 Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the meeting of the Waterbury Select Board for Monday, January 23, 2023. I'm finally starting to be able to say 2023 versus 2022. We welcome you all. The first item on our agenda is to approve the agenda. Mr. Chair, I move to approve the agenda. Thank you. We have a motion to approve and a second. We just add a super quick housing task force update under select four items. We could add that to be as you suggested before the meeting. Do you want to entertain one other consent item or you want to save it for next week? I just got the information because I checked my email. The WinterFest is looking to have a big tree brew tasting event as part of WinterFest at Rusty Parker Park from 1.30 to 3.30 p.m. on, I think it's the fourth. There's some information in here about roping off a section in the middle of the park between the Fat Tire demo. Mark Fryer will obtain the catering permit, which he was not able to get on the portal and do today. I can approve the permit, but I need this liquid to tell him that he can serve alcohol in the park. Don't they need to file for a permit before we can take action? Well, if that's the case, you won't be able to do it until next week. No, because it used to be the case because the Department of Liquid Control was issuing the license, but now Karen can issue the license. So the issue really is the select boards, the town owns the property. Is it okay to do it? It's the question. You're not issuing a liquor license. Okay. We do a C on the select board item so that we can discuss it, but we can send as written. Okay. I'm going to just make a separate motion. Okay. And you got to just point of order. I'm going to recuse myself on that vote. Because I am on the leadership committee of Winterfest. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? There being none. All in favor say aye. Aye. And you can pose. I guess it's not one of the prep stations. Okay. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is the public section of our agenda. Yeah. That was just to approve the agenda. Oh, okay. That was to approve the agenda. Now, can I have a motion to approve the consent agenda items? So that. Thank you. Second. Second. Motion to second. Any further discussion on the consent agenda items? There being none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Motion carries. Now is the time that we have for the public. The public. Anyone who wants to address the select board. Feel free to do so if it's not an item that is formally on the official agenda. If anyone has something to say, if they could come forward on that. Good evening. Thank you. My name is Christopher shank. I think I know most of you. I am the select board's alternate delegate for CB fiber. And so we were trying to get on the agenda, but I just barely missed the deadline, but I just wanted to. I just wanted to, uh, first of all, you know, remind the select board and everybody listening that in 20, 22, um, water very committed $50,000 in ARPA funds to CB fiber. The Vermont community broadband board or BCB B then matched that $50,000, giving the town a total of $100,000 towards the CB fiber project. This $100,000 can be used and will be used as the town of water very wishes for that project. Most likely for things like installation costs for more challenging underserved and underserved homes. CB fiber is very appreciative of this generosity. And now in 2023, the VCB B has renewed this offer to any towns who contributed less than $100,000 of their own ARPA funds. Again, offering to match those funds up to a total of $100,000, including last year's contribution. Therefore, CB fiber is asking the water very select board to, to put on March 7th's ballot that water very contributed another $50,000 to take advantage of the VCB B matching funds. Thank you. I'm just wondering last time there was a time limit on this matching funds. Is that the case again this time? Yes, I believe it's March 31st, but I can get back to you on that. Just, just for the record, we did have a bunch of emails with Linda. Yes. So that's why it's in the parking lot. She she indicated to us that CV fiber would not be CP ARPA funds this year. A little bit ago, I understand things change, but we didn't exclude you on purpose, as all I'm saying. Yeah, we understand. Yeah. And we were not intending because we didn't think that, you know, an offer like that would come again. And it seems like a good opportunity to take some free money or at least double our money. Do you have a question? If the select board gave less than 50, say 25, for example, would you still be able to double the 25 reserves? Yes. Any additional funds up to the total of $100,000 gets matched. Okay. Now, is that total of $100,000, is that inclusive of the $50,000 already given? Yes. Yes. So just a maximum of $50,000. Correct. Thank you. Anything else? Thank you. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. We'd like to break it, too. Okay. Are there any other members of the public who should say something? I believe there are. There being none, we'll move on to the agenda. First item on the agenda is select board items, decision on count, meeting, date, spot. And I have one update. So Danny, I believe I asked the question last meeting about Australian ballot and the question, and I might struggle to phrase it, but it's under the emergency bill, which is yet to pass, but the governor presumably will sign it, which allows Australian ballot. Can there be a vote of the Australian ballot to move to that format permanently? And the answer from the Secretary of State's office is no, that the bill specifically prevents that. If you want to ever move to Australian ballot, you've got to have a town meeting day. And what under that? Thanks for the question. And I think from our perspective, we just need to know how to plan and the clock is ticking. So if everyone supports town meeting day as we've been working towards, and we don't really need to, from Karen and I's perspective, we don't need to have much of a conversation. If there's some debate, then there's debate. Close. I just said point of information, so there is a bill that is not yet passed that would potentially give us flexibility, but it's not yet on the books. Is that passed? Legislature is on the governor's desk. Are you talking about a different bill than what you just talked about? No, I was just asking if anything had changed. It's right. Of course not. I'm just making sure. The legislature has passed it, but it's not officially out yet. And this, what you just clarified is that it gives flexibility for the articles of town meeting to be by Australian ballot, but as we talked about at our last meeting, I've seen the owl. There's no one. But we can't choose to change that. So I would also just say, I felt like we as a board of the last meeting did think that regardless of what we're not answering the question, having an advisory question about the town's interest was of interest to the board. I agree with Melissa. At least that could be a discussion among the community. If, you know, it would be non binding, but it would be something that if folks in the community feel another format other than traditional town meeting day is, you know, you know, that's what the community wants. You know, at least we can hear that. And then if there are some ideas that probably should be some sort of committee and stuff like that coming forth with a proposal for, for a, on the warning of next year's just to move town meeting to another kind of different kind of format. You had a question, right? Yeah. I think we discussed this at some length during our last meeting and it became apparent that trying to schedule town meeting on a different day was not really feasible. So I, I would move that we could move forward with having town meeting on town meeting day at the usual time, which I believe is nine o'clock. And then I think your proposal to have an advisory question during the meeting is a good one. So we have a second to that motion. All second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? So just a question. I know Mike said the advisory question could be to talk about alternatives and then you'd have to do it again next year. I guess I'm asking if you're going to have an article on the warning to potentially move town meeting to Australian Ballot, why do you want an advisory now? Because if it's advisory, then you've got to go through that another year. So I mean, I'm not advocating to change it. I'm just saying that if it's advisory, if you have an open town meeting this year, you can take the opportunity to really ask the question at fast foot the board wants to do. I would, my initial reaction, which obviously is open to feedback is that with the time constraints of how soon we're getting close to town meeting, I don't think we as a board necessarily have the time to prepare and talk about options and what we think and what get input from staff. I also think as Bill had talked about before, we might want to have a broader conversation, get maybe hold a virtual or in person meeting to get feedback from people who maybe can't be there on town meeting day. So for that reason, I would suggest an advisory question and then give us time to prepare. You're as well listening as well. So Chris, prior to or during, to put an advisory question forward, you're talking about at the meeting, at town meeting. Okay. And should that be at the front part of the meeting because typically after all the articles are read, most people are at the door. So if you're going to get any kind of reasonable input, I think to do it before we actually get into the. Before you do the budgets? Before you do the budgets should be that way you've got everybody's attention. And I don't think maybe that's why I was proposing an advisory section because I don't know if it's just a formal town meeting or an Australian ballot. Maybe from the audience we can have something that's comes up that's works other ones. I don't know. I know like as Ryder's comment, you know, days and whatnot could be combination, you know, with the school and, you know, it's at least to me is worth asking the question. Her post doing it on Australian ballot because I got one of the points was that we generally have more people vote for the offices that are allowed to do that if it's advisory. So it's not fine. How can you come up with another solution? If it's on Australian ballot, it has to be like clear, yes or no. Right. So what we could, you're asking. Do you support the select board explore posting town meetings sometime other than 9 a.m. in person next year? But that doesn't include only Australian ballot also, which is part of the. I guess, I think it doesn't matter. Are you going to have an open town meeting this year? You're going to have an Australian ballot? Well, to be clear, after the next just read the day and the time, I took it to mean in person. Yes, in person open town meeting as traditional. And I'm not saying one or the other. I just felt like among the many dimensions of why this conversation was complicated is that asking the 200 people who were in the room at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, if they want to be in the room at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, so it might not be the full. So I'm clear with your motion. No, it's right. This is basically the discussion portion from when you open up. That question. But in terms of format for this year, we can vote the format for this year. So that's direction. That's fine. So going back, Roger's motion is to have is going for a traditional town meeting for the 2023. I believe it was a second. Yeah. For a second. Any further discussion? If not, come. So next week, we'll finalize the warning. So Karen and I can draft potential questions and we'll send them out as soon as we can for people to consider about how it might be phrased if there's going to be an advisory question. And then we can also double check, can that question be on the ballot or does it have to come from? Does it have to be in the warning? We'll figure the logistics of that out and get back to you and give some ideas to get through. And I personally support, oh, sorry. No, I support both. I think having a support discussion is really important. I would like to do that. I was cringing a little thinking. It's my first time on the stage. I wanted it to be nice and we have a budget and it's going to be really organized to immediately launch into the contention of is this the format? Not that it's necessarily contentious but it's a big thing. I'm thinking about that balance between how we both get key budget items finalized and then maybe have a conversation with folks in the room. My initial suggestion would be to do the budget. There are other things that are going to happen after the budget but do the budget first and do the advisory. I know it's an important thing but I think the budget is important too. People will stay for the budget. I don't feel like I'm going to stay for this. Okay. So I just want to try to clarify again to her point about is it feasible to put something on Australian ballot to load on for this question? I'm not sure. It's possible, isn't it? They're going to look into it. If it is, it's not going to be the budget. Right. I guess according to your phrasing we're just voting to explore alternatives to the traditional town meetings. Speaking only for myself the information of what a thousand voters who came out to vote on Town Meeting Day think about that question is an interesting benchmark to me considering this conversation next year. 70% of people who filled out a ballot said I'd like to have it a different time. To me that's really useful information for a future board whoever may be making this decision. That's my only thought about it. I get that we can't pull on Monday, Wednesday at 7 but if there's an overwhelming interest perhaps that would encourage a future board to have a special town meeting before Town Meeting next year to do the thing. That is what's done next door in Ducksburg. Would it make sense to do any kind of advertising before Town Meeting? To advertise that meeting? We're going to have a discussion about possibly changing traditional town meetings. I don't know. I'll just throw my glasses here. There we go. Although just so I'm clear to Danny's point did you suggest it almost sounds like you suggested the question should be should the town create an advisory committee to the select board to explore town meeting alternatives? Is that how Ducksburg did it? I don't know. We can wrap it up next week. I don't know. Can we decide this next week? I thought it needed to be answered. Well, we need to vote on that. I think we're ready to follow the question. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any extensions? Motion to pass. Let's have a traditional town meeting. Okay. Next item on the agenda is managers. The housing task force update from Lawson. The quickest update I've ever given The housing task force at long last is meeting. We're going to meet on Wednesday for our first meeting in this room at six o'clock with the owl. Thank you to Karen who posted the agenda. Anyone is welcome, but I will caution that it's a first meeting. It is scheduled to be very introductory to give a chance for the folks who we appointed to explain the background to do some just level setting of things that are currently happening on the planning commission and other communities, et cetera, and do like a very preliminary brainstorm of stuff the group might be interested in. So happy to share back with you all, but just wanted you all to know what was happening. And I just saw Steve. I think he said he's going to hopefully attend. One on a 10 to 10. I'm sure a lot of meetings talk. I'll probably attend the assumed. Wednesday at six o'clock in this room, the 25th. The agenda is on our website under select board. Oh, yes. Thank you for the time being given that it was a select board. And that felt like the place to park it. With a lot of hyperlinks. If anyone wants to go deep dive. There's a spare time. Thank you. What's up? And we have the winter fest liquor license. So I'm happy to, I guess, I want to just have the opportunity for discussion. You were discussion. So I'll make a motion that we approve. Winner fest serving alcohol and rusty park apart from. What was the time Karen? I think it was 130 to 330. Oh, it's still open. Yeah. So again, I'm reading this almost in real time. I'm going to go ahead and advertise the big tree brew tasting events. 130 to 330 party in the park ends at four. If this needs to be changed, let us know ASAP. So the background is that I guess as I read through these email, this email thread, Lawson's and Stowe's Cider did this last year, but of course last year it went through EFOD for commission. And like Bill said, you can approve the permit once I get it through the department liquor control website, but I can't give them permission to serve alcohol in your park. So I figured if I got you to approve that piece, then it's okay for me to. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. What was the date? I think it's the fourth again. There's two different email threads here. So it's Saturday the fourth. Thank you. Any further discussions? We need a second. Second. Okay. Does staff have any concerns? I'm sorry, did Chris just second? Chris seconded. That was my other question. So any further discussion? There'd be no further discussion for the vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Abstentions? No. Subnoted? Roger. Motion carried. Next on the agenda manager's office, we'll go into the cemetery. Sure. The cemetery can be pretty quick. Because the most important number is the top line number, which is town taxes that go directly to the cemetery. And that's not changing or proposing. We're not proposing to change that this year. The cemetery revenue didn't quite need budget in 2022, but that's essentially on paper. The cemetery's got about a half million dollar investment fund. And so the losses in that fund are posted, but we hope that'll recover in the next couple of years. A couple of things to talk about for the cemetery. Once you know your taxes aren't changing. There's two things going on that might impact at some point. First is they're working on finalizing a job description, and they'll have that done soon. They're working on this last year, just didn't quite get there. But John Woodruff gets a little bit of part-time pay, but we're looking for someone to essentially take over for some of the cemetery commissioners who have volunteered labor forever and are just getting a little tired. And so we're actually working on a job called Cemetery Sextant, which is a pretty unique job title. Cemetery what? Sextant. It's a very old term. But in essence, there's certain duties at the cemetery, obviously, and then there's certain duties, you know, you purchase a grave site and there's a deed filed in the works office and there's certain duties in town hall. And we're reaching a level up to the pace of one to do that and figure that out. And that might impact us at some point. And then the second piece is the cemetery has had a long-standing contract with someone who moved and we trimmed when the cemetery was forever and did it without raising prices for the last 50 years. And that person is retiring. So we budgeted more for contractors to pay for that work and we're looking around for them and Bill Woodruff has made a bunch of calls, people who all say, I'm happy to do the work and they've all given us a very reasonable price and they've all said, I'm happy to do the work, what I can hire the staff to help me do it. And so if we don't find the contractors, it will be public works to maintain the cemeteries. So we're hoping to find the contractors to get it done but we've got some money in the budget to essentially reimburse the highway department as needed. Any ideas about the hours involved? Yeah, I mean, Hope Cemetery is a big cemetery. So I just walk you through it myself. I think you can mow it in, you know, with a good commercial mower in four to six hours. But it's the weed trimming that takes a long, long time. So I think it's... Are they doing it with old hand snips like I used to? No. No, but I think for one person, it's 12 to 16 hours of work and you have to do it once a week, I'm guessing. I think the grass chopper's guy came and I don't know if he had a crew of him and two or him and three, but Tuesday was their day and they came or whatever day it was. But it was one day, it was the same day every week. I think they came at seven o'clock and they were there until four o'clock. Yeah, at seven. And, you know, Everett Coffey used to call me and complain because they would be in there on rainy days and, you know, the weed whacking would get on the stones and the guy said, look, I'm on contract. This is my Tuesday. The grass gets cut, whether it's raining out or hasn't rained for three weeks. And it was a one-day intro. No, no, I think he had a couple of helpers. I'm just trying to have a reason to ask these questions because I'm trying to think that somebody might be able to handle this. I mean, he was doing it for what? $1375 a month for 12 months. Yeah, he wanted to be paid monthly over the course of the year. This time of year, it's a pretty quick job. Right, it is. So we're going to have to muddle through it and figure it out as best we can. But it might be that the highway department just has some additional demands in them this summer. But not much else to talk about there. I just wanted to make sure it was presented. So Tom, do you have a figure that's going to go into public work? So that $40,000 for their contractors? Yeah. Some of that would essentially be shifted. The expense would stay in here, Chris. And if that $40,000 had to be, if it was the highway department doing it, Tom would expense this line and then he'd put a revenue in the highway line. So the expense will stay the same in this budget. And then there are no cemetery questions. Health and social service. We look for questions. Would the expense be less if the highway department, you know, would be doing it? We still have to... Or maybe not the highway department, you know, pull a board. Because, you know, you're not expensing out the equipment like a contractor is. We would allocate the payroll expenses there. Right. But then we'd have a challenge maintaining everything else with our crew. So if we don't hire someone, something else would have to give. It's reasonable. No, I'm not saying it's not. The expense that gets paid to the highway department from these other funds. So if you look at the pool budget, for example, or the parks budget, and you see certain lines, you know, it's the hourly rate. It's the retirement. It's the health insurance. It's the whole nine years. So somebody who's making 20 bucks an hour really, you know, it's $38 an hour that gets charged, basically. All right. So it's really six or one-half done of the other. Mike, I wouldn't change that. I don't believe the production rate is there. Yeah. Because, again, those contractors are not paying their people retirement. They're there to get in and help. Exactly. Health and social services, the community service officer piece, some of those, you were saying last year, some of that was for, in essence, part of the salary for an existing staff person. So the salary has changed, the fringe that health insurance has gone for that reason. A couple of different conversations here, because this is essentially three jobs. There's the health officer piece, there's the parking piece, and there's the animal control, all of which are difficult to have staff in their own right. So by law, the select board chairs the health officer, and then traditionally the manager gets appointed deputy. And so that be us. And I propose we just model through it, as has been done in the past. And reconvene, you know, six months or a year from now, and see how that's going. The challenge with being the health officer is there can be, and the challenge with hiring someone is there can be nothing to do for a while, and then there can be, it doesn't take a lot, but if a person has an issue in their dwelling, and it wouldn't be their private residence, or their apartment, their rental, typically, it can be a really urgent issue. And so it can be, go from zero to 60 real fast. But I propose we stay the course with sort of the manager select board option. On the parking piece, the parking control, to the extent it's done now, is done by public works employees. We have two employees who take turns, and when it's snowing after hours, they come in and check the road to see if we need to plow. And so they'll go in the village, and they'll note then, if we've got a bunch of legal partners. And they'll go a few other places in different parts of the town just because it might be snowing differently high up or down low. So they get paid a stipend to do that of $100 a week. Whether they go out, and whether we get a mild winter, or they have to go out three nights a week. We've tried to attract other employees to do that just to take the pressure off. Because it's the same two people, and by the end of the winter, they're just frazzled. And so I've thought about, I'm not quite ready to move on it, but I've thought about saying, maybe from this line, we should pay an extra 25 or 50 bucks a week to the public works employees to hopefully entice others to do it, and spread the pain a little bit. I'm not sold on that concept yet, and neither is Bill Woodruff, but it seems logical to use this line to pay for it. And we're essentially talking 25 or 50 dollars a week for something like 20 weeks, so $1,000 maximum. But if it entices someone, and we've got, and in talking to Bill Woodruff, it doesn't have to necessarily be a cloud driver that checks the roads. We've got two other people with CDLs who work in water, and even our wastewater operators. So if other people are willing to do it, maybe the little extra stipend would make sense. So I'm not sold on that concept, I just want to present it to you. And then the final piece is on animal control, and I understand that you've advertised that job in the past without success. And again, that essentially falls to me, and it's one of those jobs where it's feast or famine, just like public health officer. We could re-advertise it, and if we get interest, we can come back to you with a potential person and a pay scale. And it's hard to... You've got to work with the individual when it comes to pay, and part of the challenge is you don't know how much work there's going to be, and so I don't love the idea of a stipend, because you might keep paying the person to do nothing. So I like the concept of... a number of times do this, where you pay a base fee per call. So if you've got to respond for a dog issue, you know, you get a base amount of $50, $100, whatever it is, and then beyond that, you get a fair hourly rate. And I think that's a good way to handle it rather than pay $10 per month when there may be no work. So those rates have to be pretty good to get someone, but that's a structure I think makes sense. So I can advertise that if you're comfortable with that, and we can see what happens. We may not get any interest. In fact, we're probably not likely to get a lot of interest. But I feel like talking to other towns and having some experience, animal control officers has to be the right person. They've just got to be dedicated and want to do it. And sometimes you get lucky and you have one for 20 years, and usually you don't, but I think advertising is worth a try. And this would come from the $15,000? Yeah, from the $15,000. I'm just curious. I'm curious the last time this position was advertised for, do you have a call that? That chance? I couldn't. I couldn't for a day. Yeah, I don't know. Didn't we advertise right here? No. We never advertised for the community service officer. Oh, I got it. Yeah, no, I didn't. I specifically mean ACO. I thought we did not advertise for it. No, it doesn't. It's going to be combined. Correct. It was 20, 20, it might have been 20, 20, Danny. Certainly no, no more recently than 2021. And, you know, we, we put this position in the budget, the combined one for 24, $24,000 that was going to start June and July. And because we had so many people leaving and so much challenge, just keeping kind of all of our current employees going. We didn't advertise for this job. Yeah, no more. But we did try for an ACO, it may have been 20, 20. I think 20, 20, because I came on and we didn't, so it's probably probably 20, 20. And the, the only thing, I never did anything personally with the animal control except as the health officer. We got a call from the hospital saying that you got bitten by a dog. I would call you, I'd work with Carol or Karen, figure out whose dog it was, if you could track them down and then tell them, you know, you need to quarantine the dog for 10 days and so on and so forth. If somebody called me as municipal manager and said, you know, there's a dog out there with a decent deer or there's a dog across the street from me barking all the time. My answer was, well, we don't have an animal control officer. I'm sorry. I wasn't going to deal with, with animals. You know, I wasn't going to go pick them up. I wasn't going to go knock on people's doors about barking dogs. So, and fortunately, we haven't had a lot of that. I mean, I think probably a half dozen dog bites a year that we've kind of averaged, I would say. You mentioned, we had a discussion and you mentioned, this is going back to health officer that you thought it would be good to have at least a second deputy health officer that was female for the first certain conditions, you know, cases that you may want to have a woman in addition to a man. You always want two people, right? You always want two people, but there are some that, you know, for various reasons, you might want to have a female versus a male. Have you had any more thoughts on that? No, I'm not aware of anyone who does that specifically. I have talked to some towns who they, they just handle that on a staff basis, depending on the call. Okay. So