 Well, good afternoon. This is a joint meeting of the community resources committee and the finance committee for June 2nd, 2020, and the meeting pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law, general law 30 a section 18 is a meeting of the two committees is being conducted via remote participation. So, I'm going to call the finance committee to order. And then I am going to go, which I've just done now, and then go through for each member of the committee and recognize you by name, and asked you to indicate that you can hear me, and you can enter, then we'll know you can be heard to confirm your participation. And then I'm going to ask Mandy to call the community resources committee together and do the same thing for her committee. And this is necessary in order to complete the beginning of the process. So, that dance loss. Present. Present. Okay, thank you. Lynn Griezmann. Yes. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Okay, Kathy Shane. Yes. And then we have three people. I'm just going to so that everybody can confirm they're here. These are non voting community members of the committee, but they are members of our committee and very important members. Bob Hegner. I'm here. And Sharon Pavanelli. I'm here. And Mary Lou Tomlin. You need done. I'm here. Okay. So we are complete. I turn this over to Mandy Joe for a minute. Thank you, Andy. It is now 207, I guess, and I will call seeing a quorum presence the June 2nd, 2020 meeting of the community resources committee to order. I will go through the role and make sure everyone can hear us. Shalini Balmil. Present. Evan Ross. Present. Steve Schreiber. Present. And I believe Sarah Swartz is still not present. We are working on figuring out whether she can attend or not. But she is not present at the time. And obviously Mandy Jo Hanneke is present. And I'm going to turn it back over to Andy who will be running this portion of the meeting when this portion is over. I will follow recess of the community resources committee so we can reconvene in a different zoom room. And I will explain it as we go Lynn. Can you put up the agenda for a moment for everybody to see and while you do so. Let me follow up on what was just said. This is actually a joint meeting of two committees. If you go down a little bit, which you'll see is that the first order after calling the meeting order, which we just did is to have a presentation of the community preservation act committee. Recommendations for FY 21. And there's Nate buddington whose chair of the committee is present and is going to make that presentation in just a moment. What I'm going to do afterwards is after he makes his presentation. We are going to have questions to come from all councilor members of the committee and I'm going to try my best to recognize people in the order that I see raised hands on the participant list and not organized by way of committee. I will then open it up for public comment. The public comment period at that point will not be on other issues that either committee will be addressing later in this. But will be on the community preservation act. And I think that's one of the discussion today. When the committees then divide into separate meetings in the way that logistically is going to happen is that the finance committee is going to stay with this zoom meeting and members at that point members of the community resources are going to leave this meeting and then join another meeting so that people who are interested in staying with that committee from the public will need to also take a similar action of in order to get to the next meet to continue with that meeting. And I think that that basically takes care of the logistics explanation of how we're proceeding. So the other thing I was going to ask you to put up if you can as the financial order Lynn, if you have it available. If not I can do it from my computer. The reason that I'm asking for the financial order. Lynn, are you able to find it or There it is. Okay. The, this is a proposed, as you see marked as a draft financial order that will come before the council on June 15. And the purpose of this is to be able to vote on and any any of the projects that are listed, which are the ones that are funded from the FY 21 funds. And we very much would like to be able to fund those projects that are supported by the council so that they can have full advantage of the fiscal year to work on the project work. And for that reason, that is the major focus of this. And we will need the Everybody to understand that need to have committees decide whether they have recommendations to the council for the June 15 meeting. One item that was recommended by the committee that has a minority report attached to it has to do with Jones library funding has to do with it is would be funded by borrowing. It was not. It is not part of the draft financial order that you're looking at right now. It will not be considered by the council in June. There is no date for consideration of the Jones library proposal. So it is part of the report is part of those referred in the system referred to both committees. But I it is not the major focus of discussion today. However, if questions come up from the committee. I'm not going to say that they're inappropriate questions, but I just want to try and make sure that people focus on what we need to do on June 15. Council President is also a member of the finance committee. Is there anything else you want to say to what I just said in the introduction. No, I will add that we're not taking the library up at this time because we really don't know when that funding may or may not come through as a grant. And until it does, we really have no reason to act on it, because it would be contingent anyway. I just wanted to bring to your attention that one of the other members of the CPA and Anthony Delaney who staff CPA are in the attendees room. Would you like me to bring them in. I think we can go ahead and bring them into the meeting because as you point out one of the staff to the assisted with the CPA Anthony and Sarah as a member of the committee. By the way, there are no other attendees at this time. I had looked at that a few minutes ago to the participant list. So, with that introduction I'd like to now introduce Nate buddington and welcome you Nate, and I had asked you. We had talked earlier today and I explained what I just explained to the committee so that Nate can make a presentation and then open it up to questions after that so Nate, please go ahead. Would you like me to stop at the end of each proposals to take questions or do you want me to go through the whole thing. Um, What it makes it are you going to be presenting by section, starting at the top with housing. I'm going to follow your transfer order. If you'd like. Okay, well they are. Since they're done in grouping to want to do the community housing and then we'll see if they're questions and then start preservation questions doing that fashion. So do each category and then take questions at the end. Yes, why don't we do that. Okay, first, before I start, I just want to give my annual shout out to Anthony Delaney who is our liaison with town hall. He's a pivotal part of this process. He gets us information really promptly we get fantastic support from him. He just makes the process so much easier. So I just wanted to acknowledge his really excellent work with us. So we have two community housing proposals this year that we've both approved on the committee. One is a $200,000 appropriation to the Amherst municipal affordable housing trust. This is I believe the third year in a row when we have awarded some monies to the trust in order to bank to be able to use as leverage. If we have a proposal comes up with a with a developer where we really need to show that we have resources to immediately participate in that project. The trust usually asks us for 400,000 year we usually give them half of that. I think they probably have amassed about $400 to $500,000 at this point that includes this year's $200,000 appropriation. They don't do anything with that money without conferring with with town hall, but it is there for immediate use if it's needed to leverage work with the developer. We also have a $234,000 appropriation for Valley CDC's program for a first time home buyers and mortgage subsidy program. This is to provide for $50,000 mortgage subsidies to for qualifying families. They do. There is a little some obviously some cost sharing here they have to contribute 3% of the cost of the house is a down payment. And they have to pay closing costs. So there's $450,000 mortgage subsidies, the remaining amount of money $35,000. It's articulated in their proposal as a consulting and advising for people who come into this process. I'm not sure that that word is really the right