 Welcome everybody to the March 2019 Board of Commissioners meeting for the Chittin and Solid Waste District. The first item on the agenda is the agenda. We do have a couple of changes we're making to that. We're actually going to have two executive sessions this evening. One up front here to discuss board procedure as well as some personnel issues and then in anything else in that there was one other thing legal legal okay and then we're gonna have an executive session near the end you know after other business for an item regarding contracts so we're gonna be doing that and then we're gonna move right there's one other change I'd like to recommend that we swap items 8 and 9 so to have the future MRF site search and analysis discussion as item 8 and the fiscal 20 budget overview as item 9 okay and unless there's any objection to that we'll proceed that way okay great next is the public comment period and we do have some members of the public would you like to make any comments at this point in time okay if something comes up that you'd like to comment on is there during our board I'll give you time during our agenda I'll give you time to speak okay and then next is the executive session I believe I move the board of commissioners of the Chittin and Solid Waste District went to executive session to discuss personnel issues and to discuss confidential attorney client communications made for the purpose of providing professional legal services to the board of commissioners who are premature general knowledge would clearly place the district its member municipalities and other public bodies or persons involved at a substantial disadvantage and to bring staff and the solid waste district attorneys to be present for this session second and actually going to ask if it's okay for the first part of the executive session I want this just to be a board so no staff for the second part of it we will call in the appropriate staff for that if that's okay that's fine with me is that okay with you Lynn okay we have a motion in a second all those in favor those nay all right next item on the agenda is the minutes do we make a motion to approve the minutes of January 30th I'm sorry was that a second second second okay we have a motion in a second so additions corrections comments those in favor of the motion signified by saying aye those nay the abstentions I think still think the motion passes great thank you and next is finance soon deke will turn that over to you go through first is the report of warrants comes right out of the system now there's we're fully moved over to quick books and so we can very easily report print these and so everything over 7500 if you'd like to know more this is a pretty easy print so so any questions on the cheques bank balances as expected this time of year things slow down a bit and then they'll pick up again the one thing I'd like to call your attention to is the landfill post closure you have a report I'd be at a request to approve a policy tonight that would change how that's calculated and that would move depending on what happens with that policy so that nine hundred and thirty nine dollars could go down depending on nine hundred and thirty nine thousand dollars that would be a problem oh yes boy yeah inflation over three zeros so you know we're any questions on cash reserves that the memo that we're reading here no for some reason the memo I had on this didn't get included so I don't know why I may have got lost in circulation there was a lot of memos plan around all right second quarter financials were well ahead just a reminder that we used to do a lot of this based on budget we're doing everything based on actuals now so we can actually tell where we are we're basically ahead on revenue slightly behind on on most of our expenses the use of the solid waste management fee is much lower because we had agreed that there was a rate stabilization but for those of you who are new when we raise rates at the drop-off centers we raised rates more than we needed in the first year we expected to go even in the second year and then use that money in the third year so we're in the third year and and so I depleted that fund before I start taking solid waste management fee and that's why we're below I think that that is not something that was agreed to by the board on the solid waste management fee for the drop-off centers in the building up the reserve was based on the MSW I think that comes into the drop-off centers and that is supposed to stay there and help offset that so we don't need to have a increase in the MSW at the drop-off centers as soon as we might otherwise and it is my understanding and I talked to Paul tonight a little bit beforehand and that that money should be there and when we start expending more for the MSW then we're bringing in then we start to take that down and there was never an intent to draw that all down and start funding drop-off centers with solid waste management fees that my understanding was the budget this year was going to use all of that is I understood what the way that that was my understanding of the budget I certainly could have misunderstood that that conversation but as I understood it it was put it all in there against the night that negative but if you want to run it the other way it's fine however you want to do it it's it's on paper it can be changed we run the cost centers and the cost centers need to you know stand on their own and the way that the drop-off centers stand on their own with respect to the MSW fee otherwise you're never going to know when we need to increase the cost for MSW being dropped off at drop-off centers that money was put there and was for that and it wasn't for the general operations of the district no it's not going to the general operations there is a deficit in the the drop-off center so if you look at the drop-off center that's a very good question thank you if you look at the drop-off centers their revenue over expenses including the allocations and transfers leaves leaves a deficit of 300 and almost $400,000 those are those are programs like the batteries and everything else that should come out of the solid waste management fee and that's I mean we're it is totally wrong and in my mind of what you're doing this can easily be fixed I mean this is not like we spend the cash we can easily fix this I this is news to me and that's not how I understood how this was going down but we can certainly well they don't we have some we still have special waste separate out in this budget we do so we're not using the the dark stabilization rate stabilization money for those special ways like batteries and things it is being it is countering the operational loss in the drop-off centers but no it's not kind of a loss in the drop I mean I don't have all those numbers but I mean the drop-off centers have been adding money to that reserve for the last three years and our you know and and we wouldn't have burnt all that money up if we were you know starting to go over the edge so three years ago we had what at the time the district called it a double bump right today they raised the fees twice so with the from again this was just before I got here but my understanding was that first year of the fee increase at the docks we knew we were going to generate more revenue than we needed so it was going to go the excess was going to go into a dock rate stabilization reserve the second year we had budgeted that it would essentially break even so wouldn't be adding anything into that reserve unless we didn't break it we made more money with the intent in the third year where we did run low because expenses continued to rise we would then try down from that reserve that was my understanding my understanding that's we made money in the second year and we made money in the third year we're currently in the third year but the point being I didn't think the reserve drew down in the second year like we thought correct it was we're in the third we're in the third so you're saying there was such a turnaround that in the third year we're using it all my my understanding in the budgeting and I definitely couldn't have missed this because this is but my understanding in the budgeting process was we were going to use all of that money this year that's that was my understanding as we went through that with the finance committee I if I misunderstood that this is nothing that can't be fixed my recollection is what Alan's is but I could be wrong too possible to revisit prior meeting notes yeah that's what I was going to suggest that we go back and research that in terms of the motion that was made should be fiscal 17 yeah can we ask them yeah I'm sorry more input let me see if there's question and thoughts I'm not sure if I understand what the debate is you know we so the finance committee proposed the budget the board approved the budget we're simply reporting out on the budget are we Alan is your assertion that we should go ahead and and unapproved the budget I'm not or you want to see a different reporting format because the way that we have the way that we're executing the budget we can't change that in mid year there was no intent on my part and I mean there are members here that were here when we set the rates they're currently there and if we made money in year four instead of having to borrow from the solid from the from the reserve so be it it just went longer before we we had to increase the MSW costs at the drop-off centers and we had discussions at one time that yeah in year three we when we first started year three we probably were gonna have to spend this but there was there was there's never been a thought in my mind I thought the thing was still building up this year because you know we the costs haven't risen as to what they are and we spend that all that money down so are we saying that next year we're going to raise the raise the drop-off center rates because there's no money in the reserve and if I'm correct I may be wrong