to the road checking issue, I don't know that increasing that money is going to bring anybody on additional. My first question is, if we do that, the two that are doing it now will obviously get that money. And I'm, you know, I'm glad that they will get that money. And I wonder, I mean, it doesn't hurt to try it, but I guess it's the way I think if anything benefit the two that have been dealing with it forever. I think it's a lot to deal with for $100 a week. Yeah, yeah. You know, I obviously, in my opinion, I think you're going to have to go higher or not in order to get somebody else to bite. So I'm happy to try that and give it to the two that are doing it now. If all else, you know, I was just talking about Dexbury's animal control officer the other day. I didn't realize that the woman that has the kennels on the camel's home, I thought she quit. Then we have a discussion because wasn't she filling in for us for a while? And then she said, I'm done. Yes, because it was wasn't what she expected it was as an animal control officer. But from what I understand, she's doing it. She's back at it now. In Dexbury? Yeah. So was it worth giving her a shout to see if this might be? What do you think that Carla spoke with? Her name is Andy, if I'm not mistaken. Say that again. Andy, I think is her name. She owns Ripco. Yeah, and I'm not sure she's doing it because when we had the integrated Dexbury to Moortown Dog there was no Dexbury experience. You all know who that is, right? There was no Dexbury animal control officer then, and that was two months ago. I think Zetown turned it back over to her. Because I actually said, I forget who I was talking to about when I said I thought she quit. I thought she had enough of that and they said no, she's doing it again. And then they did it for a period of time too. Right, yeah, Zetown was good about it, you know. Went on there for some time. It may have been call volume. I don't know. But I mean, if you're talking about the terms that you're talking about and she is in fact doing it again for Dexbury, she depending on the amount of calls, she's the only whether it's not a lot, she might just say hey, I'll dig it on as an extra. Do you need a formal action to approve the advertising? No. I would advertise and if we have some interest, I'd come back to you with that. Is there any risk of liability increasing our financial liability due to nuisance calls? I mean, is people complaining about very little that would require a visit from the animal control officer? I'm not sure about that. If you have an animal control officer, you tend to have more penalties. Yeah, that's what I'm concerned about. So yeah, there's some risk. I don't think it's tens of thousands or maybe thousands. And further questions or concerns about jobs of the community service officer? If they've done, I guess we're done with the health and responsible service budget. We could move on to the 2023 major capital of trends and fund replan. Just want to do a quick review of this and I think it can't be quick because this does impact the tax rate. I just want to make sure that I present this is not different than what I present to be for, but I just want to be clear. In the fire department, the budget has their SCUBA system for $85,000 budgeted and that would be purchased with fund balance, which is in the fire equipment fund. So it wouldn't impact the tax rate pulling from your reserves for that. For most of these capital items below it, these are just directly in the budget paid for with property taxes. The cemetery vehicle, which is the little vehicle I talked about in the highway side. I forgot it earlier today, but it's pretty minor. That would just be internal borrowing and the managers done that historically where we have these tax stabilization fund, for example. The one-time shroud for $148,000 I would propose to put that on the warning and request voter approval to borrow for that. That would be external borrowing, which is why we need to be warned. That would be $148,000. That's a complete setup. Yeah. That's how we're going to get some money. That's a lot of money for our window truck. And the reality is we won't spend that money until 2024. We've ordered it, but it won't pay for it for 12-18 months. It should be in the budget. We have to have it in the budget in order to order it. The first calendar year will pay for a truck that was plundered at 110 last year. Get it while it's still a deal at 140. Three years ago, you had two for that price. No kidding about that. Then the mini-escavator would be $95,000. We can get that. We think we can have one pretty soon. Then be a cash purchase once it's approved by the voters. in the, I'm not sure if it's for that one ton or it's for something else, but didn't you have like 22,000 for a sale of assets in that? Yeah, that's right, that's our existing one that's dead. So our existing one ton, one of our one tons, which is dead, the motor is dead. We knew it was on the way out. They found, they did an oil change and found shards of metal in the oil filter and we knew it wasn't long for this world. They drove it for a little while at one point, I think it busted a hydraulic line or something and they fixed that. But the engine's dead, the chassis is not terrible, but it's a, I think a 10 or 12 year old vehicle and so we got a quote to get a new engine, but at this point it's the third engine in the vehicle. The second one didn't last all that long. So we just made the decision that we're just gonna sell it, but someone else can put it in the engine and it'll fly. The body's not terrible, but it's still an old body. So at some point it was gonna go out of money on a new engine, it should be the third one. Right, so you're gonna try to sell it to some horse half or turn it in and strap it in. We're gonna sell it because we think that the rest of it's good. We're not gonna tell some horse half, it's a brand new perfect vehicle. They're gonna know the history. They're gonna do car facts. So I just wanted to review that to, you know, the one tunnel beyond the warning and everything else is just budgeted. I just wanna make sure there weren't any concerns about the big picture items here. You prepared to talk to the voters about why this costs 140,000 bucks. Yeah, okay, let's go. Just for information for anyone else reading this, I would just emphasize that Sweet Road Quarry is also a study, like the full study. Yeah. It's not any sort of acquisition, it's a study. I'll read, oh, good idea. I'll stick to that, no more clarification. Yeah, that would be probably 30 of your main app, as you know, it's useful if they think that the quarry's already there. And we already reviewed that, and that's actually not a budget, I just, so that it's there at a glance. If you could buy a quarry for that sort of money. What in that is going on? I mean, you're right. They're just gonna give you a chance for you to read. And then on the ARPA funds, since in the past, you've worn the use of ARPA funds. So we wanna have some clarity for drafting a warning for next week. Alyssa pointed out earlier today I did have a typo in the highway department. I had $90,000 spent, that was 95, so. I made the same typo in the town like ARPA letters, so. So. So. You're all by 5,000 above. But looking for some clarity on the request, the biggest challenge in this list is, I think the senior center is, at least double the amount that is in the spreadsheet. That's the amount that came to you for. I think it's at least 50, I don't know if Chris, you mentioned you might have. No, you're probably pretty close. I, again, without actually seeing it, but. Did you talk to Skip about this? I talked to Skip about his church, and it was 58, I believe. Yeah. Yeah, that's very good. And so, I guess we're just looking through you to let us know what you approve, what to put on the warning. None of the ARPA funds, if not approved, will impact the tax rate, or take the expenditure out of the budget, too. Well, I'd love to start with some of the bigger things that maybe have less or fewer contentious opinions, such as the bridges and the gravel road, at least to start. I think we heard the massive input on infrastructure from the constituents when we put out the survey. We know these things need to be done. So I think included in these would be prudent, a great use of funds and agreed on by as many possible people as anyone could agree on any things. So those two, I think we could, if all our agreement move forward to how many bank. I'll agree with that. Me as well. How are we gonna deal with it? I know we've heard just in the public comment, CB5 are kind of looking for additional funds. Are we, so I, yeah. So that was a couple of straws that broke the candles back. We'll be up to talk about the next one. My fear. Do you find, I'm sorry, I'm sorry to interrupt, but before we move forward, I wanted to bring those two up because I felt like they required less conversation. So before we just, if everyone's in agreement, we can kind of check those off and then move forward in the conversation. Was that work okay? Yeah, I thought we had. Oh, okay. I just had a hand in here from the concrete. Yeah. Anyone else? So I kind of had this gut feeling when the ARPA funds recently came to the town, I had some personal sense of urgency to try to appropriate this into the town budget for town things, for fear of other asks from a column of special interest for lack of a better word. And my fears kind of came to fruition. I'm disappointed in the fact that the way it looks right now, if the sheet holds true, the town would have gotten a third of, or not quite a third of ARPA funds to go towards municipal appropriated things. Just speaking for myself, this sheet is far from finished. This sheet is every request we've ever got. There's one that I want to. That's what it is. 22 cents. Okay, I just want to be clear that this is a list of, a laundry list of everything we've received. And it gives me a kind of disappointing feeling. Not that I am disappointed that it asks for the money, I'm disappointed that, I don't want to say this as a society, we are in this type of financial difficulty that whenever money gets appropriated for one place, it seems like there's a lot of people after it. That's telling in some sense that it seems like we're really overspent as a nation. It's almost to the point where, like I said last week, what would any of these entities have done if that money had been appropriated to us? Or what kind of pickle or semi-pickle would we be in? So that's my two cents. I was hoping to get more out of it for the municipality itself. And we'll see how this finishes out. So that's just my two cents. Unless it seems like you had. Well, I was doing the same, quickly doing math for Chris, so I did some. So I really hear you, Chris. I think my first thing would say, I appreciate a day and a half's approach, because to me, this is the full menu of things we've discussed with candidly, really varying levels of depth. So as we said, so grab a number of things we've been through. To your point, Chris, because I really hear you, I did the math when Down Street came in last week. If you add up the 100,000 to Dalton Street, the ICE Center 100,000, the CB Fiber, and the WASI. So we've already, that's 326,000 that is going to other entities. I would argue WASI is cause I'm municipal, but that's the point, but that's 21%. So that's a fifth. I'm not saying that's nothing, but also to me, recognizing that this funding was to support the community and make folks whole after our buck. I feel like Danny emphasized with the road, if we then have gravel roads, town bridges, and we consider the highway department funding the 95, that's 36% going pretty strongly into direct infrastructure. And again, we're not done yet. So this is not a full breakdown, but I think in my mind, that's how I'm thinking about it. For practicality, I would propose we move the down street up to the list to go in the morning cause it felt like we had consensus on that at the last meeting, if the board is supported. One I wanted to clarify, cause Tom had a note, is on the reappraisal. So do you want to? Yeah, so this, I'm almost ashamed of myself not thinking of this earlier, but someone made a comment at the last meeting, I think it was Chris, and immediately the world started turning. So we have a reappraisal fund with $200,000 in the fund balance saved for future reappraisal. And up until very recently, we've got notice that we're our CLA as well. We've got a reappraise. We've got until the end of the count, and this summer we'll get a letter from PVNR about that. We'll have to respond to the letter. But essentially, we originally had until the end of the calendar year to tell PVNR when we're gonna start that process, but we didn't have to start it quickly. And initially my thinking was to delay that given it's tough and given it's expensive. After the ARPA idea came up, my thinking is I've done a complete 180 on this, but I think it makes a great amount of sense. And that's still right now is being reappraised with their Lister, our Lister and the contractor. I believe we can be reappraised for around $200,000, which is what we have in that fund balance. If ARPA funds instead are committed for the reappraisal, that fund balance can be moved. So that fund balance, and that would be part of the essentially after town meeting, that's something that we could work on with the auditors to do the accounting entries. But that fund balance could be moved to the capital projects fund. And so if you're thinking about town uses of ARPA funds, this is another way to put it into the capital projects fund, but then there's not an urgency to spend it like there is with ARPA. And just to forecast on capital projects, the Stowe Street Bridge is in the state stocking, and we'll pay I think 5% of that, and that's $175,000. So a little bit has been paid, but those big bills aren't coming until 2024, 2025. So this is not formal. This is just my very informal thinking, is that given that, and given the bridge right down here and needs work, and that's a half million plus, my thinking is if we are going to work on that bridge, that would be a good project for 2024 or 2026. We don't wanna do that bridge in the Stowe Street Bridge in the same year, for sure. Yeah, that's gonna tie stuff up in the hurry. But, you know, that bridge is estimated last fall at a half a million dollars by the time we do it, 600,000. It's not gonna get cheaper. Not gonna get cheaper. So if we had some ARPA funds that we could put into the capital project fund and save until we meet them, that might be a good, good option as a down payment. Does ARPA allows to do that? Yeah, so what are you talking about? The ARPA would be used for the reappraisal. Oh, okay, and then it would take the other money to save. Oh, fuck, and the reason why it would be good to use the opera is because you gotta spend that by 2026, we have to appropriate it next year. Appropriate it by next year and spend it by 2026, I believe, right? So that essentially left pocket, right pocket. Yeah. Yeah, about this, but it's a way