word. It's really, I guess what I would call maintenance costs to run this program. One of the things that happens with these mortgage subsidy programs is they will have to reject the vast majority of the people who apply. So there's a tremendous amount of vetting with these different applicants. They have to, you know, have time to review the inspection documents they have to inspect the house. The number of costs. Part of which is the counseling piece that goes as they're vetting the applicants. They say that they end up really doing some fairly important home buying counseling for almost anyone who even applies in the process. But that that term really I think is the wrong term it's it's really the maintenance of the program, which includes the counseling piece that takes up that remaining I think it's 30 something thousand dollars. Those are our two housing projects. I don't see any raised hands and just second I. Yes, Lynn. Nate, I don't know that you know this for sure, but am I correct that the Amherst municipal affordable housing trust is using some of the money they have for the rent subsidy program during this COVID period. My impression is that they are but okay. Yeah, I just wanted people to be aware that in addition to maybe working with developers in this case, they're actually using it also to respond to the present situation we're in. Evan has his hand raised. Yeah, I see Evan and Mandy has her hands raised. Evan. Yeah, actually, my question was actually based on what Lynn said, which was that this was voted by CPA this was pre code and pre the housing trust making that decision. My understanding is that they have about about 500,000 in the trust and they voted 250 of it towards this rental program which went half their funds. I was curious if there had been any consideration in CPA, given that they asked for 400,000 and you agreed to fund 200,000. If there had been any consideration given what's happened since to reconsidering that and upping their amount to help offset what they spent on this rental program. We can't consider it because we haven't been allowed to meet. So there's no medium for us to talk about that very issue which is a really good one. It had been a long period of time as you know and other committees that were not elected boards were not meeting by zoom, because it was not the ability to provide it support for all committees. We've just now gotten into that next phase where we are beginning to have more capacity to do that but I think that what made this pointing out is that CPA committee got into a time trap because of that. The other point that I'd make and I want to recognize Mandy and Kathy whose hand is up now to is that the committee could meet again now and make a recommendation and the council could make a supplemental order. So adding money to the trust later in the year that we're no longer because we're not a town meeting anymore that only meets twice a year but we meet every month. We can, it can be a year round process and so money. If available. So I need to do something. Yeah, I just wanted to add that in this proposal from CPA there is a $377,000 budget reserve. Plus there's also a $50,000 housing reserve. So that gives us the ability to go back in appropriate later if we need to. If we don't reserve this tax rate is that we couldn't do that. We can do it because we have this reserve in here. Okay. Thank you. There are questions about that they should. We'll come back to it from questions. Mandy. Thank you. Question about some of it's just affordable housing, the community housing program in general and the funds in general, I thank you for providing the spent reports the prior years reports and where they are on spending and all. So before the first time home buyer program in the report there indicated there was a recapture of amounts in event of sale deed or transfer D transfer or refinancing. And so I'm curious who recaptures those amounts does that go back to Valley CDC for an additional sort of home buyer subsidy to say a fifth person, or does it come back to the CPA. That's my first question and then the second one is, we've got a lot of outstanding community housing grants out of CPA that haven't been spent, particularly some for rental subsidies from last year that went to ACC I think there was a full housing. There's a home buyer's assistance program from a couple years ago that hasn't had any money spent in it either. Does the CPA program ever go back and sort of get an idea as to where those are or why some of those have not been spent, you know, I'm curious particularly about the home buyer program and that rental subsidy given the current situation and this current program I know the home buyer was a different entity, but you did mention it's really hard to find them. And so I don't want to tie up money if it's not going to get used for five or 10 or 15 years, you know, because they can't find anyone so could you talk a little bit about that to Nate. Great question. So, this year, on the committee we, we, you know, we were kind of looking at what appeared to be a lot of outstanding money, some of it from years ago that had never been spent. And we really wanted to get on top of that because we wanted to, we wanted to have a process whereby we could say if this money isn't spent in three years it's returned to the CPA it's a little squirrely right now in the agreements of whether that really takes place and we really wanted to firm that up and we did put that into our revised plan CPA plan. But we also are in the process we have a subcommittee on CPA to do largely what you're just talking about which is to come up with a system where we can account for what has happened to previously appropriated funds. And we've been getting some information from other town CPAs to come up with a good system for doing that. It's not locked in yet I hope we're going to have it for the next year cycle. And your first question again I'm sorry I already blanked out on it. Yeah, the first question was about the money comes by programming and who recaptures that. Right. The money comes back to the town. It was a little unclear to me whether it comes to the CPA or it goes into the goes to the town directly, but Sonya probably has the answer to that. So yeah. Also get a funds don't go back directly to the CPA fund. It depends on the funding source in there that came from a housing reserve go back to housing reserve that came from open space reserve and go back to the open space reserve. But if it came from the pot and just go right back to the CPA fund balance and be available for appropriation for the following year. Kathy. Yeah, I, Sonya answered part of my question. It's linked to to Evans on if CPA gets to meet again. Can they look again at housing and I'm just wondering what we're saying is available in total to CPA for FY 21 so how much is the 3% that's our surcharge and the expected state match and do we is that state match certain or not so when Sonya when you said how much would be and reserve is including the money we're expecting to get from state match or just off our own. So, it's CPA kind of runs like the operating budget it's estimated and it's the year before. The state match for this fiscal year has already been received. It was an 11.2% I believe and I had us make it 11% typically. So charges are estimated at about 950,000 coming in from the so charge and then whatever the percentage the state tells us at the time now for fiscal year 22 that's going to be that's unknown at this point. So when when you talked about the, it's be the amount being reserved it's counting both of those sources. It's counting everything. Yes. Figure out what we have that we're going to be able to spend what we estimate. And then that set aside but the 377 I caution we're going to we're going to punch it as a reserve but I would watch carefully as the CPA money coming in to make sure that we're actually going to meet that before we spend it all. So I'll be watching that. