 All right it's seven o'clock. We do have a quorum present. It's good. I haven't heard from anybody saying they wouldn't be here so maybe Jim's going to be coming along. That would be good. So I'll open the meeting and ask everybody to identify themselves and representative of either what community you represent or where you live. I'll start off with Donna Bate. I represent Montpelier as an at-large. Doug? Back to Montpelier Rep. Mel? Mel Chambel, Berry City Rep. Kim? Kim Cheney at-large. Justin? Justin Dreschler, Montpelier Rep. Okay and the others present. Dom, you introduced yourself? Dominic Arcuri with Tel Aviv to hear as an interested observer. Joe? Joe Wallsworth, the interim fire chief of City of Berry. And the phone user did- is that Stephen? Can we get a name out of the phone user? Okay. The agenda went out but there are additions to the agenda. Are there any- okay by no objections by unanimous consent? We'll accept the agenda. Public comments? I just want to say I heard Joe's title there. Congratulations, Joe. I hope it's going to be more than just interim. Thank you, Dom. Appreciate it. Yeah, Joe, I'll join in on that. That would be good. Yeah, should we send you letters or recommendations or a cheer? Would that work for you or against you? I think we're good right now. Thank you. Okay. I had attached the minutes of September 8th looking for a motion to approve. So moved. Thank you. And Doug seconded. Are there any additions, edits to those minutes? No, but I'd like to thank Justin for his hard work. Good thorough minutes, Justin. I appreciate it. Thanks. Okay. All those in favor of the minutes say aye or raise your hand. Aye. Aye. Anyone oppose? Great. They passed unanimously. A little bit of a- Donna, sorry. Who seconded that motion? Doug seconded. Now made a motion. Yep. Okay. Thank you. The next item is an update on the Department of Public Safety Authority for the 3.5 million. Joe, you want to talk a little bit about that? I mean, I sent out exactly what Brian Pete sent me, both when the application was submitted and then when he said that they were notified of approval for a 2.444 million and that indeed it was a tentative. It has to go, I believe, to a committee, a legislative committee. Is that right, Joe? Yeah, that's correct. So the update on that is that it's still within the committee. They're discussing nothing has been decided other than the tentative award agreements that went out. But the final agreements that'll be issued is not expected till sometime in December. Okay. Good. Did they give you any more guidelines as to what they would want or need? Which committee was it? I don't remember. I'm sorry to say. I think it was government ops and nothing has been come out yet. Okay. Government ops. Actually, it wasn't government ops. I thought it had different initials. So who do you think it was, Kim? Well, the conditional acceptance was issued by a committee of DPS called the, I don't know, I guess it's, they call it a homeland security group within DPS. And they're the ones that approved the conditional approval that's subject to coming up with a governance plan. And I sent out to all of you that information together with a proposed governance plan, which I sent to the city because it was a city's grant, not ours. And I can talk further about it once we clear up the procedures. I think the, in theory, if the grant had been approved, it would go to the joint fiscal committee for approval towards the end of November. Very much doubt that would happen because it hasn't been approved. It may be approved between now and then if the city complies and comes up with a governance plan. But I very much doubt that'll happen before the end of next month. And the working group, the working group that is supposed to submit a report in December, which is a separate DPS group created by the legislature to monitor grants. I've been going to their meetings and I can say they have no idea how they're going to do this job that was requested by the legislature. And they're all going to mix. It's not decided, but I think the mood of the committee is to ask the legislature for further extension of time and for some funds to hire expert assistants because they don't have that. And it's a mammoth job. They're instructed to figure out how all the regional grants would be governed and how much money they need and what they take. It's just a nightmare. Everybody's different. They're all in different stages. So I don't think any of the grants were approved. So I don't think any of them are going to the Joint Fiscal Committee for funding, at least not in November. And the next chunk of four million or so would theoretically be up for approval or supplement of existing grants, but the so-called working group has to complete its work, which I don't think is going to happen until December. So I think the likelihood of any money coming out of that will be sometime in the middle of next year's legislative session. Okay. So have you been testifying with the committee? The Governor and Ops Committee you talked about, that's the legislative oversight on the grants? Well, Government Ops is not currently involved. That's the Joint Fiscal Committee. Okay. That's what Bill said too, but I guess I heard you talk about another group separate from the Joint Fiscal Committee. It's Joint Fiscal, not physical. And the grant process was the DPS sends out a request an RFP request for a proposal, which is what grants were bid on. And the awards of those grants were sent to a Homeland Security subgroup within DPS. It's appointed by DPS and is mainly composed of DPS staff members. There are some, I think, a couple non-staff members. And they recognize, well, I'm not talked with that group and I've got