. If your property was valued at $200,000 and 10% depreciation is applied, you're valued less. So that's effectively paid for by everyone else. What I don't understand in full yet is how that also impacts the education tax rate given more in a broader district. So I'm trying to answer that. But first, what I said to Dan is there's time for all that because that's the 2024 grand list. But it's really up to him as a professional to do that analysis and try to figure out the appropriate number based on the market. He's also going to talk to other communities that were flood impacted to get their thoughts and see what they're planning. So truth be told, it's part art and part science. But Dan's job is to make it far more science at art in the end. So I'm going to rely on his experience and his professionalism to treat those properties appropriately. But it's going to have some impact on the grand list next year. And would it be too soon to ask him to come in here on the 21st to give us an overview of how he's approaching it? Yeah, I think it will be. But I think it doesn't need to wait three months. I think it can be in September. OK. And how about a response to this? What's the timeline for our response on this request that we've already received? It's a BCA meeting. And I'm just wondering when we need to set a timeline for that BCA meeting. Excuse me. You don't have to recall if there's a legal deadline. I think the answer is as soon as we reasonably can. OK. We are in taxes due this week. Tax at the first round of installments is due. And therein lies the challenge. Well, isn't there something about what we can or can't leave late fees? So in short, if we don't take action by this week, then a theory of late fees would apply unless we have the ability to do that. I'm just saying that for four months. Right. But that's unlikely time to have a meeting. There's also a second installment. True. Yeah. I meant to talk about this with Tom before. This just may be helpful information for you. This is what we did in Irene. When Tom's exactly right, you have to remember that a grand list is lodged on April 1st. Try us to explain. I mean, the assessor lists the value of your property as of April 1st. And that's what your tax bill for this year is based on. And just like if you have a fire, if there's a flood, you might decide that they don't have the use of their property. But this table is what we ended up doing in Irene. And you can see down at the bottom, kind of almost all the way to the end, $92,728 dollars were abated in taxes. And that was the town and the village and the education taxes. But what's important to note here is if you look like a third of the way over, you see a column that says number of days out. That's really what we did in 2011 to determine how we were going to abate taxes. And this time around, nobody's out. So you could make an argument that on April 1st, when the taxes were assessed, when Tom set the grand list based on what was on the ground on April 1st, that was what your property was worth. And that's what we pay for taxes. And very few people this time have really lost the ability to use their property. There's hardly anybody that I know of that had to leave their property. I mean, Roger, if you look on this list, you look like you were out for 111 days. At least that's how we calculated it. There's some that were out 216 days here. So what we did was say, April 1st to March 31st. So if you were out from the 1st of September until April 1st of next year, we counted every one of those days and said you were out. And all we did was took, in your case, 111 days, divided it by 365 days. And you were out 30% of the year. And we abated 30% of your taxes. That's what we did then. And then the next year, you can see way over on the right side, about four columns in, the assessor's percent of damages. So Tom Vickery at the time went through and said, OK, the alchemist, 50% of the property is damaged. And that was taken care of in the following year. On April 1st to next year, he lowered assessments. So the 2012 taxes, people who had serious damage or minimal damage to their property, and there's somebody on here that was 8%. So that might be a way that you can approach this. And in the case that nobody's out of their home, really, to speak of, mostly basements were impacted. And I've never been flooded to, I've had plenty of floods in my own house, but not like this. The cleanup damages, that's not really your property damage. That's just you have an expense to pump the place out, to get the mud out of there. And the sheetrock and things like that on the first floor, those were the things that caused people to be out the last time. So I'm not telling you that you shouldn't abate any taxes now, but I just wanted you to know how we did it in 2011. And I think this time around, Tom's absolutely correct that Dan, Dan Sweet, is going to have to kind of look at, OK, not only is he going to have to look at how much damage was caused to the property and depreciation, but if sale prices start going down in these areas, he's going to have to take that into consideration. So I just wanted you to know that when we abated these $93,000 worth of taxes, it was basically based on how many days out of your property that you were. That you couldn't live in your house anymore. So just for your information, you can do with it what you want. And the channel just now is based on the local criteria. There aren't many people that would qualify. There could be commercial properties that would qualify, per se, under that. Right. And there are real commercial properties on this list. The Alpen is almost the top. You moved back in in December. Yeah, it was very nice. You went stuck going. Very cozy. And Dan Sweet is meeting with the Listers next week about the future of RANDMAS and how to get to that, how to get to those numbers. But it's a very different scenario. Right. We are in a position of having to make a decision, at least one decision, and probably others as well. So I'm just wondering what the consensus might be about getting the board of civil authority to convene. Dan as the