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you for your hand up. So none of this money is actually in an account called CPA is that correct. It's all somewhere else. Or is there an account is called a CPA account where money they put aside that they don't spend sits. For appropriation account and it's labeled Community Preservation Act fund. So we have to appropriate from that works just like an ambulance fund. So you appropriate from that fun and then you move it to a capital project fund to be able to spend on individual projects. But everything always goes back to that receipt reserve so it's available for appropriations. So separate reporting that we have to do with state matters and yeah. Okay. Yes. I want to go back to the two housing and just check my knowledge or memory on this. I also believe the municipal affordable housing trust is holding the money for East street school. And we don't seem to be moving on that because we've run into all kinds of issues about whether it's really. You can do it the way we wanted to the first RFP field. So I just want to check that I'm correct that that money is held by the Amherst municipal house affordable housing trust. One question I have is really on the Valley CVC money and whether any of that money could be used for first time home buyers who are now in mortgage trouble because of job loss. Yeah, that's an interesting. It's an interesting question. I mean I guess I don't know. I'm going to go to beyond CPAs jurisdiction to your first point about the East street school. The original idea behind the trust being able to bank a certain amount of money was that if a project like the East street school came up, or the East street school in itself, that we would be able to jump on on at that time we were under the town meeting framework where you know CPA was really limited on when we could act. And it was a way to anticipate either that probe that project East street school or something like it should something come up. But the one is it's been allocated to the trust side believe that it stays with the trust until spent and if it's not going to be spent. It's going to stay with the affordable housing trust. Right. Now, I think one of the, you know, if we go to this model of it in three years if something isn't spent. You know we have the option of asking for that money to be returned unless another arrangement is made. You know, with the trust's money, although it has that's a fairly specific purpose, you know to hold on to that money for leveraging which could potentially go beyond the three year or arbitrary three year time frame. The reason I'm asking this because it really is, you know, it's just sitting there. We don't seem to be able to move on that building and get more money was needed. Needed for rent subsidy. That would be another source. Absolutely. It is something that the The Is there no other questions on housing that I wanted to let me go on to the next section, which is the historic preservation grant. We have four historical preservation items. One is with the North Amherst community farm window restoration and this is a pretty small grant of $4,500. It's the final piece of a three year project to completely restore the exterior of the farm building at the North Amherst community farm. This is a building that was originally in the Dickinson family. It's a pretty central part of North Amherst. It's been in terrible shape used to house people to work on the farm. This is one of the founding sources for the entire restoration project that we were involved in the exterior, which meant clabbards that meant largely clabbards that meant Replacing the windows with historic windows. And this last part is for the remaining window work and replacement of the window sashes. This is the I want to follow the list here need to update the historic resource inventory. This is $25,000. This is something we haven't done in a long time I think since 1988 and it's a historic resource inventory of buildings. This is something that's a pretty important part of the work of the town being able to understand its own inventory of historic structures. And we're way overdue in this most towns do this and you know they don't wait 20 years to do these plans so we haven't done this in a long time that's a $25,000 grant. This is a $50,000 grant for the West Cemetery headstone restoration. This is again I think the third year we've invested in the West Cemetery which is a pretty remarkable resource for Amherst in historical resource and there are still kind of getting through area by area to replace some of these headstones that are have either fallen down or cracked have been pushed down or are on the verge of collapse of some safety issues there but it's really about really honoring this historical resource and keeping it in nearly top condition. I think this is the third year in a row, we've invested in the West Cemetery. And then, I guess, I guess those are the three. Yeah, I was including the library also before. We'll come back to the library before we adjourn but I'm trying to keep the ones we're going to vote on in June 15 separate but we will get back to the library. So the remainder you would be putting into reserve that is for historic reserve for historic preservation grants and just so everybody knows that because we're required to spend a certain proportion on each category. If there's leftover it has to go into reserve that's for that category. Dave Zomac, I saw you've had to hand up for a little bit. Sorry, Andy, I was going to make a comment about affordable housing, but I think we've moved on so I'm fine. Okay. You'd be welcome to come back to it and Dorothy, you had your hand up for a minute, but I see it's no longer there. No, no, it's still there. It's still there. Hold on. I can't find. Okay, well, go ahead. I wanted to ask about the Civil War stones in the detailed report. A sum of money was given. And I just in I came into one of your meetings late and I know they're in storage somewhere and I don't know whether you're paying a lot of money for the storage, or whether there is testing going on in the stones now to decide how much money is needed to restore them or whether you're doing planning to get some money to bring them back to the town green or near the town hall. They just want an update of what's happening with the Civil War stones. I thought they were in the budget but now it sounds like they're not in the budget so but there was some some of money in the longer report. I'll pass this along to Dave Zomac. Okay. Thanks for your question, Dorothy. Yeah, and I think a lot of people are asking a given recent a newspaper article so the Civil War tablets are actually completely restored. That money was spent a number of years ago. And so they are in storage. They are not costing us anything to store they are professionally created, having been professionally restored to very high standards. They looked for a number of years for the appropriate to display them. They weigh, I'm going to say they range anywhere from 500 to maybe 800 pounds a piece. They're five to six, seven feet long by three or four feet wide. They are, despite their weight and their size, they are actually quite vulnerable to the elements. So they cannot be, they cannot be displayed outdoors without extensive protection from the weather water heat and UV. For years we've been looking for a site to to display them for of course for their historical significance. So I think that search continues. We have had some pretty extensive designs to try to to try to display them outside and those were either deemed infeasible or cost prohibitive. So we've looked at buildings indoor space like the town hall which impossible to to display them here. We've looked informally at the library. We've looked at existing space plus the potential renovated spaces. And then we've considered places like the school schools, the elementary and high school and middle school so that's kind of where we are. I think we'd all love to display them but they are priceless artifacts and need to be treated as such. So we've got to find the right place at the right time for the right budget so you may see a proposal coming from the FDA in the future once we've determined a potential space for those. Okay, thank you. Okay. There's nothing else and you could go ahead and just speak to open space. Well, I do see Shalini with her hand up so I'm going to pause and then Shalini. Yeah, thank you just have a quick question is the percentage in which according to which the funds are distributed what's in the list here the 50% for community 10% 6% is that the ratio in which money is distributed. Well, we don't you know in any given year we get different types of proposals, but we for if you leave recreation out of it for historical preservation open space and housing we have to designate at least 10% of our funds. Recreation we could spend nothing if we didn't want to. We don't in any given year we don't say we want to spend 25% on each proposal because it different years you get different proposals so we try hope to average over the course of a number of years. But I saw a report this year I think over the last 10 years. We had spent significantly more money on affordable housing than the other three categories but the other three categories were fairly similar. Is that is that kind of what you were asking. Yes. Yeah. I was going to say if you want to just speak to open space and recreation, you could do the four together. Okay. So, we don't have any proposed land purchases this year for the first time in a while. But we do have a $25,000 appropriation for trail maintenance and