their minutes, but they're so cryptic they don't tell you anything. They tell you they reached the result, which everybody knows about, which they didn't award anybody any money because nobody complied with eligibility requirements. So near as I can figure, the whole thing is in limbo pending. It's hard to get this straight. The so-called working committee is a group that the legislature set up with a task to do all kinds of things, among other things, survey the whole state and find out what needs there are and how they'll be done and how different regional areas fund communications. And it's a nightmare and there's very little data. Nobody keeps their call data the same way. Some people, it's just a nightmare. Yeah, I mean, we know this between Barry and Montague. They don't keep the data the same way. So a couple of things, Kim. One is what my conversation with Bill Fraser has been a bit different. He has been in touch with the Joint Committee and but I don't want to quote Bill. It's like it's not my burden to carry, but I would like to know if the board wants to discuss your interest in governance or not. And if they do allow some time for it and if they don't, then I suggest we move on. So Benjamin. Ben says he's on it. Who just joined us. We're hearing conversation. Were you watching with Ben German? Donna, you should be able to mute him. Donna, if you can control it, you should be able to mute him if you control the meeting. There you go. Yeah, that doesn't come up on me. Thank you for reminding me. I was sort of interested who they were. Anyway, back to with the board like to discuss the governance plan that Kim has sent out and is proposing to both to the city and the working group around the application for this equipment. Well, Donna, before we get to that, our own budget, I think, is part of that discussion because. Our budget comes next, Kim. Yeah, well, they go together. So if you want to wait till then, we can talk. No. Well, one is there any other questions directly about the application? I think kudos, thanks to everyone who contributed, which we talked about before. And then I'm back to Kim brought up the governance. Does anyone want to discuss the plan he distributed? Well, what I'd like to say is the very first grant that Dominic and I'm getting bad with names. Rick wrote so, emphasized that we needed a governance plan. And then when the state came through, they only gave you a month to do a governance plan, which I think was crazy. There's no way to do a decent governance program in a month. And I hate to say it, but I will. I proved right when early September I forecast that this would happen. So governance, whether it's a city or our budget, is very much in play and has to be resolved before any money is going to flow around. All right, I'm still going to put it back to the board. We're going to spend any more time talking about governance. If there's no interest, then we're moving on to the next agenda item. And I don't see any hands. Okay. Yes, Doug, quite. Yeah, unmute. It's, yeah, we'll wait. I'd like to hear from Chief Halsworth as to his take on what the award was issued, what his conditions are, and what do they feel is needed as far as governance and does the public safety authority have enrolling? So right now, there has nothing been officially released to for guidance. There was some preliminary discussion about certain proposals that did not have any governance that was referenced. And I believe that was a general disclosure to those folks that did not have a governance model set up. In talking with Dom and Rick, we do have a current governance model that's been in effect for 20 years with the current contracts. We felt that that held the weight of what we currently have. So I will tell you that Capital Fire does not have any interest in entering any discussion with CBPSA on any government's discussions. Nice job. And that sort of mirrors what Bill said, too. They feel governance was a much bigger issue with other applications. And also because of input brought in from other people that highlighted that they highlighted governance. But they thought it was able to deal with it when they talked directly with the Department of Public Safety and the Joint Committee. Which committee are you talking about, Donna? The Joint Committee of the legislators. The Joint Fiscal Committee. Yes, it's one of those words I never say right, so I just avoid it, Kim. Well, yeah. It hasn't had a meeting that you can discuss it with. It may have been off the table somewhere. I'm not going to debate what I was told. I'm just sharing it. That's all. That's all. Okay. I will share that I had a brief conversation with Chief Pete. And he said whatever we do about this has got to be regional. And there's various ways to cut that pie. And what we have now is not a regional governance in that application, no matter how you look at it. Okay. I'm going to go back to point of order. I don't see any other interest on discussing governance at this time. So I'm going to move on to the next agenda item, which is the discussion of the 2023 projects, budget and ballot items. I was going to try to share my screen if people want to look at the 2023, 24, 25 budgets. And then we need to look ahead to 2026. We have to do a three years at a time. So I can't see how it appears to you all. Is it full screen or yeah, okay. So the year to date in 23 compared to what we put in our budget, obviously I made some error there. I got a $3 balance on the proposed budget, but at one point it didn't have that. And so as you know, we carried out in idealistic mode that we were going to go after consistently a certain amount of money. At that time, Barry Montpelier in Capital West don't know that it