of but we'll make things work for us. And then counting perspective, it makes sense to do that. Right, and it walks it up to Gil. Oh, Melissa. I really strongly support the proposal to use for reappraisal for that. I would say I think it buys us time in this category of thing. And I would say though personally, I more than capital projects like Chris talked about bolstering the reserve fund for this building or some sort of other strategic funds. So I'm personally not sold yet on just putting the 200,000 direct plans in capital projects, particularly given that we did that pretty significantly with the bridges. But I think doing the reappraisal this year and getting voter approval for that is really prudent and gives us more time flexibility to get that done. And just to be clear, the reappraisal wouldn't be done this year. Wouldn't be done really until 2024 and 2025, but it could be done by 2026, I believe. And you're just gonna appropriate your market for that expense. But I'm saying you can get that approval for that expense now to get it off the books in that way. And with the inflationary rates and they've been, you're still comfortable that 200 would cover reappraisal? Yeah, I mean, Stowe's. And the lack of professionals out there. Stowe's is doing it now and their number is 330,000. And they've got, I have the number right now, but it's something like 40% more tax parcels and not 50% more tax parcels. And they have a lot more complicated parcels too. So I think that's a pretty realistic number. And you're still gonna be getting, unless the state changes their law, you're still gonna be getting about 20 grand a year coming into the reappraisal fund that we can help sort of, you know. What would that be? You're always planning for the next reappraisal, like it or not. Yeah, Mike. Roger. I'm ready to move forward committing to the 200,000 for the reappraisal and then moving the money that's saved into the capital fund. Do we have to decide, we don't need to make decisions tonight on where those funds would be redirected. Correct? I think we can have those conversations. You should not. And further discussions on different why and how. Yeah. So I'm going to ask for our money there. The com wrote us an accounting of how much money is involved and the underlying ideas of being a, you know, March 2020 when it looked like the role was going to end the e-fund passed and under less chapel like these you should pass down essentially $300,000 to different businesses and customers of the water system. That's actually only part of the money because the e-fund management and community government block grant and what's the other one called the U-day. U-day. Money, that was also, you know, a substantial amount of money was transferred to businesses that were, you know, what was March 17th? The only closed every bar and restaurant in the state and that's, you know, a number of water-growing businesses with full refrigerators, you know, no, at that time there was no expectation or hope or process that was generating better money to do this, we were on our own and we gave that money up to U-day Community Development Block Grant money, we're not saying that shouldn't money that ought to be reversed. That was a hard-headed business decision. We were worried about large-scale bankruptcies and but our money was originally to make municipalities whole for the damage they suffered during the pandemic and this is the extent of the damage. The, without the money we have, we're facing a kind of unpleasant future where we have to raise the rates to get back to where they were before the pandemic and we have to raise the rates to make up for the money that we've lost at the care of the pandemic and then of course there's all the money that's gonna have to be raised to first, to fray the expenses of the inflation and that's had occurred in the last couple years, it's gonna be brutal and we're still hoping that we can get some help. The realize that it's played in the process, the, and it's a nice, it's a large piece of change, but we did what we thought was right and we took a lot of money out of various accounts where we could have, gave it to business people to keep them busy. Well, the waving of the base charges that benefited every single customer. Yeah. Homeowners as well as business people. Yeah. And the, and it also affected by the school director who were on there, you know, every, every, the school or government you could stop. Benefited the town too, all the base charges for the, for all the town water accounts. Right. And so the town's for, for help. The town customers were not in the water, in the e-bike. No, I mean the, I mean the town water, you know, the pool account, the rec field, this building, they all had lower charges than they would have otherwise. Just to be clear that they did not leave anything for the state of Mont. Just in your response to, yes, I do believe ARPA was a lot to make individuals and businesses whole and municipalities, but it was also kind of created where you had lost money where you could make long-term investments into your community that you otherwise couldn't because of that, those lost revenues. So that's why I think we've been looking a lot in terms of what the future of Waterbury is and what we will spend to, you know, yes, you want to help, you know, institutions need to be critical to the community, but also you want to be looking forward as to think, you know, you don't want to be, it's like if you have a, you know, a 1975 Chevy, you'd help want to be put, what do you do with it? Yeah. Or truck. Well, we're not looking for the whole thing. And I think that Bill Shepluck was reluctant to get into this conversation for fear of reigniting hard feelings between the E-bike and the slide board. I want to say there's no prospect of hard feelings about this. You know, we did what we had to do, we're proud of it. And if we have to take a beating, we're going to take a beating. But if the $300,000 is a lot of money and it's a lot to get out of, it'd be nice to get it back. Alyssa? Roger. Bob, Skip came forward a couple of few weeks ago with a proposal to put in a new water line from Guptel over towards Route 100, which would help to provide fire protection for that section of town, as well as gain you some new clients for EFUD. I'm wondering why we're not looking at that. Well, we are, that's like a different thing. We have operating budget problems left over from the pandemic. Right. The project here describing it has a new estimate of $4 million, but we are beating the bushes and or, you know, different grant and loan funds. When we started the project, we believed that there would be federal grants also coming for civil works projects, for public works projects like that. And there was a change in the law late in the process which sent the money to the state revolving loan funds. Right. And so now we're having to go through the resolving, revolving loan funds in order to raise that money, other grant programs and stuff like that in order to raise that money. So are you asking why? I mean, I thought if they gave you $300,000 for that line, would you be happy as opposed to? I think Roger's asking, you know. To separate us. We're going to be able to put it towards something that's meaningful. There you go. So putting on my EFUD after a minute. If the town were to grant EFUD money for that project or any project, that's great. EFUD has a cash challenge now. And so it would benefit EFUD more if the town said we are giving you X dollars for that project. We'd like you to get back at some point when the project happens, show us an accounting of how you spent it. But in the short term, if EFUD could have the cash. Right. It would be a big benefit to EFUD. EFUD had to issue essentially a current expense note this year to pay some bills. And so. And is this 300,000 reflective of the whole that EFUD needs right now? So the 2022 isn't audited. Last night, and sometimes there can be big numbers at the end. But last time I checked 2022, the water and soar combined had a net position of a little over a million dollars, which is solid between the two funds. But the SOAR fund was in a deficit of, I think about a half million dollars. So the water fund had a surplus. And neither fund, both funds were in a deficit this year. So I think the last EFUD meeting had previewed rate increases. And they're very substantial. Doesn't mean they all have to happen at once. Doesn't mean we can't issue short term debt in essence and make the rate increases over time. But they're very substantial rate increases that need to happen, I think, in the short term. That being said, I don't think EFUD has raised rates for water or SOAR for about a decade. Well, not quite. It's eight or nine years. Yes, it's earlier than that. They were supposed to raise rates in 2020. And then when the pandemic hit, not only did they not raise rates, but they gave away lots of money. And well, anyway, I'm not really part of the equation anymore. I get things that I never might have. So from an EFUD perspective, if you said there's X dollars for this project, EFUD in its books could ear market for those projects, but it's not a big benefit to EFUD today if you earmark funds for a project that won't happen for a couple of years. That would make it, any money that comes in, obviously, can be, will benefit them. The, from EFUD's perspective, the best thing that you could do is to say the $300,000 that they're asking for was lost revenue to EFUD. They made a choice to lose it. They could have built it, but if they did, it's likely that some of the businesses that are still here now might not be. And there were properties that closed down right after. They managed to be able to sell. They paid off their ear-dag loans and everything else. But that $300,000, if the town gave it to EFUD and said, here's $300,000 for lost revenue for EFUD, and then let the EFUD commissioners decide how much goes into the water, how much goes into the sewer, that could be beneficial. And you're gonna, there's how many thousand water customers? And there's 750, 800 sewer customers, something like that. I think it's about 30%. And so don't underestimate the fact that those customers will get a direct benefit from this because as Tom's saying, there's gonna be a rate increase. This is gonna be a rate increase, whether they give them this money or not. But if they had this money, the rate increases much less dramatic. Let's put it that way, that's it. Well, I guess I would start by saying I appreciate the service that EFUD provides to the community. We have got an in-depth water and sewer presentation here and we have a housing task force meeting on Wednesday. And one of the background items is where water and sewer service are provided in that. So recognize that it's a value to the community. Personally, I find the reimbursement ask a little challenging, in part given that I was one of the 20 people who voted yes to giving $600,000 of ARPA before I sat on this board. And if a voter said no, I know that was a little more complicated than that. I will say, I really read your memo in hearing preliminary engineering expenses for water and sewer line expansions. Can easily exceed $50,000. To me as a town select board member an opportunity to invest ARPA funding to help you all make a project like that a reality and leverage other grant funds. Also akin to the December ask and fire hydrant and fire protection support are things that in the schema we just discussed and infrastructure investments, things that I could more easily reconcile in my head as being future infrastructure investments. And if there is a time sensitivity to having funding now I would be amenable to working through this. I guess just, you know, I was economic development director at the time and I'm also on the record for saying thank you for the quarter base charges because it did make a difference. I think the fact that it seems some of it is not sustainable and there is the short-term thing using ARPA it's a tough ask for me, candidate. Thank you. All right. Yeah, you mentioned it earlier, Bob. You know, I'm going to try to keep my distance from this tit for tat with what used to be the village in the select board. The fact that, you know, my wife haven't been a bookkeeper for 35 years in the town I was fully aware of the water department and the sewer department's standing. I know that the sewer department has been running into red for quite some time. That to some degree upsets me a little bit that that wasn't kept up on top of more, better. And now the consequences of that are coming to surface. And I'm just afraid that this 300 ask is going towards part of that. And again, rather than putting it to something that we're being faced with here for the long-term future we're paying for, I won't call it bad management but debt from the past that has accrued over time. It's gotten to where we are today. Well, I have to respond to that a little bit, Chris. No, if you want to call it bad management but you have to understand when in 2010 and we have the numbers to back it up we can treat 510,000 gallons a day at the wastewater plant. And we were averaging 350 to 375,000 gallons a day in 2010 and 11 and the flood came and for from August of 2011 through December of 2015 there was nobody at the state complex and they're the biggest customer in the system. And we are now treating 200,000 gallons even if that, right? 