but I think the key part of this is Alan and I think that that was intended to stabilize to cover the cost of municipal solid waste not the special waste that are collected that's the drop-off so we would just ask that that I think be looked at I don't think we need to go too much farther on this right now and we're not saying that that's what this this money is being used for okay so yes we can we can get some clarification on that we will go back to fiscal 17 finance committee and yeah that's that's local make sure and clarify it check the numbers seems to me there are two conversations going on here as a board member we get the entire budget we're not privy to the conversations the finance committee about how they anticipate these funds being used so to the extent there are minutes of those conversations and what the intent was that we're gonna have to take this conversation up again I understand what you're describing Alan I can sexually agree with the approach you're talking about but it wasn't the finance committee can still it was the whole board when we were setting the increase for the solid waste main here for the cost of the drop-off that happened three four years yeah something like that I think it was it was again is the right stabilization reserved for the drop-off senators and it should be in the full board meeting minutes so again we just that information would be helpful to see yeah absolutely and this valid concern from Alan will just ask staff to research it so okay I just have a question you've given us a budget variance by program at some point are you thinking that we will also see on a quarterly basis a roll-up for the district as a whole yes that can easily be done sure I you know I believe we have talked about being able to see see this on also on a consolidated basis as opposed to right in addition to the program by program so as of the end of this week I think we'll have everything fully converted into QuickBooks and I can just print it without having to do the B lookup table so that becomes infinitely easier to to manage I think the heading on the fourth column or fifth column that says percent of quarter to budget is titled wrong okay I think that's the percent of the annual budget you're right thanks for your patience feet go ahead right so two policies we're recommending tonight having been vetted both through finance and through and through the executive board the first is on accounting just background for folks who are new we have we're going through all of our policies in the district and reestablishing everything across the board putting them in new format so I'm just rolling through various pieces of the finance policies we've done a couple already fraud and a couple of high-level ones this one the two that you have before you tonight are basic accounting reporting auditing and internal controls and the policy on restricted assigned and unrestricted reserve funds so again there's some minor changes but not not huge in the in the accounting it just sets up that we will use accounting principles and do what we can to minimize fraud and assure good reporting on the reserves a couple of things happen as you can read the facility improvement has been broken out by each function and the finance committee recommended that that money just get combined and there be simple capital fund and that that capital fund be used for only capital it has been used for anything related to improving facilities so the the policy is that that gets combined it's used for capital and managers have to sign off to approve the expense moving forward to the through the warrant process and every manager could sign off on their own just like their budget and so what we're proposing is that we assign a manager to oversee that fund internally so that one person is responsible for the whole fund and can keep track of it rather than having seven or eight people all hitting it and not knowing where it is so those are the big changes we're making in those two policies actually I guess technically I should see if anyone wants to make a motion on these two policies as a presented okay we have a motion do we have a second okay right we have a second so I know there's at least one board member that has a concern and I want to make sure he has a chance to talk so the motion is to prove both of them together correct my concern is more with process back on the board for about a year when these policies came in the packet I reached out talk to Paul I've talked to Sarah about it some of the language in here I think is restrictive on individual board members it talks about what the finance board has access to talks about what the full board can decide to have access to but read literally this would imply the ending individual board member could not request certain information without getting either going through the finance committee or through the full getting the full board to vote to allow so I suggested and would suggest here that as these policies are being developed the first draft or at least early in the draft should be shared with the full board so as the finance committee and the exec board are talking about it they can have any input from individual members perhaps some people have none but some people would have input that they would want to see considered and not come here having having the subcommittee spent four meetings talking about this that feeling like it's pretty much done and then we end up debating for an hour over what language should look like you know I promise you just there a moment I just want to ask a clarifying question of the cure I think this is really the first time these kind of policies have been coming before this board I mean have we approved this at some point in the past these two in particular or policies in general policies in general like this yes we've been bringing finance policies I know for the past few months yeah but I'm talking about before that talking about pre-sera yeah yeah absolutely so policies do need to have board approval and Amy has a list of all of the policies that have been I just believe it's been a very long time since we've really looked at these and I could be wrong on that no I think you're right yes it's been I think the last time was like 2011 if I read and and it's a the the paperwork has policies it has procedures it has a lot of things in it so and it's several pages long it can I reason I ask that is I I share your concerns and and I've been thinking about how we can address those and I wanted to know how long it's been since we've really had this kind of discussion so anyway let me turn it back over to you that's my biggest issue when I when I read the internal control policy lost for a legal why if he cares but it talks about the board requesting certain information the board can get reports I would question if I as a commissioner wanted to see certain reports that the finance committee is getting whether I have ability to do that whether staff could say no under the policy you're not allowed to see that information when I go to the the capital policy I just question a couple of questions on one of which is given the discussion we're having around whether money's being spent in the docs appropriately what we're going to do with the compost program melding all of the first together at this point seems like it could create a huge amount of confusion question whether now is the right time to make that change I'm struggling to follow the finances at this point and the more you change it the harder it becomes to follow what's going on and I did have a question this is a legal question I don't have an answer I haven't had a chance to research it further myself but this the policy talks about the program manager for capital having authority to expend against the proposed budget two questions there why the proposed budget and not the approved budget seems it should be tied to the approved budget the communities have actually approved not a company that's proposed and I wonder if there is a conflict between that authority in this policy for a manager to expend against the capital budget and the warrant procedures that we have to go through because I've been in a situation in Milton where a new manager came in we have a capital budget and he said well you approve the budget that said I could spend a hundred thousand dollars on a new truck that means it's approved I don't actually need to go I want to make sure that we're not creating conflicts by approving this policy and that it is in harmony with the actual warrant process that we I'll stop there if I could nothing in the policy was intended and if the language is in articulate then I'll own that but it was not intended to usurp the warrant process or the fact that over a certain amount of money everything has to come to the full board I believe it's fifty thousand dollars so there's no way of spending it this was merely an internal control from a manager's point of view of making sure we had one person overseeing that budget and accountable for it rather than seven people all hitting it to your first point you know I defer to the board as far as whether you want to merge those are but if the language doesn't work I can certainly there was never intended to usurp the warrant process nor was it intended to usurp the requirement that anything over fifty thousand dollars comes to the full board before it can be expended and I'm not implying with something with intended I just have seen ambiguity problem before rather everybody yep can if you look at page three it says the board of commissioners may request special reports at any time so you can ask to see anything you want that says the board of commissioners doesn't say a commissioner which is my concern we can put that in what I'd like to understand from you what your what how you envision the remedy to this well you seem to have a problem with there is a finance committee and there is an executive committee and since they are approved