had any basis in reality, but it was a budget that the board decided on. I will be sending this out and we can certainly have people look at it between now and November. It would be helpful to have a discussion around what are the viable projects. And indeed, I must bring on the 23 year to date column that says $37,058. That matches our bank statement that Chris sent me just recently. At the end of September, that was our balance. And unfortunately, Chris is changing jobs. She's leaving Montpelier City Employment. So she'll, she sent me everything she has electronically. I will pick up physically what she has in paper. I put an inquiry into Kelly who was ahead of financing, who is now the Assistant City Manager, if indeed they could allow another staff member to do what Chris has done for us. But that's an unknown right now. But at least that's where we are. We have $37,000. The one thing not out of that yet that we've already spent is the $3,000 for that last telebake payment. Chris hadn't had it yet when she gave me this statement. It was the end of September. So Justin, question. I have, hopefully this is the time for this. I have some questions about a potential executive director because we are sitting on a little bit extra money now. And I was thinking about the executive director position. And if the, Donna, can you move the phone user please? Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. So the executive director position, I guess my question is, let's just assume for the sake of argument that we were to hire an executive director. How would that person get paid? And would it, would they require health insurance? Would they require retirement? Basically, I want to know how much of an effing headache it would be if we retired or hired this person, or they could just be hired as an independent contractor working on a stipend. You know what I mean? Well, previously it costs us around $90,000 to have an executive director. So that was their pay. And that person was part-time, but it was a high level quality person. That was their pay. And we did have to pay extra with our membership of Vermont League. So they were covered. I can break that down. Maybe someone else remembers all the different components, but I do remember that $90,000 was a big, heavy burden. Yeah. And I guess, so was that just the executive director salary or were there other costs that were associated with that, like extra accounting costs and all that other nonsense? No, no. There's extra even more when you add that we had an office. We actually rented a space at the Center of Vermont Chamber. We had a copier. Of course, we had to have liability related to them. Our liability went down when it was just the board. Donna, could you take your screen down because I can't see the speakers when it's up. Okay. That's better. Thank you. So, yeah, I guess that answered my question. So it does sound like it's a to big pain in the butt if you do it. It's asking for major money from the cities. When, right now, our two members are basically going in another direction. Yeah. I guess that's, that was my next question, which is like, do we envision, and I'm sorry if I'm being pedantic about this, but I do, I would want to explore it. Do we envision any possible role for an executive director, given the capital fire doesn't really have any interest in working with CVPSA and Barry Montpelier, like you say, seem to be going their own way. Like if we were to hire an executive director, what do we think the scope of their role might be? Is there anything for them to do? What do they do before? Well, my standpoint before they were really working to pull in other members and working with the dispatchers, having constant meetings and communications, trying to involve the employees of our member cities. And so that was a big one. And every time there'd be some progress, there'd be some back stepping. But that to me was the big thing was expanding our membership, working on that. Anyone else? Kim, I heard you wanted to say something about the executive director. Oh yeah, our major project and whatever it was, 2020 or 2018, was to have a standalone single dispatching center. And that Barry and Montpelier would seed their employees to CVPSA to run this. So that required a lot of discussion with unions and the employees and others. And at that point, Cap Fire had signed an agreement to join CVPSA to help foster that project. And that's why they were on our board. Since then, of course, the idea of a joint dispatching thing has gone away. But I think from a funding point of view, you could hire an independent contractor. You might find we could even hire Dominic Acuri to advise us on technical matters if we got involved in it. So you wouldn't need to do the full boat of paying an employee with FICA and all the rest of it. And I don't know. I'm sorry to hear Joe be so I'm convinced that governance is going to be a stumbling block. And capital fire has to be included somehow in order for this grant to be approved. And they have to be given some form of voting input, which is why I wrote the memo I did. And I think our budget, what I would propose, probably next month after we think about it, I would propose, let me interrupt myself, the CVPSA with some minor charter changes is a perfect governance model. And you don't have to reinvent something. I think there should be some and we got a whole new board. There's only going to be three survivors in March. Justin, Mel and myself. And so there's an opportunity, I think, to build a new, change the charter to limit it so it's not taking city employees, provide representation for everybody and hire, in my mind, an executive director who has technical and practical ability to help