access. If you spend any time on the trails system in Amherst it's a pretty remarkable resource for the town. That's a little rough around the edges you got some bridges that need repair we need some kiosks and places that we don't have them that are signage parking areas things like that and this is the beginning. We hope will be a multi year effort with CPA to begin the process of really investing in the infrastructure in our trails and open space. So, and it's important to say that any CPA money designated for trail maintenance and access can only be used on properties purchased through CPA funds. So that's a $25,000 appropriation. We also have a $25,000 appropriation for surveys appraisals and studies. This is a fairly regular proposal that we get from the town. This money isn't always spent but it needs to be on hand and needs to be available if an open space opportunity arises. There's a lot of preparation that needs to go into to that proposal surveying land getting appraisals. And this allows the town I think to be a little more nimble in getting those getting those jobs done prior to potentially proposing the purchase of some open space land and we've done this. A couple a number of times since I've been on the committee on terms of recreation. A very similar type of proposal to what I just said, which we haven't done in a while at all as far as I know, is recreation pre development funds and this is to address the same sort of issue you know one of the things I think that came up with the Kendrick Park playground is, we suddenly had the opportunity to get this grant and we had to jump through a lot of hoops pretty quickly to make that happen and we did. But again, as we think about investments in recreation. We want to be a little more nimble in terms of being able to prepare for kind of pre designed site work appraisals that sort of thing, but dedicated to recreation specifically not purchase of open space land. And finally there's $150,000 $500 appropriation to continue the engineering and design into the reconstruction of the high school track. This is part of a multi town CPA. Gathering of monies for the, for the high school track which is woefully in disrepair on it really almost unusable. And it would be to get ready to sort of designed to kind of move the direction of where the track is and and begin the process of getting that whole process moving. And those are the four open space and recreation proposals. Thank you. And a couple questions about the high school track. I believe that it is not the town's land, it is regional land. And so one question is, and what does the, I guess the deed restriction or whatever look like on something like in the past for historic preservation we've had deed restrictions on stuffs, but I don't know what that looks like on say recreation project that we as a town do not actually own. And then my other question related to that is and I'm hoping you know the answer to this have the other three towns, also appropriated CPA monies for this project. David, would you like to talk about the deed restriction do you know the answer to that question. It's a really good question. And to be honest, you know this funding. So, when we're doing architectural work landscape architect work, or any kind of pre development work that doesn't, to my knowledge doesn't require any kind of deed restriction. And that's what this money is for is really to further the study CPA invested, I'm going to say about $50,000 to do the initial study of community field and, and the high school fields, and we share that expense with the region. And likewise, this is a step further. If we were go if we were to go to invest construction money in a permanent facility, say a track and or a, you know, a multipurpose field there. And that's where we'd have to explore. Would that would that property have to have a permanent restriction on it or open space or active or passive recreation. We've been talking to town council about it since we're not at that point. And we know that it's a pretty big nut to crack there if we go the full route. We haven't fully investigated that yet. But I think this is pre development work for the further study of the feasibility of that. That's, that's what I know. Does anyone know the answer to whether the other towns have also recommended CPA funds for this. John Mangana was on this zoom. So he might know the answer to that. I was trying to hide over on the side, but caught me. We submitted requests to each of them. I don't know if they've approved them yet. I can find out the answer to that from Doug slaughter, but we did submit requests all the other committees to for their share of the design work. Right now they're struggling just to figure out where they can have a town meeting safely. Exactly. Andy. Yes. I was going to mention they can't approve it till they have their town meetings. But the way this is listed, it says high school track and field replacement. So it makes it seem like we're already in the process of doing the replacement versus. Looking into it. I don't know why that, particularly because of how David has described the issue of who owns the land. Do you want me to speak to that one. Yeah, go ahead. I mean, if it's the same as I remember when I was there, it is to take the sort of high level master plan type document that we, we received from the prior. And to turn that into more of a schematic design so we can, we wanted to get more accurate cost estimates. You may remember the last time we got the high level design, the cost estimates were somewhere between three to four to $6 million. And we wanted to get much more detail on what that cost would be. So it's to convert sort of high level design work and to, you know, the beginnings of a true schematic design. I would like to make sure that the actual states that. I was just thinking Lynn's point I think is that maybe after the word replacement, it says replacement design. You know, or replacement studies so we're not physically replacing the track right now we're doing the engineering study where it needs one more word in the financial order. Yeah, it's pretty clear in the paragraph the paragraph says continue design and engineering work to replace, not the replacement of the track. Right. We can have our staff consider whether they can add one word to the word draft is removed from it. Sort of substitution drop draft and add one more word elsewhere. Anything else in the way of questions about either open space and recreation. At this point. That's handed. Oh, Pat. Just trying to clarify for myself. The current 157,500 would be our share of what it costs to do this turn things into a schematic design. But would we go ahead if we did not receive funding from the other towns in the region. I don't know if Sean wants to comment on that. Yeah, I can't, I mean, I can't speak for the region it is meant to be the Amherst town share because when we were looking at this we thought we needed about $200,000 keep moving the design work forward. So this was roughly the 80% or so of that amount and then we requested the balance from the other towns. If we if the other towns do not approve it, we can still go or the region could still go forward with starting some of the design work. That would be the conversation with the region. So that just brings me back to how much more money do we want to invest until we clarify. How we own this or what we're investing in. And then the other question is if we felt we needed the other towns to put their money in, we may want to hold this one off until we get the results of town meetings. Yeah. So part of the conversation around why this was requested was because there was a lot of urgency at the time to keep the design work moving forward. As Nate mentioned, the trap wasn't, isn't pretty bad shape. And we didn't want to lose momentum or progress from the prior report that you know started, I think almost two years ago. So I believe that's why the region kept this request moving forward is because there is some sort of sense of urgency to get the trap replaced in the near future. Kathy and then I see a member of the public Sarah. So why don't we start with Kathy. Um, so I'm wondering if, well, it's a two part question one, if the, if the answer is we could do something with a 157 500, which is its own odd little number, because it's a 200,000. So we would still want to spend that if we would want to make it contingent on the other towns, can we ask for it contingent on them. And then my other the other part of it is when I was at the presentation by Doug Slaughter to the CPA. I didn't have an exact amount, but he said, this is far less than you need for design and engineering study. It's like the beginning of it. Because people, the actual proposal just Xerox the pages from the Western design, which