and appointed by this board which does request that we do what we do we're not overstepping the instructions that have been given to either the executive committee or the finance committee by the board any director can attend any meeting you can get the packet if you'd like all you have to do is get your name to to Sarah and you can see everything that we see so I'd like to I'd like to understand so that we can address it and again I'm a believer in the more we know the more we agree in the less we fight so how do you envision if there isn't going to be a finance committee to review this then then what what do we do for example you've made some observations here now during the comment period that have validity so can't why don't you propose them as an amendment to the motion and as the maker of the motion I'll be certainly happy to agree to them and let the board decide so rather than directed at management maybe bring them forward for the board to to approve you've got some specific recommendations here please present them as an amendment to the resolution so that we can we can fix it or discuss it you had a number of comments in there the first it first I'll respond to is I am not talking and I do not support eliminating the exact board I understand having served on the exact board for a number of years I understand the efficiencies of that process I do feel like having come back on as a regular board member now not on any of the committees that there's been a natural movement of control and authority to those two committees and there's an assumption now implicit or otherwise that committee members show up to the meeting and the board in the finance committee have essentially bedded everything for us and I'm not implying that anyone's doing anything wrong I'm not implying that staff isn't doing this job or the committees aren't doing their job but I I think that proactive I should not have to search for the I don't know when the finance committee is me I don't I'm not oh I don't know anything about the calendars for the exact board in the finance committee that's a comment there's no reason that information is not provided to other commissioners that's something that we can address we don't get the minute you have minutes of your meeting there I am sure that if the commission wants or any commissioner who wants can receive the packets that we get because for the executive committee what we see is what comes to the board we just look at the packet before it comes here it's not like we get any secret sauce to do it you know as a matter of fact I find that the board actually often asks more probing questions than we do there is nothing that we see that you don't end up getting unless it's something that that as we discuss it we say well maybe this we have never said this can't come to the board it shouldn't come to the board don't do that there have been instances when we've identified that there isn't enough information and that it comes up the next month but what you see is what we get so you know yeah no it's fair but I focus this or split it into two things again I think you're perfectly right on by the way we have a finance committee meeting tomorrow evening at 430 you want to attend everyone's welcome we'll be talking about certain budgets I think it's the last budget meeting right of the year so anyway but you're welcome but I'm more specifically can for this particular motion do you want to make any motions to amend no okay I'd like to take a motion and then you know to take a vote I should say and then I want to make a general comment and ask a question which I think is a something we might should consider so any other comments on the motion to approve these two particular policies as I'm not prepared tonight to redline the document that was right which is why I believe that we should get the draft when it goes to the other committees so that we can have input and not and I don't have to put forward a competing document or or make a motion to amend particular language within the document which itself can be ambiguous to what I'm changing and not change it I prefer to have a process where the committees that are vetting this who have authority can actually have a way of taking input from other commissioners rather than doing it in this form because I think this form is a very difficult way so let me make an observation about that this is the board process it comes here we we can have the finance committee here every month so that everybody can see what we see which is what you're seeing again right now or we stick with the process that as it is but you get this information it's emailed out what 2048 hours after the after we see it as the executive committee now you've had it for a week we there's plenty of time for any commissioner who has something to the they'd like to change to do it I mean that is the board process it's not up whether you're in the committee meeting or not we can't make the decision for the board if you want something change this is where we do it okay let me see if the board is willing I would make a motion to table this item until our next meeting it's not that urgent and it would give Ken a chance to review it and make his comments and you could proceed from there it does Ken find that does he want to do you want to if you don't want to I won't make the motion or it wants me to redline the document and present happy to do so so are you making a motion to table this item until our next meeting we have a second I think I heard a second we have a second okay I don't believe that's debatable the motion just to table so all those in favor of the motion to table this until the next meeting I believe you said correct signified by saying hi hi oh his name one day okay any abstentions oh okay yes I'm abstention oh abstention sorry and um were you abstaining no I was wanting to let me first let me make sure I took about I think it passed can I verify that okay all right so I will allow you now to Ken is is going down a road that when I wasn't on the exact committee I felt the the same way back in the days when Ken was on the executive committee but we don't want to come to this meeting with seven redline copies of the document and so I think that we over the next month or so need to figure out how we're going to do that process because I I mean it was so formatted the last when I first came on the board that I didn't even get to sit in on the executive committee meeting they closed the door on me and so yes but so I think if folks want to make recommendations to this they should do that and and send them in and then the finance committee or the exec board will take those and try to meld them into something and then have justification for why they didn't accept this or that when we present the document back to the board so I've thought a lot about this because thankfully Ken gave me a heads up a few days ago and I was very appreciative of that and I thought about it a lot and I think they're very valid concerns and my suggestion which the board may grown at is potentially maybe we should form a governance committee a lot of boards do have that that they're tasked with reviewing board procedures and policies and things like that and make recommendations for change if we wanted to do that I think I know the perfect chair for such a committee so I don't just a thought I think it would be really valuable actually over time to have something like that the only solution I see to keep this from something like this extending out for months and months if these a policy or anything comes to one of the committees and we look at what management is presented we make our little tweaks and I can tell you that they're little and then come here and have as Alan has said individual directors who want to be presenting their own red line at the upcoming meeting instead of presenting it at the meeting where the item is presented for a vote then what could happen is we go home we don't agree we do it again and now we're six months later to make the process simple and completely transparent I think that we should try not having an executive committee meeting that it be done here live to the whole Commission at the monthly meeting and we try that for two months to see how you like it and we can do the same with the finance committee meeting otherwise these very complex issues that get discussed can be discussed with everybody I really do think that that's the only way to really get to the a true answer that isn't going to drag making a decision out forever does anyone have an appetite for that or do you want us to continue with the process that we are because right now I see a seating a director control over not only established but mandated because it's been voted on process without the commissioners saying yes or no I have no appetite I think the process works extremely well and I agree even if anybody wants to have a higher level of engagement you need to go to the executive board meeting you need to go to the finance committee meeting we need to give out on a special pass so we can't slam the door in his face and I think it is that it is very difficult the it would be extremely inefficient to try to make those decisions in this form right this process works with the larger group goes ahead and delegates authority for decision-making its specific areas to smaller committees which can work much more collaboratively with staff on a face-to-face basis in a much more timely fashion if there is absolutely no downside in increasing communication facilitating that I will make one interesting comment I think can is a very valid point if we if we get the minutes and we have a concern one issue that has certainly stifled if I have a concern as a board member and I want to go ahead and draw in other board members and engage with them and say hey I have a problem with this do you have a problem with this we've I don't know if we've done it explicitly or implicitly but we've shut down people's ability