spend five or eight million dollars, which it's going to take to build a system. And frankly, I don't think either city is equipped to do that at the moment. And the brief conversation I had with Bill Fraser about it, and it's very brief, no commitments, but it's having the city run this thing is a serious problem because are they going to own it, but then turn it over to most of this money is going to go to benefit the Camp West Towns. Kim, I'm just going to pull you back to not what's happening with the money coming in from the public safety application, but what public safety authority is going to look forward to for the next year and what potential ballot item requires doing that, such as hiring a consultant. That's something under our bailiwick, as far as what's going on with that application or their choice with governance. I also would be to build a budget that is variable. We can put money in the budget, but it doesn't mean we have to spend it. And whoever runs this grant is going to need some money, and right now it's only the two cities that's paying for it. So it seems to me to make sense to build in a budget to hire a pick Dominic, who might be a good guy to do this, to help. For budget purposes, let's call it a consultant, okay. A consultant to figure out how to wisely spend and develop an eight million dollar project, which nobody's ever tried to do before. And neither city's tried to do it. And I think I'd like to see a budget that the money's going to be spent. Okay, so what are you proposing for? The city doesn't need to raise it. Okay, so what are you proposing for a budget scope? If you would like our consultant to do this? Well, I would like to get this group to talk seriously about where we're going with this. And next month, I'd like to see your budget figures and get a chance to play with them a little bit. And maybe they're not mine. They're what the board is proposing. I'm asking the board to propose specific projects. I heard you proposing a consultant. And I'm asking, I want to look at it and see, give it some thought, not just see a screen. That's the first time I heard that we had 35 grand. No, I've reported regularly what we thought we were having. I don't mean to dope on you, Donna. It just hasn't hit me on it. So, I think we have, we can pull this together in November. We ought to have some figures and we might even talk to possible consultants. Okay, I need draft figures now to come back in November, because we have to start publishing ads with a draft budget in November. And so, we meet early in November. The ad start has to be started so many weeks before our annual meeting, our annual meeting has to be before January 1. And then we have a public hearing that has to be before February 1. So, suddenly we're in this time sequence. So, that's why last month I asked people to think about what they wanted to do next year and what we want for a budget. And Justin kicked us off about executive director. You've mentioned consultant. So, again, it's about the scope of that consultant. Like, is it asking the city to come up with $100,000? Is it $50,000? Justin, you have your hand up. Yeah, I think, so I agree with Kim that we should, I think we should ask for a lot. The budget, the items passed very easily last time, much easier than we expected them to. I'm very sensitive about asking for money generally because I don't want to waste it. But I think there is a world where CVPSA could be the governing body for this whole thing. I don't think that we currently exist in that world. And I think the real barriers to getting there. But I think it makes sense to ask for a lot of money enough that we could fund an executive director. I think we should ask for $100,000, maybe even like, because we've got $130,000 in the bank. I think we should ask for the money. And if Capital Fire tells us to go fly a kite, we'll just give the money back, which maybe that's a joke I'm going to tell me right now. I just don't see a lot of downside to asking and then giving the money back if CVPSA either dissolves or finds a different role at some point on the road. But we can't ask later. If at some point the legislator says, CVPSA, you're going to run the show, well, we just can't ask later. We've got to ask now. That's all I got. Okay, Mel? Out of curiosity, where is the money going to be coming from? Is this to say you're going to go to each city and ask them to put in like 50 a piece? Well, this is a public safety authority. It has authorization for tax. So we would put it on both Barry and Montalier city ballots. And the $100,000 would be divided by the allocation that we have now with a memo of understanding between Barry and Montalier and Public Safety Authority. So like the 30 that we got in the budget that I had up, Barry's is like 15,000 a little over, and Montalier's a little over 14,000. In the past when we went after a large amount of money, we were seeking it for like our needs assessment, then we divided accordingly. But we actually put that on the ballot. We do ask and talk to the city councils, but we don't have to have their approval. We have their authorization to go on the ballot. Okay. So moving on from there, I've forgotten what I was going to say, but would that go on the ballot prior to us finding out if we have been given the grant money? It would. The steps start with advertising our budget in November once we've set it. And then we have the annual meeting, which we then present and talk about it. Our members come and then we have a public hearing. So let's say last year, I believe we had our annual meeting, like I'm going to say December 20th. I actually wrote that down. And that was CVPSA? A Public Safety Authority had its annual meeting December 