was 4 million to $6 million. So people were saying exactly where does this fit in that giant proposal but whether we're like a down payment on it where we're paying half of it or half of it can be done. So, so Lynn, your question on, can this move forward, my sense was it wasn't even all the money we needed but I don't know whether it was for a corner of the field or for part of it. So some sense of how far would we would get if we spend this money over the next 12 months. Sarah, do you have anything to add Sarah Marshall is also a member of the CPA committee and she's asked to be recognized Sarah. Hi, thank you Andy. I would just add to what Kathy said, in response to Lynn suggestion or wondering whether we amers should wait on voting this funding. Other towns, if they only have one town meeting a year that's their one shot to award money that their CPA committees hopefully are recommending. And it would be pretty depressing. I think if Amherst had kicked the ball on it. So, given that we would bear the lion's share of the cost. I would hope that we would throw our, you know, throw our hat in the ring and say we'll do it, and if the other towns don't come on board well, the region may decide not to move forward. That's all thank you. David. Yeah, thank you. I guess I wanted to just echo what Sarah said and also what Sean did and kind of put up an exclamation point on that I just. This is such an urgent project for all of us for the region for all of our athletes. I don't see any downside and and I fully support, you know, all the work that has gone before this and part of a lot of it to at least vote this. The money's not going to go anywhere if we don't have a critical mass of funds to move the study forward, it won't happen. I mean, Sean will be involved in that I'll be involved in that. Mike Morris and Doug Slaughter so we're not going to move forward unless we have a critical mass of funds to get us to a next step defining that next step today is probably not possible. I do know as an example. There the tan brook goes under the fields west of the high school. So part of this money was to really look at the time. Improving those fields with the tan brook culverted under the field so we have some work to do. I just want to say that, you know, I think gamers should lead on this. Again, we're, you know, I don't think this money is going to be to be ill spent, unless there's tangible steps that we can take toward a full design so I think the urgency is there if we wait, and then the other towns box somehow, and we've lost yet another period of time that could be another year and the track is unusable pretty much as it is so those are my thoughts. Okay. When people talk about this and they raise this to me, their question is, why is it so outrageously expensive. And why does it cost that much money for studies that doesn't don't even include dirt or machines to move the dirt. I mean, people played on fields. I played on fields. I mean if the field is a mess, then get a new field go somewhere else and start with a better place and the idea that you spend all this money just on studies. I understand it, and I can't explain it to people so maybe you can explain it to me. I see Sean's hand. So, you know, the way I interpreted this project when we were putting it forward is that it's not meant to be a study it's really meant to be the beginning of the design work for a new track and field. The reason it's so expensive is a you probably heard about the other fields at the region or not in great shape either. And so this project is looking at whether we can do something like artificial turf or some other type of synthetic surface. It's looking at turning the track and field. The creation system and things like that for the field. It's, you know, this was a comprehensive study that we already did. We have to study pieces already been done to really improve all of the fields of the region because you probably recall a couple years ago or maybe it's just last year, where the fields, you know, were inflatable at one point and that wasn't even the tracking field those the other fields. You know, lack of water or overuse. So this project is really meant to be the keystone of, you know, one strategy for getting the fields to be more usable all year round. And it's the biggest chunk. It's part of a larger plan, but it is the bigger chunk. And so this money would be the beginning design work so it would get us a certain it allows to keep moving the design forward and then a certain point you have to come back and request more money for the rest of the design work. Andy. Yes. Do not take any of my comments and questions regarding this project is anything other than full support for it. In fact, the fact that Amherst is paying more than other towns is fine with me, it is literally inside the borders of our town and used by our citizens as well as the and the teams. I'm just trying to get straight about, you know, who owns this, the other money necessary, and how much more is going to be spent on design before we can actually do it. What can be what what can we be anticipating down the road. Can you hear me. Okay. Yes. So, so the typically design costs and some of those soft costs are, you know, I mean it's evolving as things go forward but somewhere between five and 15% of the construction costs. So, you know, we sometimes use 10% as our rule of thumb. So if the project, you know, they get to the detail of that four to $6 million estimate and find out what the construction cost is and then and then pull out the design I think I think in that budget they did estimated design to in there so we can get you the exact number around the design portion. Anything else on the proposals that we've heard today. There's another thing left and I'll just said and you can add. There's $10,000 it's proposed every year for administrative expenses having to do with the CPA program, including membership in the coalition statewide coalition of CPA programs. And that's been standard in every year's CPA budget. And that's been done over time. So, is there anything to add to that Nate. No, it's standard costs, dues to the coalition legal notices in the newspaper or that sort of thing. Then those are the things that we're going to be voting on on June 15 is a council and the two committees will be asked if they have recommendations on those on the proposals that are recommended on this list. There's one additional proposal that is not on this list as I explained at the beginning of the meeting. But I wanted to give Nate an opportunity or Sarah to say anything that they want to on behalf of the committee about the Jones library proposal. And if not, then there's no members of the public attending at this point. We're not members of committee other than Sarah and Nate and they're both now in the meeting themselves. So treat this as also the opportunity for any other public comment from either of them about the issues in general. But Nate, is there anything you wanted to say about the library. I just, I mean, I think I can just explain a little bit the kind of awkwardness of where we are with this proposal. I don't know how widely circulated the, the, the statement has been that that Dianna Stein and Michael Burt whistle and I wrote in opposition to a proposal that we all had voted for a couple of months ago. Just to give a sense of how that happened when we evaluate CPA proposals. We immediately dispatch the ones that have no support, put them aside. We take the ones that have almost universal support in the committee and we put them up on the board. And then we begin to have more detailed discussions on proposals where there's kind of some split opinions or people aren't sure. And as we approve them, we put them up on the board and then at the end of the process, if we have enough money, we vote on the entire slate. We got interrupted because of the COVID-19 crisis before we were able to do that last step. But the library proposal was one of the first ones that we looked at and as we evaluated it, I think it was seven to zero to one in favor. After that, when we passed it, a couple of us began to get kind of cold feet about it and started doing a little research on whether it really was an historical preservation project. And as we got more information, the more concerned we became so at the, in our last, we didn't know it was going to be our last meeting. A good presentation to basically say we really think we need to pull back on this Jones library proposal for a couple of reasons that I think are outlined in that paper that we submitted. It was hard to figure out a title for that document without impugning that there's some sort of schism on the committee. There's not. It's just, it's very awkward timing in the sense that we, I can't, we can't communicate anymore our