to communicate via email on on board discussions or at least we've discouraged strongly and I'm wondering who cares if it's in the public domain go ahead and use email the issue is not so much that the public meeting requiring advance notice that's that's the once we begin it to look for instance I believe you know you could send a like in the exec board this happens one member might send out a note saying here's questions or comments and I usually will to the full exec board that's so that's I usually say if we start responding back and forth that's a deliberation okay and I usually try to remind people look it's good to send questions but we don't want to start a deliberation here online that would violate the meeting I need to make one more observation your suggestion for a governance committee because I think you're alluding to Ken being the chair of that course if you want but the problem with that is that it perpetuates the part problem that he's complaining about and that a small group of people will be going over and seeing all this might I suggest that instead of having a governance committee that this should be a retreat for everyone to put their information in and their opinion and hear everything instead of it being a committee of three that then has to report out to us and we are pissed off because we weren't there to filter the information that came in and we don't know what was said and I don't know maybe Ken locks the door so you know but maybe do this as a body of the whole as a retreat and so yeah brand before I go on I have something I also thought about I think there are some board members who are tired of retreats but you know I find them very enjoyable but but I'm odd that way so but anyway so valid definitely valid I thought of that too is a potential so brand yes maybe we can just start baseline and just increase announcing when the meetings are and sharing meeting notes and see how that goes and we can kind of see how that goes for a month or two and then if that's not satisfactory we can propose the next step but that may be logical as far as like baseline so again there's no action we need to take here again very valid concerns and I want to address things we can do is just make sure these kind of communication or exec board and finance committee go out to everyone there's no reason that can't happen that's great so good good yes just a simple matter of adding a couple of groups to your email yeah so that's fine I think that's absolutely easy so I am open again I welcome the idea of either retreat or committee or something but let's let's mull it over let's I understand let's mull it over and perhaps we can come into some some thoughts but let's I don't think we need to solve it here tonight so I'd like to move on with the agenda if everyone's okay we did we did we're waiting we take so much conversation I understand I will move on if that's okay with the next agenda item so which is my update and for the item that's listed as past will be actually talking a little bit more about that under the future Murph site search and analysis piece and then it was very busy couple of months as we didn't meet last month and you know a lot of progress is being made in a lot of different fronts so because there's so many different items if there are any particular questions on any one bullet or not but I'm happy to dive deeper into the first one in the past there has been discussions by this board a few times in recent years that there is no desire to change the governance of the board so when I saw that in there especially with the central Vermont solid waste district I was very concerned well that and that has been communicated to them and they also have no desire to change either their governance or ours at all so it will be a very different approach correct other questions and comments on the management butter was your conversation with the closed loop foundation sort of an initial step towards perhaps that need this sort of financing for some of the big projects we just isn't stated there you know you just said I bet with this person this is what they do I just want to make sure that the conclusion is correct yeah and Bridget had I've met with Bridget a couple of times over the past two years she lives in Vermont so it's easy to have a quick update meeting and she's interested as a Vermont resident on what's happening in particular and she knows that we're we like to innovate and that we are progressive in not just our policies but in our actions as well so it it certainly is it was information for her but it was also for her to be able to let me know okay well closed loop fund is now entering into their second round of funding so prior when we first met they were had had almost exhausted that first initial offering essentially and now they've reinvested and they have more available and they're expand you want to let me know that they're expanding their look to not just recycling but also to organics and wanting to know more about what's going on there so it was her just again letting me know so I could let you all know about their programs the main one for municipalities is a zero interest loan so it certainly could be once we go down the road of how we're going to pay for things that could be a component and maybe there is room for combining different ways to finance the larger projects so she was just encouraged that we are still moving forward on and getting research research on these things and it was mostly touching base making sure that we are both aware of where each other's organization stands with regards to can they fund can they finance yes they can are we still looking at things yes we are and knowing that they may be a resource for us at some point and one other question yet again every time apologies to Rob here but every time Burlington's mentioned there's never a deadline so Spencer said he'd be making a recommendation soon to his council go ahead we're actually gonna ask to get into the weeks so this was so this was all happening oh okay well okay and in light just saying when you see something like that it's like and in the effort we had a discussion with the Burlington representative at least at the exec board the exec board was not in favor of extending the MOU however of course I perfectly valid and that's what happened I or Burlington to bring something forward to the board so again that wasn't a decision don't don't don't take me wrong here okay this was just a consent a thought in terms of no one really expressed an interest in in keeping anyway but that will come to the board at some point so okay any other questions on her management letter okay okay next item is the future for sites conversation so that's Josh and Jen oh no I'm sorry I'm sorry real off-container purchase that's growing isn't every other year we go out and bid out to purchase 14 to 16 roll-off containers these are the open top or the compactor boxes or the overflow recycling boxes that we have we have a fleet of about 84 of them and they last about ten years each so every other year we budget a hundred thousand dollars to go out to bid to replace a handful of these 16 of them we went out to bid this year our budget was a hundred thousand dollars the bid sheet is on the in your bid packet you'll see that Duraback it was a low bidder at a hundred thousand four hundred forty four our hundred thousand dollar budget is also net of our what we sell some used containers for so every year when we purchase new containers we'll take out of service an equal number of old containers and sell those historically we get a thousand or more dollars per container so in this bid we're assuming we're going to sell 16 and get a thousand dollars each so our proposal of a hundred thousand four hundred forty four minus our presumed sixteen thousand of revenues from sale of all containers puts us down to spending a total of eighty four thousand four hundred forty four which is under our our budgeted amount of a hundred thousand so in order to purchase these oh we have to spend a hundred thousand four hundred forty four put them in service and then we can go sell the old ones and come here to request that the board authorize the executive director to purchase sixteen roll-off containers from Duraback for the amount of one hundred thousand four hundred forty four dollars as detailed on the bid sheet motion in a second okay discussion on the motion curiosity what determines when the other the old roll-offs need to be decommissioned we like I say they last about 10 years so it's just our judgment staff judgment we have a a list of roll-offs we assess their their condition every year and every other year and and again we've historically replaced 14 of them every other year there's quite a range of bids is there is there any difference in quality good question yeah we have had some containers that we've purchased in the past that haven't been the best quality there's been some matching problems with the swinging doors don't match up very well so our specs have been honed over the years to get us the latching mechanisms we want and the the door details we want the grease fittings we want and and then we've gone up and talked with actually they came down with plans of their boxes Duraback came down from Canada to meet with us so that we felt comfortable that they were meeting our specifications it's a Duraback as a Canadian supplier that's correct you're not going to get it any cheaper got the right guys that's what they said we're going to win this one because the Canadian dollars so it's actually it's the error so big issue and I find that all steel parts that come out of Canada very high quality we've we've we've had Duraback equipment in Burlington and it's lasted a long time it's been good equipment US based suppliers have to pay the tariff right and then the Canadians don't pay the tariff but the tariff doesn't get imposed on the material that's processed in Canada and then further questions or comments