20th. Okay. And then we had a meeting right before the deadline, like the cities needed a final budget January 20th, 25th. The week before that deadline, we meant again, confirmed our budget and presented it. But we let the cities know ahead what we thought it would be, but it does then go on and increase the tax. Right. That's part of my asking. And but then that said, does will we have been, will we know by the time the vote is being taken, whether or not we have received the grant? We don't know. January, when we have to commit our final budget in January, we would hope to know by then, but we can't control. We don't know what the Public Safety Authority and legislators will do. Now, I don't think so. I think we could say in our budget document that in our presentation that if the grant money comes through and or it doesn't, we don't need the money. It'll revert to the cities that put it in. I don't think that's a serious. You mean it'll be given back? Yeah, that's what it's their money already. Right. I understand. You know, and I'm kind of looking at it from the city council point of view, which is, you know, this is going to be a different tax here. So I, you know, every every penny gets parsed. Yes. And anytime we put something on the ballot, like any item one, we have to have clear language of what we're going to use it for. And whether it's general operating, whether specifically, like for needs assessment study or equipment, in this case, if it indeed the board decides in the end that they're going to use this money exclusively to support such and such, then that's stated. And there's another narrative underneath that that could express what Kim's talking about, that, you know, this is there to support this capital application that we have perceived that we think we're going to get. If it doesn't happen, the money would, at least maybe a certain amount of the money would go back. It might need enough to stay functional. I have a question for Dominic. But see all that language gets presented to the board when we do the budget. That's all those kind of decisions. Again, the board has to make it as a whole. Okay. Kim, you wanted to ask Dominic a question? Yeah. The Motorola response, I couldn't read it very well. It came through in a garbled document. But it looked like they wanted more than a million dollars to do an engineering study. Did you read that as well? They wanted a, it was over a million dollars for their engineering effort and project management for the entire project. It wasn't a study. It was, yeah, sure. It was supportive of the project. And I've looked at the, there is perhaps some Homeland Security grant money coming, but their governance proposals are exactly the same as we're on the RFP, and they don't allow engineering costs. And so whatever happens, whether the city gets the deal or that money has to be raised somehow locally in order to actually get the equipment on the ground and functioning. So if it's in our budget or in the city's budget, if somewhere we have to ask the question, what if we get four million dollars instead of two? What can we do? And how far along will we be and who's going to make up the rest and when? And those questions require, we'll call them a consultant hypothetically, to figure all that out and make a proposal and spend the money when we know how we can use it. And if we can't use it, we can always give it back. But if we don't have it, it won't get done because the budget cycles of everybody will preclude it. Okay. Does that make more sense to you, Mel, as far as being a ballot item and definitely we'll have language around it. It's all the kinds of things of which we keep editing. We present it in November, but we keep editing with other comments and other information such as if we hear what the application is, we can then confirm it. We can keep changing the final number and the final wording up to when we give it to the cities in January. Right. Right. When they have their deadline, we have to give it to them before their deadline in January, which is somewhere around the January 20th to the 25th. Okay. Yeah. But we really need to start on it now. Joe, you've got your hand up, please. Talk. Thank you, Donna. I just wanted to clarify, the total project that was proposed is 3.5 million. I'm not sure where the 5 to 8 million came into play, but I just want to make sure that we go on the record to say everything that we've talked with Terri the Valley and the state on with it's been a 3.5 million dollar project, not a 5 or 8 million dollar. Yes. I think I threw that number out. I think that was a total we were thinking, but the cities have already contributed somewhat. So it's not the full number. You're right, Joe. Thanks for that clarification, Joe. But I had a million for for Motorola's engineering and other costs. I will share with you that is a quote that is purely pie in the sky numbers because of the time frame was so narrow. So I would not focus so closely on that quote because it really is hypothetical. And there has been a considerable amount, I'll have Dominic back me up here, but there's been a considerable amount of engineering already done in the development of this project that we would not have to do. So I just caution people don't put a lot of stock in the Motorola numbers because they are hypothetical. I will agree. And I was going to point that out also, Joe. Yes, there has been a significant amount of engineering done, but Motorola has not seen that. And that's part of the problem with their quote. They have not visited any of the sites. They don't know what facilities are currently available. So they were forced to put a quote together that made assumptions that they were going to have to handle