concerns to the rest of the committee as a violation of open meeting law. And the reason that we titled that a dissent or disagreement was because we had originally voted for it. And we assume that the three of us are holding a minority position. I don't know if it's just the three of us are the outliers, and the other six people on the committee are all going home for the proposal. I just don't know. But we felt strong enough about it that we really wanted to keep the conversation going. I think our preference would have been to continue meeting and I probably would have moved to reject the Jones proposal made my argument, had someone make a counter argument and vote done with it, but we weren't we weren't able to do that. So, hopefully, you know, we, given this, this delay, we will get the chance to meet and, and hopefully as a committee and we work very, very well together. Close it out one way or the other. Sarah, see your hand up. Yeah, I would just add to that that at our March 5, I think it was meeting the last time we met and we discussed this at length. My takeaway was that we were as a committee was hoping to get more information. We already had an opinion from the town's attorney that supported the CPA that the appropriateness of the proposal. But then we had some other opinions, other information that was counter to that. So we were hoping to go right to the commissioner of revenue, I think, who of the for the Commonwealth who oversees the program and try to get a definitive answer. And we were never able to do that. And that's what I recall was going to be our next step. We had discussed it internally. I think as, as much as we could, we needed more information to help us decide one way or another. And we didn't get there. I should say that we reference in our letter that Diana Stein had had a conversation with someone at DOR. We went then went to the town manager to try to really engage a conversation with him in the room and, and I think he made a really good faith effort to make that happen. But then all hell broke loose. The end of that week with COVID-19 and we just, we just couldn't get it done. But as Sarah says, that would be a definitive conversation. If we could, if we could have that. Yeah. I see two other people on the committee who've asked to be recognized. I'm going to get to them the second I just, I thank you both for your comments from the committee. And as I said earlier, it was regrettable that this whole COVID crisis has come up and affected us in the way that it did in the IT couldn't support committee meetings initially, creating this time bind. When you and I talked earlier Nate, I sort of felt because it's not going to be acted on one way or the other by the council. Soon I wanted to concentrate today on what the council was is going to act on in June. And that doesn't mean that gives the committee time to come back and have further conversations is if it wishes to do so. So, but I'm sorry that it happened in the way that did. Steve driver. So, from what I hear from the way that Nate was describing that that there was almost unanimous, maybe one dissent vote that the library project had support. And then it's really almost like a theoretical question as to whether or not it's historic preservation. Well, since I read the couple men. I'm sorry the town attorney's letter, but from what I remember from that is that yes that the town can determine that this is historic preservation. So, I guess I have a little bit of a problem arguing. I think that determining whether or not this is in the proper bucket. I don't know that's that I would defer to the town attorney, we can keep asking questions and get the answer that we want. But typically the town relies on what its attorneys are and I have personally I have a lot of problem with any of us going rogue and trying to ask people that we know that happened to be in the state house or where it is. Anywhere else, you know, fishing for other answers because normally we rely on the town attorney. Well, we went to the coalition before the town went to the attorney. So we didn't we weren't we weren't going at a fishing expedition we were trying to get information in because we're a member of the coalition and the coalition is really the kind of clearinghouse for information for CPA committees. And like that was a good way to go. I think the reaching out to the attorney was the town's decision after they saw the letter from the coalition. Do they declare that it is the opinion, the minority statement from the three members Nate and two other members of the committee CPA committee has been circulated to all members of the council, not just this group. If you have a chance to look at it, believe it was in your packet though. And yeah, Nate and then I we have two other members of the committee who has to be recognized. I just, I guess I'm a little put off by this implication that would come some of us on the committee have gone rogue. What we're trying to do in our approach to this project is to what we think is honoring the spirit of the CPA. And honoring the interests of Amherst taxpayers. We're trying to play this by the rules cleanly with total integrity. We've kept everybody informed. You know, we're trying to do the right thing here we're not trying to go rogue. I just want to be really clear about that this is this is a committee that I think is still acting as one that wants to come to the right conclusion on this issue. The only reason this is appearing the way it is, is because we can't talk to each other. So I just want to be clear about that. And if I may I apologize for the implication of going rogue. Thanks, Dorothy, you have something. Yes, I do. Well I was reading this over this just before the meeting started. And I certainly got the case that one of the problems with CPA money is that many towns. They use it to substitute for other town money when they need to do that, and that it's not to be used to subsidize buildings, but to for historic objects and I believe you said in the report that there were no actually historic objects mentioned. I mean I can certainly see that something that one has to guard and protect against so I was thinking am I going to have to vote on this because I found a lot in the minority report to be persuasive. And I'm not sure what Lynn announced at the beginning was a good solution. We don't have to deal with this now. So we're not going to vote in it now we're going to vote on the other issues. And, you know, the way we'll become clear as we go forward. So, but I do appreciate the minority report because I think it brought up brought up a major issue for CPA funds everywhere. How towns use the money do they use it to plug their own holes, or for actually, what's in the law. Can you respond to that but I think I'm going to ask Kathy first to, because she had her hand up. Yeah, I just, I just want to I did think the minority report was excellent was very helpful. And one of the issues that Nate just emphasize was coming back together and this discussion with the Department of Revenue, because the the spirit of conservation, there's, there would have been no question, as in the past, if we were repairing the roof on the historic Jones building, or the facade of the historic Jones building, I mean, the act is very clear that we could fix the stones or stuff. It was more, can you apply it to a structure that is going to a new structure that's going to house papers of historic interest and trying to get some clarity on that and that's where the discussion was circling around on the level, because the, the Jones project made a decision, why ever they did to not apply for money for the historic part of the building repair. They didn't reply for that they applied for the special collection, a new space for it. So that's where this gray area and trying to honor the spirit of what is historic and get some clarity. I think it's, I think the solution of waiting until you can come back together. And we need to wait anyway as a council because the lack of, we're not sure when the grant will come in and whether we have enough money in the town for our share and everything would have been contingent anyway with this grant was only going to move forward. If the major project move forward it's, it's wrapped up. So I think the timing is great to because we can wait, this could be voted on next year. I mean, in July in August and September I mean it's not a time dependent decision right now. I see another hand up. What I was going to say is just on one other aspect of it, in what Dorothy said, if we have frequently applied the policy when we have looked at buildings and building projects to use other grant sources and other funding sources including CDBG and the Community Preservation Act to help us fund projects. And to the extent that