on the motion okay all those in favor of the motion abstentions step one setting criteria over the last couple months we've brought to the board the concept that we had got a lot of bang for it to buck running out of space in both so we're looking forward into where we could potentially put a new facility that's what this part of back on September of 2018 we had a board meeting we talked about kind of the state of the technology that's existing currently today and state of technology that we have in our facility you know we talked about markets in the Chinese National Sword and kind of cover just the basics of where our merch at we also set a board retreat date we had a board retreat on December 1st at that board retreat board had directed staff that they were interested in looking into a new Murph the board had also directed staff they were also interested in that Murph being regional one of the large take-homes was that the board wasn't going to make any decisions without a comprehensive pro forma and economic analysis so that's what we're moving towards at this point three concerns that came up at that retreat was for us to look comprehensively at all of Chittenden County for a sighting profile another question that came up was the use of Redmond Road in Williston if there is any restrictions for that property and then inbound single stream tons currently we're at roughly 45 to 48,000 tons that will be determinant of how we design our facility so I'm going to speak to the first two in this presentation and then Sarah will address where we're gone with the project order at this point just to kind of give you an idea of our logic right now of where we're going in the next couple months we'll be doing sighting reviews to find hopefully either one or two sites that really make sense for the district to look into further once we kind of decide on those one or two properties we'll do a civil site review that's relatively inexpensive in the grand scheme of things and it'll give us an idea of how much we can build on the properties that we have indicated you know what kind of building we can put up what kind of parking what kind of traffic you know it's just a general overview we will also go into equipment estimates and structural estimates will run those in tandem so we'll speak with all equipment providers and then potential structural companies to see you know once we know what footprint we can have what kind of building we can get on that and how that building will work with the equipment we want to put in it and we'll do those in tandem because we'd like input from each in the event that the building needs to be shifted a little bit for equipment to fit or vice versa and then once we have all that information together that's when we'll come to the board with our comprehensive business performer to give you guys an idea of where we're looking pretty specifically where we're looking one or two spots what it's going to cost generally it'll be budgeting costs but you know what we expect how do we expect to pay for it what kind of timeframe we expect to pay for it in and how that's going to affect the district as a whole that's just kind of the the step process to start off you know if the board deems it favorable to move forward then we'll get into permitting you know act 250 you know the big bonding bidding stuff like that so this is kind of the preliminary steps that will bring to the board each step of each of these points will bring to the board to further this the discussion and get your input I've kind of got circled secure inbound tons right there that's kind of be going the entire time because we do have in district tons that are generated in our county in our district and out of district tons that are brought in and so we need to get a level of confidence that we know what that tonnage will be now and moving forward so that's why it's kind of not nebulous but it's on the side and to give you guys an idea you know just a point along the time frame that we're looking at you know our current contract at our Murph expires June 30th of 2022 that doesn't mean we need to rush into this we can extend that contract you know but it's just a point that you know to show that we are trying to move forward so we have an idea of what we want to do before the contract expires so getting into siding we broke it in the two tiers tier one is kind of a go or no go real basic stuff you know it does this work yes move on tier two is got a little bit more nuance to it a lot of the stuff in tier one will feed into tier two what I'm going to show you tonight is I'm going to walk you through the tier one criteria that pared down the properties that we found and this is really kind of the meat of this presentation and really a pretty important point in how we're going to decide where we want to build because the amount of land that we can secure and where it is we'll determine a lot of we'll have a good determination and how we how we build and what we can build so I really want to walk you through this make sure we understand you know this the selection criteria so the first thing we had to do is just identify industrial light industrial zoning because that's what a mirth will fall under then there are multiple industrial complexes that have been built in Chittenden County some of them just don't have any lot availability so that's an instant selection if it's not there our lot size we want eight to twelve acres that will give us enough room for the next 20 years comfortably so that we don't have the problems that we're running into now potential impact residential that's a pretty significant and self-explanatory point so when we look at sites that are zoned industrial we want to see how close they are to residential and the criteria I used was I took what the solid waste management rule provides for setback from residential and then I just multiplied it by five to give us a good buffer so that we didn't encroach if it's within that that's considered impact to residential proximity to 89 right now we're roughly three three and a half miles away from 89 we have equipment or we have material coming in so that's trucks on the road coming in and we also have commodities going out so our proximity 89 is important so we're not congesting multiple roads and also it just helps us get material out the door faster so that's a pretty pretty important one impact traffic we don't want to build in the center of the musky roundabout so there's some pretty significant areas in the county that have traffic impairment that we want to stay away from and then local permitting and it's it's been made aware to us that you know if we're looking at a certain town we're going to need to engage that town before we even move forward significantly because they may want want us open you know open arms or they may not want us at all and it's just a an end to conversation so that's that's why I put that in tier one we won't jump too far into that right now in this conversation but that's something that we see is important tier two are kind of all all tier one will feed in the tier two so a lot of the act fifty two fifty stuff will have figured out and some of these these criteria proximity to population density the farther away you get from population density in Chittenden County the farther route trucks will have to travel which means the more money they'll have to spend on gas the more time they'll have to spend getting to our facility which means that's more money that's put on to the public so that's going to be a part of tier two criteria is you know in the properties we identify how close you're going to be in to density populated areas costs will play into it I'm actually going to use a little bit of costs and today today's presentation because there's a couple properties that are obvious that are just exorbitantly expensive in there worth moving forward on wetlands wetlands is part of act 250 but it's also a pretty easy feature to to delineate a and r has a great atlas that identifies wetlands and also if you're just looking at a property and there's a pond or a stream through it it's pretty obvious there's going to be wetlands there so that's a good indicator of whether or not we want to will be able to build on a certain property and finally site suitability and perception just because it's zoned industrial and it meets all tier one it might be a high-end business park and there just may be no way that will ever be able to build there or if it's a multiple acre hundred acre development that has slotted light industrial and talking to a developer the last thing they're going to want is a mirf there so that's kind of that that last little you know straight face test so that that's kind of walking you through all of our criteria does anybody have any questions because this is a pretty important part of this presentation and moving forward all right so from here on I'm just going to walk through it have to be in the county we our determination was yes yeah I mean technically I suppose no but then who would pay for I get the question I think was one of Alan's points was if it's our mirf but it's not in the county why are we footing the bill for I guess and logistically also we have route trucks coming to our facility you know packer trucks and a lot of stuff that comes from out of district is already put into a large tractor trailer so all of our route tracks would have to extend out to wherever we decide to put it you know that that system is already in place so we either have transfer material out the way it's being done and brought into us or that those those packer trucks would have to travel a distance to get to where we decide it would go that just is that need to be on tier one in in the county I think we just kind of assumed it right yeah yeah keep it in the county all right so this is the regional planning Commission's zoning map for enterprise zones and that are specific to light industrial zoning not a ton but there's a