a lot of those types of things. Well, whatever the number, it's going to be a local effort. All right. So if we went back to the needs assessment, which had a number in there for administration implementation of a capital, would that give us a baseline to reassure us that $100,000 would be enough for the first year? I think the numbers were in there. Yes, that would be the source to look. And I believe that's still accurate. Okay. All right. So I'm hearing a general support of putting money in the budget to help implement any kind of equipment grant we might get. Is that correct? I don't want to spend time on it unless people are going to support it. Okay. So I'm going to start with $100,000 for now. Doug, you have your hand up, are you just thinking? No. If you're done with that particular thing, I have an item to add to that. Okay. I would like to see the Public Safety Authority put some money in the budget to assist Barry and Montclair in installing, acquiring, computer-aided dispatch system. They both work on BALCOR, if I'm not mistaken, and I don't know what the state is currently using, so I should probably add to that. Neither of which works very well. But having a computer-aided dispatch that provides support for both law enforcement and EMS fire service would go a long ways through making dispatching portion of all the work that we're doing now to really make sense and make good use of their time. And they're still going to have issues in terms of getting a proper number of people to run the dispatch system. So providing the ability to do the dispatch should be a priority. Dom can chime in here, but wasn't there $80,000 in our need assessment for ACAD? Somehow $80,000 sticks out. I don't recall the number, Donna, to be honest. There was a figure that had been included as a separate item, an optional item. Well, just so I want the board to know, it's a big number. I can go back to the needs assessment and find the exact number, but it is $70,000 to $80,000. It's big. I agree with Doug. I have a question for Dom. The Valkor won't support CAD, as I understand it. So if you want a computer-aided system, you have to replace Valkor or get some addition for it, I gather. Am I right about that? My understanding is the current Valkor system is not a discipline CAD system, but I believe they were updating that so that it would provide the functionality. Yeah. Well, we've heard that for a year or more. Maybe that's the case. So is there a separate? Would it be possible to do it separately? Probably not. There's some logistics. I'm sorry to do it separate. What? Could you do CAD? Could you buy separate equipment? Certainly you can, yes. But I think the intent was to stay with Valkor to be consistent and compatible with other agencies throughout the state and with the state themselves. With the state. All right. I'm just going to try to get a nod if people want me to look into that cost and add it to the budget too. Yes. Okay. All right. Anything else that people have in mind for the coming year that impacts the budget? Well, Dom, you're more familiar than I am with the normal operating costs and insurances and stuff like that. Yeah. Yeah. It's right there in the budget I was showing you. It's all laid out. What's expected. It won't change very much. Okay. No. We've, you know, even with our thin existence, it's still somewhere, you know, seven, eight thousand dollars. So it will be all be in the same budget. The two items and just our regular operating. Okay. Okay. Justin, I don't know if you've had time to look at the charter, but I will send you some dates and see if indeed you think I'm online with where the ads are because it talks about, you have to have the last three and three consecutive weeks on the same day of the week and etc. So it takes some cal, you have to sit down with a calendar and I can make mistakes. So I'll do it and then I'll send it to you and you can see if you think it complies. Okay. Okay. Yeah. I read the charter after the last meeting. So I'll grab that language. I put it somewhere. It is a map here. I mean, you can do it if you like as secretary. I did it in the past, but I thought, since I begged you to be secretary, it wasn't one of those things I expected. I'm happy. I can come up with the schedule of when we post. I can do that. Let me, is that what you want me to do? Sure. Sure. If you're willing, that's great. Yeah. I'll do that. I'll shoot it off to you. I might be able to do it tonight. Okay. Yeah. It's all within like page 14 and page 15 within the charter, all about the warnings and the meeting dates and advertising. Okay. That's cool. Anything else related to 2023? Actually it's, we're in 2023. It's actually 2024. I have to change that. Wow. Our FY year goes July to June. So it's like, okay. Any other business come before the board? I have a question for Joe. Okay. Joe, are you still there? Joe, are you back in town? I heard you were on vacation. Yes. I was on last week and then my wife and I have tested positive for COVID. So we're up and down most of the week. So that's thanks. That's a lot of fun in my life and I just did that. So good luck. Thank you. Well, thank you for joining us. I had no idea you were positive. Take care. Don't let the symptoms, the mildness sometimes fool you. You need to rest. That's true. Okay. Otherwise, our next meeting is November 10th, Thursday, 7pm. If Justin and I are going through the dates, feel like we have to meet earlier, we'll notify people, but start thinking about December because we'll need at least one extra meeting in December and likely one extra meeting in January to make all the dates work. Okay. Okay. Thank you. By unanimous consent, I adjourn the meeting. Thank you all very much. Thank you.