we can do that. It helps us to have funds still available to do a little bit more with other capital needs. A little bit in the JCPC discussion, but it is a part of the December Council budget guidelines. If you go back and about age three, I think it is, and look at the Council budget guidelines from December. That point is made there. And I can think of numerous projects over the years that have been combinations of various pieces of money from sources of which CPA is one of them. That's just the other day looking through a list for other purposes and came back to the town hall amount and the part of the town hall work for the original renovation. I think the clock tower part was done with CPA funds. So you could argue that that could have been funded by other funds, but we have done this historically over time. I think it is a longstanding policy to try and do that. Evan Ross, I see your hands up. Yeah, just two quick comments. So one, I just want to push back on the idea that this is not. Just because it's contingent on the grant, because I think that a lot of these decisions and investments also show some signaling. And so just as we said that we needed to approve the CPA funding about a year ago for the construction and road project, even though that project wasn't going to be using those funds immediately, in order to show investment for the state. Similarly, every piece we do to shore up this project shows investment, right, and it signals to donor, they may have an ambitious fundraising goal. And so all of these pieces play into that and so it's, to me, it's, it's actually not something where we can say, and we don't even know when we're going to get the grant or accept the grant anyway we can wait, because there's a lot of moving pieces to this and I don't think we can take it out of that broader context. And then the second thing is, you know, I think that the struggle that we're facing is we asked, we, the CPA committee asked for two opinions one, or collectively two opinions were received that are in conflict. And, and you could ask for five other opinions from different entities and they might still be in conflict and at some point you have to just decide what you're going to do with that. But at the end of the day, to me our town attorney opinion is the one that that should prevail. And if there was interest in the CPAC committee to fund this project which there was it was a 701 vote. And we have, if we have the town attorney opinion that gives us the cover to move forward with it and there's interest. I'm not sure why we want to keep soliciting opinion after opinion we have we have a legal opinion that says we can do it. We clearly want to this committee wanted to do it. I want, I hope that too much time isn't spent going back and forth on this. If this is something the committee actually wants to see happen. So, if there's nothing else is we're not really going to be dealing with the library right now and I want to let the two committees continue their meetings. And if there's no objection and I'm going to, and I'm really looking for raised hands to see if there's objection, then what we're going to do is I'm going to ask a manager to take over for a moment and to recess her committee and give me some questions as to how people can continue to participate in that committee meeting. And I'm going to, during that period of time, treat the finance committees and recess though we will, as soon as Mandy has finished that continue with the finance committee meeting so Mandy to your show. Thank you Andy. At this time, I'm going to recess. This is 322pm. I'm going to call about a five minute recess of the CRC. We will reconvene as soon as possible in the virtual meeting link for part two. So each of our committee members have received two virtual meeting links, we are going to head to part two link which is just the CRC meeting link at this time. So at this time, there were two meeting links on the CRC agenda. If you wish to follow us to the continuation of this community resources committee meeting, you will now move to the part two link, which was the second link on the agenda. And that is how you can join us there. So at this time, 322pm, we are in recess until we can reconvene in a new meeting. So it is now 358pm, and I am reconvening the community resources committee to order after a break a slightly longer than we thought we ran into some technical issues but we do have a quorum present I will just go through again to make sure everyone can hear us. And then I will quickly run through what the agenda is going to look like since we are close to end of time. So Evan. Yep. Steve. Yep. He responded. Shalini. Yes. And Sarah. Yes. And Sarah is with us now she has joined. I'm so sorry. I am so sorry. So sorry. She thought we were like spamming some doctor's office or something. I was like, who are you? Yeah, I'm so sorry. But we are here. We are going to continue our committee discussion on the community preservation act commission committees recommendations. After that we will be not taking any action on noise bylaw today or presentation and discussion items or minutes or announcements or next agenda meeting preview or items not anticipated we will do CPA we will do general public comment if we have any, and then we will adjourn. If at that time as long as we can keep a quorum. So, we are into our committee's discussion we are here to talk about a maker recommendation on the CPA proposals that are not seeking borrowing. And I hope we can base our discussion on whether the proposals are in line with town policies for housing recreation there's master plan there's open space and recreation plans there's community field plans there's preservation plans all of that. We are the committee that looks at sort of the master plan and the town's overall arching policies and plans. And I think that's the view that's my hope is that that's the view we take in this discussion as to whether we believe these projects fall into those lines in terms of getting to a recommendation. Does anyone want to begin this conversation at this time, or have any other questions for Nate. Shalini. Oh, I was wondering if how the CPA budget has changed because of COVID. It just in my mind it seemed like housing fields more urgent than gravestones, but then that's just me and I'm just trying to make sense of it. Well, I mean, one of the changes potentially is the match is going to be a little smaller but Sonya I think it's predicting an 11% match. I don't know David maybe you have updated information, as opposed to what we expected which is a 14%. That's a huge change. We ended deliberations at the beginning of this so we really never got into a discussion of, you know, given current conditions should we rethink how we're utilizing our budget could be different next year I don't know. Dave. Nate, I thought I heard Sonya say 11.2%. Yeah, other people heard that. Yeah, was conservative at 11 it actually came in 11.2. But you know Shalini, you raise a great, a good question I think when we were talking about. I think Evan brought up kind of the money that the trust already has and the new request and they use some of that money for housing assistance, should that be replenished I think that's an interesting I that's why I almost chimed in on that, that a little bit. I guess my thought on that is that by having a council, one of the true advantages of having a council versus town meeting is that you all can be a much more responsive form of government right. So, in, you know, when we were in the, in the previous form of government, it was kind of a once a year cycle and if you miss that year. You know you had to wait a year to come back to CPA but my, my thought is, you know, see how the trust does see what the demand is for the, the rental assistance. And we, you know, we could, we collectively could come back to that the housing trust will, I'm sure report to the council how is it going what's the demand like what's the draw on the, the assistance program, and they might come back to you in the fall and said it's, it's worse than we thought we need to dip into more of the money we're already holding or we need to have you all consider another allocation of funds. So, you know, I think, you know, you all can be as responsive as, as your, as our form of government allows you to be, which, which I think is pretty responsive, compared to town meeting so that's kind of my take. Oh, I also wanted to add that with the exception of 132 Northampton Road. There isn't anything really and I don't want to speak for john and the trust but you know I work with them Nate Maloy my staff member, you know attends all their there isn't a project other than 132 Northampton Road that is pressing on capital funds right now. So, we're looking at East Street School. I'm not sure who