Lister, in a lot of respects, is a staff to that board. So we'll need to have him work with him and reach out and try to convene a meeting as soon as we can. Yes, I think that's probably the best. And we don't have to address all the issues that Bill just described, but there are a few immediate ones that people deserve answers. They're requesting you have to hold a hearing. Who's that? Liz Schlegel, I think, is still the chairperson of the DCA. And Karen is also on vacation for three weeks. So you've got two key people not here. To give you a flavor of the conversations, I've had a couple of property owners call me along rental properties and say they have no real intention of renovating them. And they probably seek an abatement. And I said, well, if it's unenhappable because you've done nothing to make it re-enhappable, I'm not sure that's the strongest argument to make to the BCA. Right. And I simply gave them the legal criteria that BCA judges by. Yeah, Alyssa. This is adjacent. And I don't want to go down a rabbit hole. But you mentioned the FEMA buyouts. And I just want to say, I saw the email from the thing. And it did mention that it was based on assessed value. And I know we're way below common level of appraisal. Do we know if there's any recourse for that or? I believe it's appraised value. OK, appraised. Pre-flood. OK, thank you. It would be a different one. And we're digging into what that means. And essentially what I understand it means is that the structure is, in essence, knocked down, the properties returned to green space. Right. I haven't got a clearance, but presumably with municipal ownership after the fact. And that all takes quite a bit of time, obviously. Yeah, no, I just was wondering. I mean, I know we, for a variety of reasons, haven't been able to do the reappraisal. But I was wondering if there was downstream impacts of that, recognizing it's a statewide problem, not just ours. But it sounds like that's not being used. I don't believe so. Thank you. OK, I'm not sure we need to take any further action at this point. We're going to try to work and get this hearing scheduled as soon as possible, given the key individuals out of vacation right now. And still working on how this is going to be approachable. Let's just point of view. So all we're doing for action is compelling the BCA to convene eventually. I have this soon as practicable opportunity. It's a time when Zoom might be wildly useful, I'm just saying. And the reason I gave you this was just because I think it can be used as precedent. This is what this town did when we had a flood before. And critically, for abatements, we didn't worry about whether somebody had $25,000 worth of damage or $100,000 worth of damage. It was how long could they not use their property that was assessed on April 1 as being of a particular value. So we gave them the time out. The damages to the facility got taken care of and was dealt with in the following year for the next April 1 when Tom Vickery at the time went out and said, OK, Mike's property was worth $200,000. He had $150,000 worth of damage. And we just put it all back. But people are going to buy that house for the $200,000 now. So it got reappraised the next year. So it's just, again, not to tell you that don't abate the properties, but I just wanted you to know what we did. And it was the time out that was critical. And the damages that happened and the impact of that on the property values was picked up in the next year's grand list. Thanks for that clarification. I just have a follow up to what Bill just said. I don't think we have very many residences that, as he portrayed, are uninhabitable. But there were businesses that lost a percent of business time as a result of the flood. Would that be something I assume that would be that? That doesn't make any sense. So the sporting goods store down there. Like what about sports, the propane? The propane, those places like that. But again, you have to be careful because the sporting goods store, they're a tenant. They don't own the building. They don't pay the taxes directly. The same thing with the propane. So you've got to factor that in as well. So just. Same thing with renters. There's renters who are out who do not own the building. They are no longer renting in a building. So if the owner of the property suffer any, you know, these. Are they withholding rent or something like that? Because it's a lot of huge. So Chad Rich, who owns the propane building, did he suffer any losses? Obviously there's equipment in there, business equipment that was damaged. But we don't know if that's real estate or not. We don't tax most business properties. Anyway, there's lots of wrinkles. Well, Bill, we appreciate your perspective on this. It is helpful to get what the historical precedent is on this. And it gives us a better perspective on which to make decisions. The rest is further need to discuss. I think we'll move on. Recognition of municipal staff for flood recovery efforts. I explained to you individually. We had a meeting with E-FUD, both chair of E-FUD. And I expressed interest in recognizing and providing some remuneration to municipal staff for a extra time effort to take place. I'm enjoying the flood recovery effort. And we've discussed this. I was looking for a motion from the board to allow Tom to make what he considers a fair adjustment to salaries in terms of all this. To make that meaningful. I move to financially compensate the employees of the town for their work during the flood made at Tom's discretion. Does that work? I'll try as the municipal manager. Yes, I second that. Is that going to be because I'm sure they're paid if they were over time? But I assume this is just bonuses that we're talking about for extra work. Yes. Time, sir. Yes. I just want to say specifically exempting, by his own request, our municipal manager for this motion. OK. Another piece I'm going to add is billable interest is a huge part of the hall and he's celebrated. So getting him some recognition, I think, is really important. Is there any way that we could do it to exempt them from taxes and pay them to them? No. No. Just