bunch of stuff out there so this is kind of what we used as one of our filters to find just industrial properties in general we also reached out to a couple real estate agents who deal with commercial industrial properties we were able to identify 30 properties in Chittenden County looking at this table on the far left I have town the description of either industrial parker location and then I work through the criteria on on tier one so this is everything that's light industrial or industrial zoned the next is lot availability so everything that was from that last list they didn't have a lot of availability we dropped just kind of stepping you through this you know we moved into lot size so our criteria was 8 to 12 acres I've highlighted for Essex Saxon Hill Industrial Park it's 6.6 acres is the largest site but we could buy multiple pieces of property and put together an 8 acre site it's that seemed unreasonable and there was also a pretty significant potential to impact residents and Milton off a route 7 there's a property that's 11 acres which look great and then I look farther into it it's riddled with wetlands so there's only only less than four and a half usable acres on it so I'm gonna drop that one again South Burlington Mountain View Office Park there's 31 acres there only seven roughly are usable the rest are wetlands so we're gonna drop that as well and then in Williston between Industrial Ave and Williston Road there's another industrial a couple of industrial properties there's significant wetland concerns there and also we'd have to piece together we have to purchase multiple properties to get the footprint that we wanted so I'm gonna drop that as well impact the residential really the only one on this list as we've gotten down this far is a piece of property and Shelburne it's behind the Vova dealership there's two separate residences that fall within our our footprint so the decision was to move away from that one and then proximity to 89 I reoriented everything to this proximity piece right here from closest the farthest from 89 that route to development or route to a development I know that cost six and a half million dollars was which is exceptionally absorbent for cost and it doesn't seem responsible to try to go after that the Saxon Hill Industrial Park that was an outlier it was outside that three to three and a half mile radius that we had indicated we wanted to keep our Murph as far as proximity to 89 so and there's also significant traffic impacts there so those were dropped as well so we've managed to whittle it down to roughly five potential properties these are five that I'm going to go into a little bit more depth maybe next month maybe may have to have to get a couple more contacts just for a lot of availability is that if they're currently vacant or no if they're a bit they literally are a lot there they're for sale if there's anything available yes so like Burlington Industrial Park it's built out there's nothing there these are all green fields yeah these are all green fields this is moving into another building this is yeah that's a very good point so I whittled down to these five properties again there's some work to be done the next thing I will bring to you guys is a more comprehensive review pulling in a little more tier two information as well to give you guys more of a breakdown the goal is to get to viable properties I mean if one stands out great but if we were to compare one against the other it's not the end of the world but that's my next step with you guys which this is what the next step will look like so this is kind of what we're thinking as far as population density this is a population density map I'm gonna have to get up and show you guys so this is our baseline so here is our mark is roughly in this area here this is the exit to 89 it's within a three roughly three mile area so what we did was as we looked at based on population density and proximity to the exit how much time it takes to service the population around this area so this white line which I hope you can see is a 10 minute drive time to get to our facility and it indicates the population in that and then there's a 15 minute drive time to get to our facility and indicates the population within that and so that's is the next presentation will bring you this is kind of our baseline and what we're doing now and how we're servicing the community the next the next presentation I'll bring you are the properties that we've looked at and how those kind of stack up to this are we missing a significant chunk of the population within that drive time so that's just kind of a just to get you guys warmed up for two months from now so again next steps that's these are the properties I'm going to look at I just you know really wanted to bring that up and show you guys this is where we're moving forward again this is a green-filled you know project that we're looking at because we want to build what we want for the next 20 years questions comments especially if anyone has other criteria they think yeah that's you've whittled it down to three municipalities so if has anyone made any calls to those three municipalities the government full office to see whether or not they'd say yes no or maybe I presented an infrastructure update to the Williston select board last week and and Craig is not here but I don't know if he copied you on the email that's it okay so you may be able to I didn't see the email so you may be able to talk more about that but he had some concerns with potential traffic impacts and noise impacts if they're if we were to relocate them or to the property that we currently own on Redmond Road so I don't know there's additional so what we didn't say is that currently we do manage a mix of in district and out of district material and part of that is by contract and part of that is price point so you know we're already seeing that but I think it was it's not on more residential roads it is on a very heavily obviously industrial avenue it's designed for that that traffic so that was the main concern was moving away from a clearly delineated industrial park to land that is yes zone for solid as purposes but is not necessarily an industrial park and what are the traffic impacts there which again is all part of 250 but we would do that ahead of that as well I'm sure you guys have written this off for a good reason but could you just speak briefly about why you decided not to look at brownfield sites at redeveloping some existing we have a retreat that was I guess we just brought up Greensfield because it makes them a mirf the shell of a mirf isn't a traditional you know industrial warehouse I'm sure we could look into a little you know comprehensively what is available and potential to purchase that it would just we were concerned with retrofitting and having to change what we have yeah it's not necessarily that's actually I don't think what Leslie is asking so I think I'm sorry yeah no jump in try to reinterpret and then you can correct me from that yeah I'm not interpreting properly so it's more we wouldn't be retrofitting a building you're talking about just an undeveloped or a developed area that has been now and developed or not used so similar to maybe the old Kmart parcel the old Kmart parcel is being redeveloped into a Hineford or you know so there are other empty either empty vacant or underutilized properties that are already built that already have the roads you know presumably have seen that traffic and we have not looked at that so we certainly can if there's a list I know in Rhode Island there was a list of the state produced that of brownfield sites I don't know Vermont has something similar do you guys yeah so there's got to be some site so we certainly can the concerns will probably be lot size would also be what might be we find anytime your environmental issues there may be a reason why they haven't been redeveloped so it's similar to an older home you know what you're going to find behind the wall to you start knocking down the plaster in the lap so that would be a consideration we could but we can certainly look into it you know just yeah I mean they're going to be higher cost but there but there might be offsetting the price might be really low that's right you know and they may not be the same residential pressures I'm just thinking that you have a we've whittled this down to some tough choices it seems and it might be that it would be worth at least an initial stab it might not work out but I just didn't know whether you'd already written that off or not but we had not gone down we had not gone down that path we started on the Greenfield part of the reason we started there was also in a reaction to what we owned land on Redburn Road so if we're building from the ground up we knew that we didn't feel that we could renovate or retrofit the current facility which would essentially be what you're talking about sort of so we went down that road because of the land that we own Redburn Road but that doesn't mean that we can't look at other brownfield sites okay further input or questions I just want to say I have the same question it will be in those same areas that were on that initial map that won't expand the areas that we're looking at that those were the ones that were identified as light industrial zoned and I wouldn't expect a huge amount of opportunities with that limited I figure you can pretty easily yeah we can we can look into it yeah as soon as you figure out we'll bring that the next the next time we talk we can address you know what we found and if something did jump out and make sense it would be shame to miss it Ken has yeah Ken yeah I've talked to the staff about this effort and there's initially there was interest but looking at the parcel if that's the one I think it is that's off the market spoke with the landowner last week also discussing potential sales so my thought was once we got kind of the approval to look at these five properties then to