mentioned it whether it was Nate or somebody else. East Street School is for nobody's fault, no real issues other than it's a very small site. I've had a lot of complications with the old school and wetlands is turning out to be not as feasible as we first thought and I think john if john Hornaker on this call he'd agree with me. So, we may give it away from East Street School. And that hasn't been fully determined. So I guess my point is, other than 132. There isn't an immediate need for capital funds for affordable housing. So, I think we have a little bit of time here to figure out the rental assistance demand, and then what's the next project coming down the list. You know 132 does 132 Northampton Road need more funding. Okay, Mike. Steve. Yes, because I think Shalini asked a very good question about how our perceptions will change regarding any budget item, but to the credit of the C, the CPA Committee, I think that all of these are important in a post covert world like the recreation. So I think that's the site of the record, you know, the community fields near the high school and I've never seen them more used than I have in the last, you know, three months by by and the school's not even been in session about by community members. And then the library as controversial as that part of the proposal may be the library is essential in my opinion in a post covert world. So let's get as closer to a goalpost of a, you know, a library that can be accessible, more than it has been in the last three months, and I think that would be a terrific thing. Hey, I just wanted to acknowledge with Steve said it totally agree because my first thing was like housing and rent and shelter. But then I was also thinking like trails. Oh yeah, we do actually want to make sure that our trails are maintained because people need to be outdoors and have that and kids need to be outdoors and that those are the safe places now actually is outdoors. So we want to make sure that we keep using our funds for those activities and the library and all of these. So yeah, thank you for bringing that up. Any other thoughts, questions. Thinking about master plan or anything as it relates to these, I guess, four categories and then the projects in general. I don't see in any hands from anyone. I do just want to confirm with Dave, you know that we have a community fields plan and the track and field would complies with that plan I assume. I haven't read the community fields plan in a while but I, it seems like this one was just moving that actual plan forward is that accurate Dave. In my comments earlier I referenced we did do some preliminary work on field conditions kind of baseline work what were our best fields most important fields most utilized fields and clearly that core around the high school middle school and community field. They make all the sense in the world that's where our investment should be. So, it's interesting, you know, I've been involved in this project for probably eight years. And eight years ago I thought we should really invest in the fields that say graph park. And I was convinced after working with this team of volunteers that represented, you know, LSSE and the schools and sports teams and whatnot. And we had a really diverse group I was convinced that investing in the fields that mark doesn't make sense if we're going to spend money. The best place to spend it is community field, the high school and the middle school field for a lot of reasons, but that is our core set of fields. And from a financial standpoint, a logistic standpoint, even an environmental standpoint, that's where children and families, you know between Wildwood, the middle school and the high school think, you know, if you have kids in the in the middle school or the regional system, you spend so many days, so many car hours, so many trips to those fields, and it makes all the sense in the world to invest in those. And sure, put a spray park at a graph park, but we don't need to put a term field at graph park as an example or Stanley Street, because we really need to invest in those fields there. Also the turf issue, as Nate indicated earlier, you know, we were not there yet but the recommendation was for a turf field which can be used nine, 10 months a year, and doesn't need to be mowed, no chemicals, no fertilizer, etc. So, we're not there yet I know, we got some big hurdles to get through and design first. Mandy, I will put a note to myself. I do want to revisit because it's been a long time since I talked to our town council about the issue you brought up or the question you brought up about investing CPA dollars in regional assets. I know we can do it, and I know that week as we answered those questions, many months ago, maybe a couple of years ago, other towns have done it. When you think about the regional assessment, and somebody else can correct me on this if I'm wrong but I'm quite sure that Amherst is 80% of the regional assessment so we pay 80% of the operating 80% of the capital. You know, when Sean Mangana was referencing how did they come up with 157,000. I'm quite sure that there was a, there was a consistency there in terms of the breakdown of, I think they thought this second phase of moving toward a schematic design would be about $250,000. So, I'm pretty sure that's how they came up with 157 and change. But anyway, I'll ask our town council, and I'll pull out some old emails on that because I know that those questions are going to keep coming up and they should and we should be able to answer them, you know, very quickly, and in the future. Thank you, Dave. I'm not seeing any other hands. That means I think I'm going to propose a motion if people think we might be ready to make a recommendation I'm seeing nods of the head on that. So the motion I'm going to propose I had one drafted but I forgot there was an actual appropriation and transfer order. The motion I'm going to propose is that I move that the CRC recommend the town council, I guess, approve the appropriation and transfer order FY 21-07 an order appropriating the FY 21 Community Preservation Act budget. Second. Steve seconds that is there any additional conversation. Anything you guys would like me to put in a report to the council. Beyond what has already been said, Evan. This isn't beyond what's already been said, but I just would like to make sure the report highlights the possibility that they go back and do a supplemental appropriation, should it become something because because that was my big question coming in today and it's been answered and so just I'm assuming it's my question other people have that question so just making sure that's in the report. Will do. Anything else. Seeing none, I will go to a roll call vote of this. We'll start with Steve. Yes. Shawnee. Yes, Sarah. Yes, Evan. Yes. And Mandy is a yes that is a unanimous roll call. A unanimous vote. Oh, sorry for all my typing. And given that we have finished item to a on our agenda. We, as I said, we are skipping to be we will move that to a second, a separate agenda at a later time. General public comment, there are no attendees. I am going to state that I do not believe that that our technical issues affected that given that we had no public at the first part of the meeting where there were no technical issues. We did make sure we did not start the second one until the online calendar was updated with a new address. But we did not have any attendees at the first part of the meeting so I was not expecting to have any at this part either. So no general public comment, no attendees presentation discussion, nothing minutes. We will move to the next meeting. The announcements. I appreciate all of you guys. The next three Wednesdays will be meetings at night. So thank you for that. We will see. I'm going to be looking at everything on the agenda that has been referred to us to see if we actually have to have a meeting on June 16 or whether we can postpone that to July given the fact that we are three Wednesdays in a row. So I will be talking to Dave and Shalini as Vice Chair about that looking at the agenda and all of the priorities and seeing if it's possible for us to maybe skip that given everything else, all the other meetings were doing. I will let you guys know though once I've done that. No items not anticipated by the chair and that means that at 415 p.m. we are going to declare the meeting adjourned. Thank you all for being so patient as we went through the technical issues. We did it and we got the one vote we needed to done today done and thank you Nate for showing up to this meeting and sitting through all those technical issues to your support we appreciate it a lot. Thank you. Bye. Thank you. Bye. Thanks, everybody. Thank you. Athena. And Sean is Sean still on this. Yes, and Sean. Yep. No problem. Have a good one.