180. So you can say bad management if you want but when the flood came and we went from 350,000 gallons a day to 180,000 gallons a day we lost a lot of revenue there and the state rebuilt and good for the state they rebuilt, they put in new lines they put in new pump stations and there's nowhere near as much I mean, what we found out if you want to talk about bad management the state was paying for a lot of river water that was going to the sewer department, into the sewer. Can we use that thing back up? It's not really, and then we'll have the opportunity to move forward to raise rates and then the pandemic hits. So I think it's not quite as bad management as you're doing. No, maybe what I meant was it should have been reacted upon sooner than what, 10, 11 years later, we're into 2023, so. Well, like I said, 2020 is what we were gonna raise the rates and the pandemic, though. And we didn't raise rates and we didn't raise costs. I meant they should have been done in 2014, 2015 is when the rates started creeping up to try to keep pace with this. We can find out when it was, but I don't think it was all that bad. Maybe bad management was a little hard. It's not hard to raise it. Yeah, it's nice. So was anything done in 2020? How about, did you move around? Yeah, welcome to the future. Sure. Yeah, how about it? Well, can we do one more conversation? I'm sorry. Here, okay. What's the engine of economic development in this place? It's beer, right? The beer breaks people in, you know, differs between water brain and William's Tannins. We got beer, William's Tannins, you know? And why is it? There's like five breweries in town. How many are there in Montpelier? Zero. There's one place that makes hard liquor, but there's zero and the reason for that. Well, there's a couple of reasons. Our guys know more about beer than anybody else. That's fair to say. Our water tastes good. We have a sewer plant that can accept more sewage and in Montpelier does it. And finally, our cost of water is somewhere between half and two-thirds of the cost of water in Montpelier, and that's an engine for economic development right there. They just, in the midst of this pandemic thing, they added another brewery on Stour Street. All we gotta do is kill, to kill a golden goose there is to run up the water rates to the same as Montpelier. So to a certain extent, and this goes back a long way, is water, water and sewer and the interstate, it's a white, water gray has to sell and keep the rates down and is a good long-range plan for the economic life of the town. I don't wanna waste a whole bunch of you guys' time. Thanks, Bob, we appreciate your perspective. So can I clarify, Tom, on this, she is just at 300 ask, would it be more accurate to reflect the previous ask as well on the sheet or? So the previous ask, I believe, was for the hybrids, correct? So they, the EFUD commissioners, the last week, wanted to specifically remove that. Okay, that's all right, thank you. And the reason was, was the benefit. The need for the cash not being remarked necessary. That's all I needed clarification on, thank you. One, just one last clarification, Bob. If we're not ready to move with a full 300,000, would 100,000, would that impact the rates to a favorable degree? That would never be a favorable thing. The, like I said, it's an ask, you know, and if I got an equal, I wouldn't be mad. If I got $299,000, I'd be okay with that too. Okay, thank you. All right, well, hey, thank you for your time. Thanks, Bob. Any further questions on any of the line items? Are there any other writers? Yeah, I just got the letter from Spring Hill School today and it seemed a little out of line to me, honestly. And so I called them up, there was a snow day, so they didn't answer. But I was just wondering if there are any or how many Waterbury residents there are attending that school and even if there were a couple, I don't know, that's one that seems pretty easy for me to say, not a strong contention for funding. Right, I agree. I agree with that, even though it's a small amount. Here's one. Your in town day cares it. Yeah. You know, we're pretty good. Yeah, and this is on the far side of Wadesfield. I'd be surprised if there are many Waterbury residents there. We also, I think, have talked about maybe staying away from education, general and the complications, so. And there wasn't a strong response from the survey that we did. Can we not, I wanna talk about the senior center. That amount, you know, to preserve our funding can we not consider that? I know we've looked at senior center in our budget, but including kitchen, you know, I still question that that will get done at $25,000. I just don't believe it. And I would say, do we need to decide for this year? Like, so what my alternate, I had the same instinct on certain school, but that and senior center, I feel like I'm not ready to make final, I guess, Spring Hill School, it seems as though the consensus is no, regardless, but for the senior center, I support the conceptual allocation of funding that there isn't a final budget. I would be inclined to wait until next year to include it in a budget, but that was just speaking for myself. Yeah, I'd like to see more information, a detailed budget, and if the ask is $25,000 and they have a potential budget for the project, how did they intend to, you know, be exactly for the gap? So I, yeah, I'd like to entertain in the future, but with more information and preparation on the part of the senior center. And since we discussed Spring Hill School, I'm curious, you know, they reached out, and I don't know that anybody's, I mean, you called, but we haven't necessarily had communication with them. So I think as a board, we should discuss, or be who was discussed, reaching back out to folks who've made requests and letting them know it will be on the warning, it will not be, we need more information next year, et cetera, on how we'd like to see that. So you don't necessarily have to decide that today, but it is something that we should do soon. All right, those people wish to do something. Yeah, right. I said at the last meeting that I felt that supporting this housing initiative was important and that $100,000 out of a $12 million budget was, I think, a pretty reasonable request. And that I would support it. And so I'd like to say that I'll support it again. The $100,000 for Down Street Housing Project at 51 South Main. I think we already said that's going on, but it should be at the top, yeah. But I will say my one, I don't know if we're distinguishing that as opposed to the other three, Tom, as a correct would be its own, as opposed to the other three will be passed by being embedded in budgets we've already seen for bridges, gravel roads, industry appraisal. Or I guess, town bridges and gravel roads are already in the budget, right? Suggests in terms of voter approval. It's embedded in the budget. It's embedded in the budget now if you would prefer to warn it, we can do that. I would say okay with those in the budget. Down Street, I think we talked about we wanted to do that. And then my question is reappraisal, what do you think? Because right now we had also, we were transferring 15,000 in any way, right under your revision for reappraisal and suggesting keeping that as- Keeping that as a baseline. Yeah, so then would that reappraisal transfer for potential future use, be it so? Down Street, that would be, we won't have the reappraisal expenses until 2024 and going forward. So that could be in the budget. And it would just be revenue in, revenue essentially into a reserve. And we can budget that within the budget if you prefer that. That's easy enough to do. Mine is less, mine is, I guess, like if we think it's a good idea, should we do it now? Have a rest in there? Or should we just wait? Because it doesn't matter, we do it next year. And we just know what it is, a piece of paper. The only downside to waiting is you, can't some other entity do it. I'm gonna do that. You're gonna do it next year? I'm telling arguments. I'm a little concerned about the reappraisal as much as I'm generally in favor, is the transparency. I know it's money in, money out, but I truly believe government should be as transparent as possible. I don't know how we would make that manipulation as transparent to the voters and citizenry of. We just did. They're always in the mail. And in the manager's essentially budget message that can be highlighted. Okay, bye. There is a report, summary of other operating funds that is in the town report. And I don't think I have it here, but so the reappraisal fund I think is fund 41. And right now it's showing the money coming in from the state and no money going out for this year. You can add, on that report, you can add another line that says, that shows $200,000 going in from ARPA. It's in the town report book. It's not, and it's a budget that the voters vote on. It's a conglomerate budget. There's an article. I don't have the town report with me, but there's an article. So here's what I'm talking about as far as the, so here's this other operating funds. And the reappraisal fund right now is $96,700 went into it in 2022, which was some money from the state and a significant transfer from the town's general fund this year. And then it shows nothing spent. So for 2023, it would have 21,000 coming in from the state. You could show 200,000 coming in from ARPA, nothing going out, and then the fund balance is now 400 something thousand. And if you, I think you should wait to transfer the out to the capital funds till later. I wouldn't budget for that now. But it would be there, Mike. It's something that can be seen. And there's an article in the warning. There's an article in the warning that takes me, the motion takes quite a bit of time to write, but the motion for the budget talks about the library, the general fund, the library fund, the highway fund. And then it says plus additional monies for special articles and then transfers to designated reserve funds estimated at 152,000. So it's all there. Somebody might read that or when you make the motion, somebody might say, well, how do you come up with that, whatever that number is and Tom can walk him through it if he asks. But it's in there. So I agree if it's there. I don't, you know, we've had a discussion here today and how many people will, there's no one on here listening and how many people do, you know, read, listen to the tape. Right. So. But it will all be in there and will be included in the budget articles. If you want to put it on an article and have a special article. No, I think if the budget line on it says that, I think that, that's all, so. Melissa. I think that's also part of our job as select board to communicate and so part of why, like the percents were useful to me and in thinking about thank you for drafting the select board report, but being clear about how this is part of our package of funding related to infrastructure and future investments. And by doing this transfer now, we have the option to have that for capital in the future. I think part of that is our job to communicate. I agree with being transparent. I think we can do that. Yep. So what does that essentially leave us? I think the way I'm looking at it. Four, five, four, nine, six, four. If we do not have an e-book. If we have that exclusive e-book since we haven't made any. And it would be one, two, three because we've got the five in this calculation on highway. So I'm just gonna. No, I'm gonna throw it out. I'm gonna throw this out there. I'm not completely heartless when I come see you. I'm not very suggestive of that. I would split that number in half. Wishing that we didn't have to, but split that number in half and then that leaves us 178 based on my calculation but there's a number on this in there I think. 178. So if you. 164. 304. So 150, is that what you said? What you said again correctly. Where are you gonna split? We'll split the e-fud ask in half. Okay, that's 150. 150 to e-fud for recouping assets. And then based on this sheet right now we've got a bottom line. So. So if e-fud got 150 based on the allocations you've approved assuming you're, sounds like you're good with the town bridges, you're good with gravel roads, reappraisal on down street and 150,000 to e-fud would leave you at 304,964 dollars plus an electricity. That's pretty good. So I asked for consideration about 150 put in to municipal, I'll call it a rebuilding fund for building repairs and alike. You had it in as what, what was your line item that covered? Yeah, so fund 74, fund 74, we put in $106,888 this year. 20 came from the municipal building operating fund and 86,600 came from the fire department and nothing was spent. So I can go look at what the fund balance is but it's probably somewhere in this range. That's from just building maintenance. Can I see that book for a second? Yeah, so this fund here, 74, we put $20,000 in 2021. This year we put 166. So there's $118,000 in this fund now. So we really need another 150 in there. I was going to say. We can even add out to 150 then. Yeah, I was going to say 50, but I say we take it from the re-appraisal. That was one of my ideas. In this 200,000, I support your proposal, the bolster rate, if we think we need to, only 100. So in my mind, that's part of what could come out of that 200 that we already said were trans, because we said put it in re-appraisal, but we still get to decide where that goes. So bear in mind, we talked about a month or two ago consolidated on the capital project. So I'd encourage you to think in those terms and to just think of the re-appraisal as we've got $100,000 that will go towards the Capital Projects Fund and that's where those bridges buildings, everything. Remember when I also was at that case at that meeting because I personally have Olysses savings and I have nine different boxes where it's the birthday fund and the travel fund. So forgive me, it's how my mind works where they're in separate boxes, but I hear it. Well, my fear of that is, to me, this particular line item stands on its own when it comes to capital fund projects. And it's one of those things that can very easily come in jeopardy if something else comes along. And I think you could, if you wanna have a separate standalone building fund separate from the capital fund, I think you could probably do that. If you wanted to, like you got 118,000 in there now plus interest. So if you wanted that 150, you could get some money in there somehow and that could stay, I think that could stay on its own as a. And within the Capital Projects Fund, I envision it as we'd still, I'm not there yet this year, but present you in future years. What's in the fund and in essence, a three to five year funding and spending plan. So we could, so the thought is, if you've got, just to put a number to it, if you have $300,000 in your Capital Projects Fund, for all the projects combined, you may even see a five year plan where X dollars goes into it and then it's a certain point, a big slug of cash might come out for buying a fire truck, something like that. So what we were trying to get away from was that right now you've got Capital Projects Fund and some are deeply in the black and some are deeply in the red. Because you sort of manage it on a net basis anyway. So to clarify, 150,000 for EFUD was proposed. And if everyone was in favor, that would be a separate warning, right? So we're all thinking. Oh God, I don't want to be the EFUD sticking the mud. I personally think it should be on infrastructure versus backfilling. I guess it makes no, maybe it just makes me feel better and maybe it's totally arcane and I'm causing bookkeeping my mess for Tom in which case I will back off genuinely. Just personally, you'd be saying to a town, tax fare, you always spend $50,000, we'll get expense, spending a waterline and on fire hydrants for a portion of our town is like as clear and simple as gravel roads and bridges. And I guess maybe I just need to suck it up and say, remember $150,000 that they gave away during COVID is too. So that's fine. That's just my personal. I don't want to be arbitraried, I don't even know what EFUD is. I'm thinking of, you know, the messaging also is looking at it as helping to reduce the significant increase in fees for, you know, their customers. Also like, I'm the one who says it that we asked for you to do it. No, I hear you, I just don't, I don't want to complicate. Can I ask, how do water and sewer rates compare to other municipalities? I looked at that a little while back there. They're lower on average, but it's really, there's a really wide band. There are small systems in the Northeast Kingdom for instance that are, you know, really struggling to watch their customer base over the years. They won't be low much longer, I don't think. Okay. And they might be a little bit above average. Okay, thank you. Roger? Yeah, I'm with both of you in terms of preferring that the money be invested and the infrastructure project that was presented to us. But the fact is that they actually do need the money now, and they did really help out the community at a time when it was really needed. And I think we can make a very compelling argument for allocating this money to make them good for that. 300,000 ants. Yeah, I mean, I'm not prepared to go to 300,000 but I'm comfortable with 150. I also wanted to respect the fact that Chris did make a proposal to us for another $50,000 for any state here for quite some time. I mean, we can talk a lot longer than this, Chris. But the fact is that they did come to us for $75,000 previously with what was called a one-time ask. And at the time I moved $50,000 to me, take advantage of the matching funds. We knew that there was $100,000 available so we could have moved up to 100, but given the lack of clarity as to how many people are actually gonna benefit from this, I felt comfortable going with $50,000. I still feel like $50,000 is the right figure. I'm not prepared to move forward, but I did want to address the issue. Yeah, thank you. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Any other comments? What did you decide to do for you? So is that going on the morning or in the rest of the day? Well, sir, go ahead. Oh, my God. Okay, thank you. Thank you, sir. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So where are we at now? It's basically $150 unless it needs to get over the accounting problems, but yeah. Yeah, let's talk to the accountants. I know. I'm a little... I was like you, Melissa, a little uncomfortable based upon, you know, I would say sometimes the rate payers have to pay, especially because they didn't pay at one point, but if they're having problems, I think that's going to be a long-term municipal issue and... And to be clear, I'm not opposing the transfer. Really, my only thing was about saying for something, but for the point of... I mean, to be honest, I asked down the street the same thing too. I'm not just going to pick on E-Flood. I said kind of before building expense, not general operating, but I'm okay. I guess my other question would be, and just to say in general, I was like, I assume they already looked at other ways the town can support them through borrowing if that was an option and that wasn't an option. Is that correct? The accountants done on the past using the... Well, I'm just in the memo. They were going on and on, but they had to borrow $45,000. They did borrow from the town. So that's what they're saying. So they were just noting. Yeah, that was all I was asking. The current expense borrowing they did last year, in March last year or April, both boards said, if one or the other of us needs to borrow the land, can we borrow? They borrowed a very small amount. It's already been paid back. It was, you know, we paid it back. But just they highlighted it in the memo. That's why I'm hard enough. Anyone else? So in kind of summary, I think we have heard that Springville is a no. Senior Center is for right now a no, but possibly put it on the budget and are considered in within the municipal budget. The town bridges and the gravel road, I think we're all on agreement upon that. I think we're all good on the reappraisal issue and downstream and with the reduced E-FUD down to 150, I think we're in agreement. Yeah, I agree. So just because you've had some conversation, can I get some clarity on how we should draft the, is the E-FUD piece in the budget? Is that warned? And if it's warned, can I have some clarity on how we like draft that morning language? I know Alyssa wanted at the time to say. I defer to the board. I'm not gonna be the one who asked for it. Can you repeat that in here? I said I defer to the board. And I'm not gonna be the one who enforces it. Well, to your point, Alyssa, I just, I think I don't think anything that's shoveled ready right now that they can put that towards, quite honestly, it'll probably be five years. I mean, what if a project becomes a provision? They have four projects that, or three projects that they have designed and have permits for. The one that you like the best is the most complicated one, and will take the longest to do. That's the one that Roger talked to a couple of years ago. I don't think I like the best. It's the one that's get brought to us in a formal proposal for our project. Well, somebody suggested earlier tonight that that was a compelling one. There's others that, up behind, to do the transmission main, talked about that a little bit with the paving up behind the... Yeah, on Kennedy Drive. Kennedy Drive, and Lapland Drive, and all those places. And that's one that we would likely just put in the E-FUD budget and do that one as part of the operating budget. It's not such a huge number. And those are all water. The nice part about saying it's $150,000 for lost revenue is let them do, with this amount of money, what you're doing, in figuring out where it can be best used for them. If you tell them it's $150,000 for fire hydrants up in the Waterbury Center, well, it's going to sit there and not be spent for a while. Right. You've got $1.5 million, and you're figuring out what's best, 435 for bridges, 300,000 per gravel. If you just give them $150,000, they can, better than you, figure out where it will best benefit the community. That would be my recommendation. And I agree with you. I mean, that's the way I... I was looking for the right way to word it, and you just brought it out. So, it's... Yeah, I'm fine with that. My point would more be, and I went back to, so I'll take my own advice from earlier on the messaging. I think messaging the fact that they are actively working to expand and serve a greater portion of the community is an important big picture piece, but if lost revenue is the financial management government piece, that makes sense. I support that. If we do it on its own or in the budget, I have no preference. And I wish we were in a different circumstance, to be honest with you. I wish everybody was a lot of funded in. It's not, I don't think it's in my investment. I don't want this. No, and I'm just saying that it's unfortunate that we have to keep trying to catch up, I guess. Some day it's going to be all the time since the town can make the decision. Just so you're clear too, even with this $150,000, I will propose a very substantial rate increase. Right, they need a rate increase. Well overdue, it's a long overdue. It's unfortunate, Mike just asked about what our rates compared to everybody else. Well, our rates are fictitiously low because they're running in the red. All right, the black, I'm sorry. Do we want to ask it's own warning or do you want it in the budget? Do board members have anything on that? What was that, Danny? Dude, I was curious if any board members have anything on whether they want it in the budget or not. And then if not, I was going to ask Tom if he had a recommendation either way. Put it in the budget. I'm afraid that if we want it, it'll get voted down. That's kind of what I was thinking too. Could you say that again? I'm afraid that if we want it, it'll get voted down. No. I am. And then with due respect, I think we should put it down straight in the budget because if it's the only one we're voting separately, why are we holding them to a different standard? Wasee is also up-warned. That was already in the budget. That transferred a warning. Possibly, the senior said depending on how we know. We decided not to see it. Yeah, okay, yeah. My understanding was Wasee is, the pledge was to warn it this year and that's because the funding was contingent on two other towns paying a component. That's my point. I'm not trying to, I agree with you, Roger, but there is a similar amount already in the budget for Wasee. That's the, that's not this. Yeah, that's just an appropriation. Oh yeah, no, I thought the transfer, our transfer was a lie. I messed it up. Now, let me ask you why is your premonition that it's gonna get voted down? I don't know. I'll face the problem. What knowledge do you think it's? Police department. There we go. No, I mean, you know, when this is, Bob alluded to it, there has been. Sort of division in this town, that's why it's perceived as a village expense and an account expense. But I mean, it's a lot easier for everybody, especially for EFUD, if it's in the budget. I think if it was on the warning with the right, you know, motion second and discussion, I think it would be able to pass, but it's more certain if it's in the budget. Yeah, it certainly can be pulled up for questions in the budget as well. Right, I just didn't have it in the budget. Okay. Roger says he would like to see it in the budget. Yeah, I think that way is okay with that. Alyssa, I think we're unanimous. Okay. We'll move on to the budget. I'm using the word consensus a lot tonight. Love that. We love that. Love that. Sorry. So Senior Center was a need more information for later. I just shot a message to my buddy later. I got to put it for later. Moving that thing, so. Spring Hill wasn't a definite no. And then a CV five or a later, or there isn't a later because there's no match. So that's a no. I just want to think about it. May 31st, by the way, is the deadline. May 31st. Why can't Justin just give some of the restaurants and buy some of the music? Yeah. I don't know, but it's 123, and we don't want any 130, so. Yeah, so that's up for later. And that's, I mean, part of the conversation is about a reappraisal. Any other clarification needed on this? Sorry, Mike, let's melt you. I think we're good. Is anyone going to reply back to the Spring Hill School? It's pretty interesting. OK, separate questions. Tom, can you reply back to the Spring Hill School? Yes, I will. OK, sir. So we need a clarification on where they are as far as I can find the money that's left. 304964. 304964, is that it? 964. 304964 dollars. That's a joke. Just threw numbers at him. Because that's taking out, yeah. I mean, I'd rather, I'd like to see the remainder going towards infrastructure in some sort. Yeah. Well, one of the problems, finding $300,000 at an infrastructure within a year of trustee. Yeah, one bridge, I mean, can we put it into a slot where we know it's safe and locked up there? I guess that's my question. I think we have a plan on the ARPA, we move that to the special articles. So Karen did a great job of pulling the list together. Oh, Carla had this list. I take no credit. No. Come on. And my understanding is there's one change, a couple of changes, but one is, Mike, what is it named next? Central Vermont State Police Advisory Board. So that is going, that was 100 last year? 100 last year, OV0, because the board is probably dissolved. And for the rest, I don't believe, I believe there's one other change, and that is Green Mountain Transit reduced their request. Really? Substantially, yeah. Do we know one? Nope. I got a letter for a budget reduction. I wasn't about to ask too many questions. I think we might have gotten a lot of ARPA funding. You see, is there a transit agency that has one potential? It didn't. Let me ask people. Part of my naive decay, Green Mountain Transit, on their routes from Waterbury, did they charge? Because I know, it was on the TV, that the Burlington routes, they aren't charging. GMT operates Burlington and their Waterbury. I take it frequently from downtown. They are fare free. I believe through this June, which is their fiscal year because of ARPA funding. Because of ARPA. They were fare free last year, and they continued it this year. I'm a huge proponent of a policy, because I would drive otherwise, because I pay credit about these things. No. When it's free, it's really easy. At least the route to Commuter to Montpelier from the train station is free, currently. It has been for about two years. Yep. Thank you. And then Melissa had a question about the senior center. And what we discussed was, everyone on this list gets a town appropriation. We have other organizations that are embedded in the budget. Sorry, not organizations, but funding that we work in with other organizations in the budget. And the Rotary is one where we, by the fireworks, they're in charge of it. So that's a fee for service. That's something different. But the senior center is a pure appropriation. And so Melissa's question was, why don't we put it all in one place to be consistent with the rest? The other thing I wanted to add is, I did have $5,000 extra in the budget. Not in here, but in the budget for Rotary, based on some earlier conversations we have. That was above and beyond the increase for fireworks. That was Rotary had talked about some funding for concerts. The guards were in the park. They've now backed off that specific request and there. And I'm meeting with them tomorrow, but I believe the preview is they still need, they still would like that $5,000, but it's essentially the message is that the town will need to work with them and spend a little more funding on keeping Rusty Parker up to spec. And that's within our parks budget. So I don't think we need a special article for that. That's just work that we do. And I frankly like that approach better. So the $5,000 would be budgeted in the parks budget? In the parks budget. It probably won't have to be $5,000 higher than it was last year. Just pay those expenses out of the parks budget. And they're not gonna request money for the concerts. My understanding as of today. Okay. So they're switching it from concerts to maintenance more or less. And it's our park. And it's now, right? It's like one's park. And who did maintenance on it? So the town for many years now has in the parks grounds maintenance budget. The lawn mowing has been done by the town and the trash and recycling has been done by the town. All the other stuff that the road we did. All the other stuff that road we did, they would come to EFUD and said, we did X, Y, Z on the picnic benches or ABC on the stage for the building and the EFUD paid for all of that. Okay. Got it. That was a small percent. It was like $500. That's right, you're on the road. You know what's going on. Oh, I do. It was way more than $500 much. That's what Al Lewis finally. Okay. Well, that's what they received. Well, that's what they received from EFUD. Okay. This seems like a better solution, so that's great. Yeah. Keeps us within our lane. Yeah. So I guess one of the questions we have is, would you like all of the senior center funding to be a special article? And what do you respect? Cause I've been a budget jerk. The senior center when they were requesting their funding asked the same question. So I was just asking why there was the breakdown and how much it agreed. Yeah. And the only one on here that is partially funded. And I think it was, they asked for, what we were told is they asked for a significant increase one year. So the 12-5 is in the budget and the 20 is after. And she just said, as a local chair of a volunteer board, it was stressful to have that much. Again, I'm okay with keeping it. We don't need to