kind of go back in and reach out a little farther and that's when we address the town you know that these properties were in I think there's some developers in the area that would purchase existing sites and provide you know that land or a building you know and I think they were very short-sighted in in not just putting out an option for you know destruction construction of a building you know and in what you're looking for is a piece of land that's there that meets these requirements and there may be one piece of land or two or three pieces of land that have a building there that have somebody in them but for little or nothing they will get moved a fine example is what Miller did with Garden Way Garden Way he built the building in Milton to get them out of the building so he could put another 200,000 square feet of building together to for curry and and so those kinds of things are out there and there are some very ingenious developers that might do something like that so I think we're really limiting ourselves to and there's no doubt that this is you know Greenfield is the easiest way to go and when you're building you've got nothing there that is always the easiest route yeah very much less complicated generally with the exception of wetlands but we do not want to lose out on potentially a cost savings if there are to be had for sure so this is why our plan is with this project is to come to you regularly and frequently because you know your community is the best you know we've whittled it down we didn't come here tonight with two sites that were ready to start working on so direction moving forward I'll definitely look into brownsfields and I'll definitely address reach out to some developers and see if they've got any thoughts on what they can do if there's anything creative to be done other input right thank you just two more slides left addressing Redmond land use we had a condemnation order for the former Heinsberg sand and gravel pit when we took that part of that condemnation order said that there was a 30-year obligation of sand availability at that sand pit which means that it has to be available on or nearby the property that 30 years started February 2009 the district bought plus or minus 34 acres we call it the Velco parcel that's one of the parcels that is in that list I showed you it was a potential area to stockpile sand that's that was one of the thoughts behind it we looked into it we have no legal restriction for land use on that we have no legal obligation to put sand on that so it is open land the removal of sand from the sand pit because this that land was purchased for a landfill would be because we were moving forward with landfill so that's you know this there's other other hurdles involved so if we did want to use the Redmond road land that's the Velco parcel for if it does work out and make sense it is available I guess that's what I want to address because that was brought up in in the retreat that makes sense all right and then finally securing inbound tonnages we right now receive roughly 45 to 48,000 tons about 30,000 tons from our in-district members and about 15 to 17 15 to 18,000 tons from out of district so I'll hand it over to Sarah to kind of give a quick talk she had the center her updates as well yeah so not a whole lot more to update up beyond what's in the in my memo to you but the reason that we're looking at securing about that amount of tons so the current Murph was designed to process about 20 25,000 tons so we are already nearly double the design capacity so we certainly don't want to design anything for lower than what we're doing now we want to be able to build in future capacity should it should it appear and when we started talking about this certainly you know central mind was very interested in more so to look at whether it's an interlocal agreement or some kind of a just make sure that there's space if they they want to come to our Murph they do now and you know we get material from various counties already and it just made sense to talk to them if there's any possibility of a formal agreement not a and we we both exed off the sharing governance we don't want to go out to a bond together that does not make sense for at least from my perspective is trying to have to manage that and Bruce agreed that also does not seem to make sense but just more along the lines of it was appealing to me because then we would really be able to have a much greater hand in the communications the messaging about what should go into the blue bin what should not go into the blue bin making sure it's all the same language all the same information there's mostly that now but this would really solidify that so we're just in the very beginning stages of exploring what that might look like but their exec board is interested in talking just to you know have an informal conversation so I haven't brought Thomas in as we're not at the lawyer stage at all but it was just more to say hey might you be interested in something and they said yeah I think we might so it's pretty informal but they are the the next largest population center just one comment you know designing a new Murphy and everything are you taking it into consideration the changing commodity market for sure absolutely is right yeah that's part of the reason for the design I mean other than we're outgrowing the facility but new equipment new processing is really essential at this point for that market and it's not only to you know to be able to potentially identify and have the flexibility to accept different types of materials but to be able to have the space to experiment to be able to have the space you know if someone wants to bring us a dedicated load of cardboard to have a space for them to do that we can't really do that right now so to be able to offer customer flexibility material flexibility as well and and we have room to grow which we we can't grow right now if we wanted to be good other questions comments it is I'm talking about there's some which want to kind of give you a heads up or a preview of some of the budget changes that we're you'll be seeing next month some of the the significant changes that are occurring and you know he has a included a memo in the packet one of the we're just going to quickly run through the organizational structure and this has been was based on feedback from something from the executive board but it actually predates me so there was a conversation with Tom about altering the structure of the organization to reduce the number of direct reports that he had and that was continued on to me as well and what I didn't respond so as I had the number so what we'll see next month is a restructuring the organizational structure to streamline a lot of the reporting streamline the responsibilities we are moving some people around Jen is one of them who's been and moved around quite a bit and we're also looking at adding a position to better organize the operations so looking at moving over time over the next three years all the operations into one position having outreach policy education into one and that changes being made this year and then having finance administration and compliance so I will go from nine reports down to five what that will do is it will free me up to do more of the outreach like I did last week in presenting to the Wilson Select Board ahead of the budget I need to get out in front of all of your select boards and your councils more frequently than just once once a year at budget time I'd like to be talking with people regularly about kind of what's going on and getting feedback and input so that's part of what will free me up to do more of the strategic thinking planning making these connections and and so forth we DECA has talked a lot about the chart of accounts so if there are questions specifically about that I would direct those to DECA and human resources again I mentioned the major change would be a hiring of a director of operations and then in the first year that person will be focusing in the four areas I would look we mentioned on year two they the focus will change slightly as they become acclimated to the position to add on so what we did was we're moving the environmental depot to josh esti josh is our compliance director and he has his background is in hazardous ways so it was a very easy move to make Jen is moving into more of the policy and overseeing outreach marketing and education and then so josh has the rover and the depot and then in year three to four the mirf and biosolids would move over into this position as well the reason to keep the mirf and biosolids separate for now is as part of what you just saw you know they're in their process I did not want to upset this team working on their process and carrying it through to whatever the outcome will be so that means it's a big job for Jen over the next three years in particular but she has accepted the responsibility and part of that was shedding the depot so I want to stop there for a moment to see if there are questions or comments about the reorganization that I'm proposing what's the outlook for overall change in full-time equivalent staff so that we should have put a little total summary here and I couldn't add it all up quickly yeah it's back what Amy do you call I think it's just one because right so rounding up to one yeah just good because we can't fit any more people in the admin building other questions or comments again on the org structure this is a mad can verify the exec board you know started to push okay so the last section on this memo is on the actual program changes so looking at property management we are the multiple rental properties and the one that we have already notified and I'm moving forward with for sure this next fiscal year is the property directly across the street from admin to the right right next to green mountain compost called the Bootsy property so we are going to be retaking that property they have a fairly large garage and compost does