ask. In fact, I thought I would just give them more. Right. So we'd make up for the taxes. There is no way around that. All right. Debt in tax. I would, while we're in discussion, like to not only after having made the motion but like to extend my thanks to all the town employees who pulled more than just their own weight during our flood. And I think if you see them on the street, you shake their hand because they worked harder than any of us did combined. They worked super hard. Bill Woodruff definitely was pulling more than his own weight. Here. Yeah, Bill has a very, he's very mild-mattered, very understated. And so when he tells me there's a problem, there's a problem, my great example is the water-wine break we had at Howard Ave. He texted me at 9 o'clock at night. And he said, there is a break. We've been looking for it for three hours and we can't find it. We're losing. And I forget the text, but it's like 10,000 gallons a minute. Not a big deal. And so I immediately do 10,000 gallons. Time should know. And I'm like, well, we're losing. A minute and a half gallons a day here. It's a big deal. I'm sure we're, you know, the quarterwell's running low. That's Bill. That's just how he is. So during the flood, Bill said, you know, we might have a problem with the lagoon walls at our wastewater plant. I knew there was a problem. I knew there was a real risk. It's just how he is. But during an instant like this, I really just appreciate the fact that calmness comes through and everyone, I think, benefits from that doesn't overreact in his experience in his work. Can we also, I know, I'm sensitive to employees and rewarding them, as well as giving them some, a little extra in the pocket. Can we give them like an extra day off? Yeah, and I do that from time to time. You know, something, you know, like that. I know that's also taxed and stuff like that. But, you know, it shows your pre- and sometimes people, the time off is worth more than the money. Yeah. And then there's always the pancakes. Yes! Yeah, that's true. Who's going to be the pancakes? All right, you'll be there this year. I can't wait for pancakes. No, I can't wait any closer. That was Tom's welcome library package to take some pancakes. Yeah. All right, motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right, so you are duly delegated to those adjustments. Thank you. All right, next meeting's agenda. Let's get to 21st. Once again, Karen will be with us. I found our one from last year and we wrote that the public works update and Catarina intro should be moved to the 21st. Does that still stand? It should stand presentation of financials by the orders. All right. Oh, yeah. What was the other one you mentioned, Melissa? Public works update. We have. Were we going to try to do much this morning? We had, we so also, so sorry, that was from the things that didn't make tonight's agenda then on the previously drafted Monday 21st one was presentation on chartered to the public. And I think it was a public work audit and then flood response. We could do after action. We could do follow up on committee. We could do standard updates. We could do whatever we see fit for the follow up. Okay. Follow up on that. And let's, can we do after action? Yeah. I think that's a great idea. Review. That's previously noted. I may, I'll probably be on Zoom but I might stop out over here. I might be on drums because of pain. And on the charter, if people have timeline, we assumed that there's a charter vote this year would be November. It's a traditional election day. Yeah. So if there is to be a charter vote in November, the legal process for a warning public hearings, et cetera, is 70 days before. So we're, we've got plenty of time but we're looking back 70 days. So. What's going on? Yeah. Close to the end of October. In the September. Sorry, end of October. No, we're gonna vote November. Yeah. We're gonna vote the first week of November. Go back seven days. You're end of August. You're end of August. Good title, bring that up. I was just gonna say, and I would defer to you and Tom on ordering but I am wondering about said presentation and if we want it to be intentionally first or intentionally at a specific time and again would defer to the judgment of you two of them. Or we just put it at the, like we did with like SE Group tonight. Yeah, I don't mind having a date. I think perhaps wrapping up some of the flood stuff because it's more top of mind. We've come first, but we'll put another recommendations. I don't think eight o'clock is too late. So we're all flowing away. Turn into pumpkins. But yeah, any other recommendations? I'll work with Tom on setting times and getting a draft agenda out by Friday. I'm about to talk about zoning, which does not need to be the 21st, but maybe in September, I think both us checking in on the, planning commission is meeting tonight and just making sure we're on board with what they're doing. As far as I know, the commission is meeting every three or midnight. So that point being taken, I just wanna make sure we're doing our side of the homework and then there's also a piece around compliance that I've heard about that I think we should discuss, but it does not need to be the 21st, just saying out loud. I don't, if it's just identifying what we should be doing in order to prepare for our meeting, I think it would be great to put it on the agenda. All right, let's do it. What's your bullet? I'm, what should it be? Unified, UDP section one. Oh God, bylaw rewrite update and propose timing. Let's give Martha wants to come or wants me to do it. And with your agreement, I will add public safety to the parking lot. So we can pull that forward. We need to. October. We're gonna be looking at the next iteration of our contract. Right. In the future, I don't know exactly how. And that's just, the public safety is going in the parking lot. No, we'll go on the agenda with this. All right. Okay. Let's just go ahead and discuss. I will continue with the motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. Who's second? The whole day was a aye. Aye. And it's closed. And then it's closed. We are adjourned.