make any changes on my account, but she asked for the meeting, which is why I asked. So are you suggesting moving the 20 into the regular budget and making the regular budget 32-5? I was just questioning what the rationale for the breakdown was, and if it was consistent, I have no recommendation. No, no, okay. Well, the rationale is, and I think I mentioned this a couple of weeks ago, it went from like 5,000 to 10,000. And at one point, they said, we wanna ask one-time appropriation. So the select board said, all right, we'll give you your 10,000 on the regular budget line, but your one-time appropriation of whatever it is, 15,000, let's say, I don't know what it was, is gonna go as a special article. That got voted in the next year they came back and they said, well, we needed it more than one year. So the select board just kept it one time a year. Now it's up to 12, last year, it went from 10 to 12-5 in the budget in the 20 state. And this board, minus you and Roger, plus 200 people last year, said, well, we'll increase the 10 to 12-5 and leave the 20. So there's three options. You can leave it 12-5 and 20 like it is now. You can put 32-5 in the regular budget and have no special article, or you can put 32-5 in the special articles and nothing in the budget. Well, I think it's now 39, right? Yeah. 20% more. Well, it sort of does stick out like a sore thumb. $20,000 compared to these other $2,000 asks, so. I think the word senior answers it all. Right. Yeah, everyone who attends a telemedicine wheel on wheels, it's a hard thing to say no. And they don't even got so much money. I'm one of the old people. You're all gonna be. All right, well, senior here. But I think it makes sense to me. It's a hard one, because it's been a constant, since I've been on the board, there's been a creep in terms of requesting money. And I don't know if at some point, they had better fundraising in the organization or it was better run. I don't know what, you know, I think it's improved that they have had a audit, which I think is a step in the right direction. But. We just had a conversation about rate structures. They are reimbursed $4 for a meal that costs $12. So no surprise, there's a short follow. It structurally doesn't work, so. I guess, you know, from a management perspective, it doesn't impact me where you put the money. And I don't care. We're going back to a traditional town meeting, so let's keep a tradition and it's fine with me. I mean, just so I know, I called Tom today too to ask about the Central Ron Health and Home Hospice line that was in the public seat. Not because I have any problem funding Central Ron Home Health and Hospice. They just get $13.5 in the budget and I said, do we get a report for them? Do they ask every year? So I have no problem with the request and I recognize I was paid for three years by a line item in the town budget. So it's not stress-free when it's just a line item in the town budget either, but I think just in the future, I would love to think about some consistency where, like we tried to, if you haven't requested before, it needs anyone with signatures when you hit five years, you don't. And maybe it exists and I just don't know it, but I don't care. Keep the 20. I mean, can you call questions on either one, right? But out of the budget or as a special article, you couldn't. Yeah, you could. Yeah, you could call a question as a clarity and an explanation either way. I guess the one thing I'd add, if you think about the future. So if it's 39,000 in 2023, how much do you think it will be in the next few years? Look at that change you're thinking about how, yeah. Very highlighted. Well, that's what I'm saying. If it's split the way it is now. It hasn't bothered the voters that it's split. No. No, I guess I don't know. You don't sit next to the two of you lying? Mother, apple pie, share the line. If anybody's that, let's put it this way. Nobody asks the mother or the wife. Okay, well, please. So every year, line on earth is this. I mean, you think people who are from that might hear it. It's fine, let's just leave it. Where do, are we putting the increase in the line or the increase in the special article, right? That's the only question. They asked if they had a 20% increase. Is that to the 12.5 and do we put it in the line? Just to be clear, I think they asked why but I think it's me asking why. Cause, you know, Carlin just knew this, pay him out of this pot of money for this many months and then I have to switch and pay him out of this pot of money. Why? Why can't make it one pot of money? Well, I can tell you right now if we put it all in special article, there's going to have to be some explanation. I'm sure somebody's going to call my name. I agree, Chris, but if it's passed for years and years and years. I get it. Yeah, I just, the voters support it. Why not put it in the budget? Yeah, I think it's better to have the split because that way the voters can ask questions, you know, on the special article for the excess money because I know they're going to get that much money. And I think if people speak to why, where the money's going for them, I think you'll get a firmer approach. Tom is right. I mean, you do, the board has had a policy in the past that, you know, if, I mean, and I use leave as an example, it's the last one, you know, $2,500 for leave. And a few years ago, or probably four years ago now, Duncan McDougal came in and asked the select board if it could be fought on the special article. And the select board told them, we're willing to put 2,500 on there and just leave it. But if you wanted five, you got to get a petition to ask for five. And he, $2,500 wasn't worth going out, getting the however many signatures. So it's still 2,500. So I think Tom's question is the better one to ask is if you make it 3,995 in the budget, then next year if they ask for 45, do you just put it in the budget or, I mean, so. I don't see them changing for a while. I think they're going to be asking for more and more and more. Well, they did get changed. I know I had some very serious questions and that's what caused them to get an audit. I was not very happy with what the financial status of that. So at least they're getting. He's saying though that you don't see that they're going to be asking for level funded going forward. They never have. They broke even. No, they've been increasing. They essentially broke even in 2022 without a director. And so they had that decision filled. They would have had a deficit there. We're still at 6, 7% food price inflation. They need to fundraise more. That's unfortunately, and I don't think they're doing it. So. Yeah, I think to some extent their challenges, their fundraising I think depends on your clientele to a large extent. And their clientele are people who are needy in the first place. Yeah, they don't have any. So it's a challenge for them. I have my notes. Food costs, covering employees, 11.63 per meal, from the council on aging, plus sometimes extra. But if they go over the number they pre-outkitted, it doesn't count. 7.83 per meal that they need to make up. And they served 18,000 meals last year. So like that's the thing they did a 91K and one meal. I don't care. Their increase this year was $6,500. It was 20% increased. What line do you want to go? Well, I think that the reason is split is to give it a water down feel that, if you're not paying attention to the budget, it looks like sooner or later it's staying level funded right along. It's unfortunate that they have to think they need to do that. But either way, whatever they come, whatever increases they're asking for, they still got to come in front of this board to get it. So I would propose that we put what was in the budget last year in the budget. And then their proposed increase goes on the special article. I would agree with that. Sorry. Why do you have to mail me a letter though asking me, didn't they? They all have to mail me a letter asking me for funding. Oh, so we have to improve them. So I think I have a letter that says they're asking for 20. Do you have a letter asking for 20? I mean, they know I have one from everybody else. Well, didn't they come in? They brought us in the process. Well, that service that? Right. Do you know the funding letters that I'm talking about? I collect them all. Yeah, but I don't. The ones that you get afterwards? I get them. I ask for a report and a funding letter. And so all these organizations have to mail me a letter that says I would like to request $200 funding for 20. But we got to that letter asking for $300,000. They came to us. They made the request to the board, so there's no letter. You don't think I have a letter that says 20? OK. You might be right. I don't know that you have a letter. Yeah, I have to go look. I don't know. I don't think you have a letter that's asking for 20. 20? OK. Well, that's what I was thinking. You could actually say 39.5 on it, to be able to say, I think that's the one I have. I think that's the one. This is 39.5. We'll put the 6% increase on the special article. Good. Any further comments on any of the line items from the special article? If not, move to the 2043. I'm just going to make sure I capture this correctly. We're leaving the budget for the senior center as it was in 2022, and increasing the special article to bridge the gap. Did I understand this? Yes. OK. OK. Thanks. Correct. And since we'll have the warning next week, I just want to preview the tax rate. Don't hold me to the number, but I can guarantee you it's not going to be $0.58. It might be $0.543, depending on the challenges. Sometimes you have a spreadsheet, and then you translate it to the town meeting day format. And I know you have these nightmares, where you know, did I miss 20 grand here, 20 grand there, or did I find it? But I think it's really close to where the final number will be. And so I think I can guarantee it'll be less than $54 a hand. So I just wanted to preview and just make sure at that rate that the board was comfortable with that overall rate. If we need to reduce, there can be some marching orders about how much we would need to reduce by. We at $53 right now. $53 even right now. So just to be clear, you're at $53 right now, because last year in the town report, in the motion, for the article that people voted on, they were asked to set a tax rate as opposed to set a tax amount to be raised. And they set a tax rate at $53 cents. And I've just looked at this this afternoon. When we put the tax rate memo together in July, the grand list didn't go up last year as much as we anticipated. So the tax rate last year, if it hadn't been for the vote of the voters, that it would be higher than $53 cents should have been 53.4, almost 53.5 last year. So and a lot of this obviously depends on how much increase you get in the grand list. And Dan and Tom have talked about that, but you're not going to know for sure until July 1st. Not making anything dramatic. Dan and I have gone through the numbers. What I will say to you is the challenge is not 2023 per se. The challenge will be, I think we're going to have to put more into the capital project funds in future years, that the 5% of the Stowe Street bridge is open at $200,000. That can be paid off over a few years, but it's still $200,000 we'll have to raise. That hasn't been in budget so far. And then that bridge down there is $500,000. So even if we throw ARPA funds at some of this, it's a fair amount of cash. Never mind the one ton, that's $140,000. All those things will keep increasing. So I think that just forecasting on my own, I think the future of the town is going to be 2024, 2025. I think more 3% to 4%, which would be a couple of pennies on your rate. I think it's going to be pretty hard to stay in the one penny range. But I think we can do it for this year. OK. Due to inflation, most of this. Due to inflation, and you can defer it a bit, but when the big capital projects happen, that's when you have to get there. The challenge is going to be, that bridge is going to be a big challenge, because we're getting state bridge funding for bridge 25 up on Stowe Street. And what are we getting, like, 5%, 90%, 95%? 95% is what he's always talking about. 95% on that bridge. And this bridge here, you're eligible for the same state bridge program. It's just that they're not going to give you the money two years and can not wait. And it depends on if you talk to Bill Woodruff or Alec. How long do you bridge that? How long do you do it? Who should we be talking to? Usually Bill Woodruff gives you a better answer there. But what we mentioned earlier, we don't want to do both those projects at the same time. Don't want to do them at the same time. Yeah. And so what's the timing on the Stowe Street bridge? We'll leave 2025. So we want to do that one out of the, probably the year after we think we'd want to wait for the state to get through. I'm not sure we can delay it three or four years, but 2024 will really, it'll be probably the budget challenge for the year. Do you know yet whether the 435 and bridge projects that you had, Austin, is he going to be able to do them this year? We're pretty hopeful. I guess Woody's initial reaction was probably not. But the more they've talked, the more things you can slip them in. And then we're also more hopeful that we can do the waterline project that we talked about and then repave those roads as part of the paving project talking to Woody. We've always used ductile iron pipe for the water lines, and that's a 12-inch line. Doctile iron pipe is a 40-week lead time, but PVC is acceptable and available. And I'm sure it's not more expensive. And so the option is do the project with PVC or don't do it for another year. So I think we'd all prefer to do the waterline and pee at the road. Who has a second question? Just mechanically, as Bill just alluded to, I recall that there was the round-and-down. So is there concern over the difference between the 1-1 and the fact that, like, are you recommending that we're going to vote on a tax rate as we don't check them last or short? I've always devised budget review on the tax rate. And the grand list changes usually are, by that point, based on what we know now, $15,000 or $20,000 in total lost revenue or gained revenue. That's a lot. So it's usually not dramatic, so I think it's pretty safe to vote on the tax rate. So we think we're OK with the $0.54 you're not recommending? I'll have it fine-tuned next week to a little bit more. And like I said, it might be $54.3 or $54.08 or something. And maybe I'm just not remembering. We can vote on a multiple-digit. Yes. Four digits in the bill. OK, thank you. Yeah, you can vote on any tax rate. And I thought we'd vote on four digits, but we do round down to two digits only. Bell, or is that wrong? Well, we sometimes have had a three-digit or four-digit. But I'd probably tell you if you're at 54.19 to just make it 54.2. Thank you. So the question is, in that range overall, folks OK, or do we need to go back and reduce it? I'm sorry about a penny and a half, friends. I don't remember a penny and a half. I don't believe it would be a penny and a half in the end. One point, one or two. I think I said there in the last meeting, maybe in the meeting before, that we've been averaging since I've been on the board around two cents. There was a year. Yeah, there was a year. There was three years in a row. I think we were at 51, but it doesn't vote. Those were exceptional years. I mean, we've still got more done in the same amount of money. We have more done. I completely get your thought process about cost increase here in the next few years. You know, it may end up being more than what you're anticipating. I often wonder what that means for all of us, but I guess so far, we've done good over the years. And this is right on par for where we've been, you know. So just a penny to two pennies right in there. Yeah. I mean, 53 cent tax rate this year is what the voters set. I mean, inflation is still seven, right? Right. I mean, a 5% increase gets you to 55 and a half. So if you're at, I mean, a penny and a half divided by 53, it's 2.8%. I don't think anybody can complain about a 2.8% tax increase if inflation is 7%. Right. I mean, the risk is if we went lower, then there'd be a bigger jump the following day. Right. We're doing what we've just been criticizing on some other people for, you know. And if you think that next year is really going to be a challenge or future years that you've got to put more into the capital policy, could you live with a 2 cent increase bill from 53 to 55 this year? You know, 2 cents. I mean, we don't know what's happening with the schools. I mean, that's always the wild card. And Chris, you and I have always said it's a shame that we have to pull back from what we need to do just because of that. But a 2 cent increase is 3.7%. Yeah. So hand to raise a little bit. Yeah, if Tom is thinking you're going to be at 54 and a half or 54 and a quarter. I think it's a pretty fair number. I think so, too. Hence my reasoning for wanting to use so much of the art of money for the municipality is to try to cut off some of these anticipated increase by dealing with stuff with that money as opposed to having to go to a tax ban and bond for it or, you know what I mean? And I say going forward, you know, the increases I'm seeing in 2024 and 2025, you don't want to ignore them. And it has to cover your thinking. But the town is pretty substantial reserves. You've got a tax stabilization over a million dollars. You've got really great liquidity. And so I think you deal with those increases in those years. I don't think you need to. You're not, you know, if you were EFOT, I'd tell you well. If you want to do that project, you've got to raise the cash now. So you've got to deal with it now in a different way. But so I'm not suggesting, Chris, we're going to see 5% increases in those years. I just think the, you know, the 2% to 3% increases it might be more like 3% to 4%. Yeah, that's why, you know, things like this quarry thing that both fingers cross, hoping that this thing's going to come to fruition for us. And there's other things, you know, that we can talk about too that hopefully you can skinny the cat there a little bit. But at some point you're going to run out of options of just how, you know, how efficient you can operate. There's only so much efficiency you can acquire. And then you're out of, you've done all you can internally, you know, and the rest is money after that. Okay. Move on to the next subject. Seeking for a report on public utility filing related to a temporary wireless facility at 91 State Drive. So this came before you about a month ago, I believe, and they were essentially looking for you as a notice that they were applying. So now the application is completed in front of the Public Utility Commission. I see no compelling reason for the town to weigh in. The project as proposed is what you saw before, that 84 Tower, temporary, I'm assuming, means permanent someday, they call it. No. Yeah, it's not going to change. And so I don't think that there's a need for the town to weigh in and formally write a letter to the PUC, positive or negative, but we certainly can. And then, you know, public comment period, so. So do you want to have any great reasons that we should weigh in with a positive or negative one? For me, it's a positive. And our fire chief was saying that he couldn't get cell coverage down, down. Down by the subway, it goes, I'll turn it out on you. Yeah, which is a concern. It was a public safety concern. I hope that this might address that, but we thought why not? If anything, I would say that we would support it. Okay. On that note, I'd like to ask one other simple question that's been on my mind for a while. Maybe you know more than the rest of us here, Bill. What the hell actually goes on down at the state complex? Are they even occupying it? I don't know, I was like, oh, that was awesome. I mean, it just seemed like no activity whatsoever. It's sad. I mean, we've, I've talked to our state representatives and state senators in the past. I've talked to the administration. The challenge is that we had COVID, many of these people ended up working from home. They like working from home. They don't want to go to work at the office. And my point to the state has been, okay, so you keep sending this grant money to redevelop and to invest in downtowns. Don't you think the biggest thing you could do is put 1,400 people or 1,100 people out of the way they were supposed to have in the downtown? That would be better than any $50,000. Tell them to flush the toilet. And then they would just have their water for a while because they put their dog for being forced to go to the office. I don't think, I don't think, Tom and I know how many people look they have down there right now. That's what I'm curious about. Sort of, they're not full. I know a couple of people who work there as well. Everyone I talked to at the state says they're partially remote and they come into the office once or twice a week because they enjoy coming in or they're just tragic. And to those, I mean, I'm not someone from Concord who works here, Concord, Vermont and the Kingdom. So they were commuting an hour and a half each way. I was like, I don't know how you did that, but of course they're not back. You know, I'll do it. I guess my question was gonna be if they're not doing anything with the building, then can they turn part of it over to us so we can do something with it? So there is a bill in front of the legislature now about Stanley Watson and getting that turned over for affordable housing. So that's stage one. I met with Teresa this morning and she's talking about the former Armory, which is a different state property. So that could be a different project. And then, yeah, the rest of it, I think we've got to meet with our state reps. My sister has a desk down there for what it's worth. Did she send her or something? Two days a week. Yeah, I have a couple friends who are the M9 three days a week, but certainly like a very small percentage of the building. Like I said, back when that got flooded and it was a big cry to get all the state employees back in, I was the only board member that opposed that and I wanted to see mixed use down there. Retail, housing, some state maybe, but private business that way, to me it gave more of a flexibility that if when you've got a lot of small entities and one goes out of business, it doesn't, there's not a big gap in the community. I know at one time, her department talked about like a desk sharing to eliminate leases on other buildings that the state was keeping. I don't know if that's whatever happened, but so two and three are. Well, that was what was happening when they decided to build this. They said, we're gonna build that back. And I forget 1,100 or something like that was the capacity and what they were saying was that as the leases in Colchester, Burlington, Montpelier, not Montpelier necessarily, but Barry, places expired, they wouldn't bring them here and put them in their own building. But I mean, you could put lawyer's offices down there, you could put makers to your, you could put any number of things, retail stores of some sort of, you know, like a mini mall or, oh well, you could have, you know. I never thought I'd heard Christian say that. Yeah, maybe a chance to get that housing but you were asking for it. I mean, we're still getting our pilot, but still that's money that they've taken from us that they're just giving it back to us, you know, along with other towns, that's. Well, they haven't taken the pilot money from us. That's right. You know, the pilot money is from local action tax money. So every time that passed one, that's true. We benefit with whatever a new town in that example, we benefit too, because it's a little more important. But yeah, we don't, we don't want the pilot to go. Chris, commercial real estate is the most frankful thing right now. You know, cities that just, they're afraid with their, you know, everyone gets so comfortable working a home in their sweatpants and stuff like that. And it's, you know, I see, I see both sides. Did it this morning. There's a good side to be, but there's another good side to being, having collaboration with having people together. I see both sides of the equation. And I know, especially in big cities, commercial real estate, you know, a lot of big companies are forcing their, their employees to go back to work because they have invested in these properties. And it's going to be, you know, and employees are basically saying, hey, we want choices and they'll go elsewhere. By consensus, the board would like to continue to stay aware of what's happening at the town office complex in case there's a future use for an outbuilding that we could repurpose into something. We have a new meeting room. And has no comments regarding our temporary wireless home. We feel good about this whole time. I think if anyone have any negatives, I think we're all positive about it. Do we want to write something positive? Brocker, do you want, I know you were the, yeah, I know. If someone's able to do that, I agree that I think it is a positive and would be okay with a positive note. I don't have the bandwidth to take on that project. Right. It can be very pro forma. My sense is, it's the PUC, I mean, we can ask more of the sagas, but like, they do their thing. I mean, it's exempting them from local property. I'm sure. Because they're doing that. I think we could say we support the project as proposed, period. I need an age score. Okay. Yeah, that'd be great. Thanks, Tom. Thanks for everything. As long as one thing's we ever are gonna know, I'm gonna say that. That's the other. Tom said that he can help the letter saying that we support this initiative. So you pass that around to us and catch progress. Thanks. No one thinks we'll ever go back on that. That's matter. We can say nothing. If we say we support the project as proposed, we are on record as supporting the project as proposed in perpetuity. I'm just naming it. I am comfortable. Because it's not where it is, you know, within the parameters that we have to send it. I'm comfortable, but great. Whether it's or not, that's just good. Okay, the last item on the agenda is discussed February meeting agenda. I assume we're meeting next Monday. Next Monday, and then it's traditional after the January marathon that you pause in the first meeting in February is typically canceled. However. However, the second meeting in February is on a holiday. It's a holiday, too. I thought it was Saturday. Yeah, thank you. Oh, okay, yeah, yeah, I didn't want to. You'll actually not be able to. Trigger that one again. So that would be, so we're gonna meet next Monday, and then follow on the Tuesday. The third week is joining me on Tuesday. So I've got conflicts on Tuesdays. So I've got it. All right. I don't want to. The third week, which is a third Monday, which would not, I mean, so our second Monday. I could still be on Monday. Right, I was thinking of the 13th. I could meet the 20th. The 20th on the holiday? Yeah, I don't get that day off. Wait, is the 13th a holiday? No, the 13th. I think that's a good one. The 20th is a holiday. Right, but if we move the 20th to the 13th. That's fine by me. The 13th is good. Yeah, so we just meet the second Monday. You know, you've got a long between the 30th and the 20th, or just go to the 13th. You just tell me where we're meeting. You had a grant that was 15 deadline. Are we applying to better connections? Yes. Okay, so we're okay. So then we should. So we're you planning on the 30th? If you plan to meet late in February, then I would put the better connections grant on the 30th. I have to, because Steve. Got it, I don't appreciate it. We should have talked to you before. That deep into February. I think we could put off the parade though, right? And I don't even know now, CV fiber, the correspondence that Tom and I had was, they wanted to come in and just give you an update, but I'm not even sure that was accomplished tonight. I don't know. Well, let's look back. Yeah, let's look back at some of those emails and see what. Yeah, there was a little bit of conflicting. Yeah, so we'll most all double check too. Okay. But I don't think it needs to be on there. Right, so great. So what's everyone's pleasure for the meeting date? 13th. So it'll be just the one meeting in February. Yeah, and it's something that comes up both day and weekend. So if your only meeting was in February, just the heads up, I don't know how we caramel approach it, but Carla never was, never came to the meeting on the night before Tom meeting. I think Tom meeting is the 7th, right? Yeah. And the first Monday of March is the 6th. So if you meet on the 13th and don't meet again in February, then, and you're having an open town meeting, you're going to have to meet on the 6th to make sure you have all of your emotions. The board is going to make for the budgets and all the rest of it will have to be done. Can we move on the 6th? Could we move on the 6th up to the 27th? Yeah. You could. How does that work for you? So meet February 13th and February 27th. Yeah. And then we don't have to meet. So you don't have that problem. Right, that would make more sense. Both are planning a mission. So they just, or it must stay in the cell forever, I guess. I don't realize this one. Sorry. Choose your allegiances. It's like you never knew how it's been months. 13th, 27th. I think, I have to reread the email, but I think Jeff Kilgore offered to assist with writing motions. Correct, yeah. If that was wanted. Or not needed. Jeff Kilgore, when I approached him about moderating, he, I believe in his response to me, made an offer to assist the board in writing motions if they needed that assistance. I think he's probably very qualified. So on the 27th, would we kind of have a go-through on what we're all going to do? Yeah, yeah, okay. Karen, can you check if Jeff is available for that meeting? Sure. Yeah, we'd be happy to if you know him after asking. Okay, thank you. If there's nothing else before us, I became a motion to adjourn. So move. Second. All figures say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you. Thank you.