need the availability to work on equipment undercover which they don't have right now so that is we're taking that over on august 1st we're also depending on again what happens with the MOU or a lease purchase agreement with Burlington Flint Avenue could be the property could be and in that lease sometime in the next calendar year but again that all depends on on how the lease purchase agreement is structured if we do decide to go forward with that public policy mentioned that too we also move product stewardship into that program again it makes seem to make sense that it was mostly educational special projects so we did want to let you know that we're the finance committee did recommend that we add some money to special projects to try to get to the bottom of disposal patterns and pounds per capita and those we go back and forth back and forth on this all the time so we're going to actually do the deep dive and study that some of that 75 is offset we are not going to offer the market development grants this year the commercial market development grants so it's a net of 35 is the difference right so drop off centers we are merging the special ways and drop off centers into one single budget they are currently separate and this has always been a tricky a tricky back and forth and accounting and and tracking piece as long as we've done that I don't know if Brian is gone so because our Wilson drop off center is essentially our special ways facility it having to divide out that time between the people who work there some will work point three on one day in special ways and they charge it here and charge it there it was getting very cumbersome so because it's one drop off center is the same fish special ways facility it made some sense to us to do that it's you know we're we're working through the the revenue considerations as committee that budget is going to be discussed tomorrow that's one of the last budgets we talked about is a drop off center so we'll be addressing some of that there as well and then the amount of compost is seeing I think the biggest changes this year so which we'll get into the next part of the conversation which is you know we're we are seeing reductions the move that we're making towards simplifying the product offerings simplifying the operations I'm getting away from bagging moving away from a retail model we'll be seeing reductions obviously in revenue also seeing reductions in expenses they are not offsetting we are reducing our staff there as well so there will be some salary wage benefit reductions there similarly you know the equipment and depending on where we do end up on the path to changes that will be up in the air so the green mountain compost budget is is soft ish and moving because there are a lot of decisions yet to be made but that one has some significant changes just again as a result of all the work that we've been doing for the past 18 months on this program as it relates to the drop-off center change is there has there been any consideration of what might be lost by combining those in terms of like available information so for example if you're lobbying for a particular decision at the legislature being able to show how much expense you have related to special funds could be in your favor whereas combining them wouldn't be readily available right so we're not losing the ability to track anything so so our accounting system allows us to track both by account and by item so we can simply assign items jobs customers there's a number of ways that we are looking at the best track it so we can pull out data at any time what we're trying to get away from is the three people working at the drop-off center who would be at the drop-off center no matter what you're doing putting part of their time in special waste where it's really convention it's a fine convention there's nothing wrong with the theory but it's a convention so we'll know the direct cost of those and we can assign labor costs based on the percentage of effort rather than this particular person in this particular person's vacation in this particular person's rate it'll be spread more evenly which should present a actually more accurate cost okay so I apologize to go back to the HR section if I may the last item on page two references health insurance and more staff opting out and I read that and I was thinking about the spirited discussion we had two board meetings ago about time off and trying to make sure that we're competitive in the market and especially with all the change we're expecting making sure that we are both attracting entertaining good staff this could be really important is there any concern about this idea that a lot more people or more people are not taking our insurance in terms of what it means for us in the bottom line and the staff that we're attracting and maintaining it is that's a great question and there this is not at all a reflection on the quality of our health insurance offering it can be any number of reasons it could be that someone's partner got a new job and they are pay less happened to pay less there and then they went out or opted Amy can probably talk more eloquently than I can about this but we don't have many complaints if really any complaints over the service that we provide the cost is so competitive Amy if you want to we're in robust too so we have 12 folks out of the 42 that are covered that take the opt out which is a significant savings to the district in excess of $100,000 for not taking our insurance yeah it's it's more personal what is the opt out how much is it it's $4,900 for a family plan that's really good within that range so it's not so much that our benefits aren't good it's that when the two get together the economics more competitive yeah so also a great conversation at the finance committee and and please Michelle or Alan feel free to jump in and we struggle with really getting a handle on why our problems per capita is seems to be creeping up versus going down we spend a lot of time and effort on education demographics we track whether we track trends we track you know the unemployment rate has a reason but we're wondering is there something else that we're not missing and we want to be able to better model going forward as far as expectations that we know well what is a reasonable pounds per cap so kind of the probably other factors that you were concerned with this really bothered me that we we were seeing the the pounds per capita and the disposal into the landfill going up in spite of all of our efforts and our increase in diversion so I really wanted us to find out why is that occurring because if we don't know what's where this stuff is coming from what's driving it we don't know where to focus our efforts in our attention for example between seven in the morning and six at night the population of chitenden county increases by 40 40 percent with people coming into work they're eating lunch they're creating trash they're creating recyclables what impact does that have where is that happening is this increased because we're increasing dramatically the amount of multi unit homes and condos and apartment buildings that we have now is it because we're booming industrial or is it because the economy is good and everybody's buying more stuff off of ebay and that comes with packaging and stuff you throw away so before we can know where to put our attention we have to know where all this extra stuff is coming from why so this is the why you know we want to try to if we can get a whole why and other states are doing some very interesting research into this as well argon's doing some you know we want to be able to to learn more from what other places are doing and hopefully come up with a model other questions or comments so if i just may in general the the format i've tried to keep as close to what you're used to seeing as i can we have done a wholesale rework of the chart of accounts so if you've seen it as we've worked together it's been 17 years that we've been using this and a lot of folks were using different things meaning the same so so we we spent a lot of time together working to make sure we're all calling calling calling and we got rid of a lot of other categories and actually named all of that so you're going to see some new names and some new titles as as things are coming forward but i did want to just say we built that together as colleagues and i i felt it was a pretty good process and i think we're going to have a much better understanding when leslie says can we show it across the the the district it'll be a lot easier when hauling is hauling and trucking is not somewhere else it's all in the same category so we've made it we've made a big effort i've done everything i can to keep the format that you're used to seeing the same but you will see some different titles and some different groupings so the next piece is i want to come back to you about the compost infrastructure ramp but before before we do that i do want to talk about some realizations that i think that staff have had and that we've discussed at grayling at the exec board and even the finance committee and about needing to change how we approach organics and for a long time the focus has been on making compost and and we've been doing a lot of work and we're doing some really great work on that and with act 148 the pressures keep increasing and the more we looked at you know what are we going to do we've been talking about this what are we going to do for about 18 months or so it seems almost like the minute i got here we've been trying to figure out what are we going to do july 1 2020 and the more you know we we brought digestor options to about 18 or so months ago we had the retreat january 2018 where we we worked on filtering filtering filtering down the different options and the more we look at it we're realizing that we need to shift completely shift our mindset it is my recommendation that we focus instead of focusing on compost that we're focusing on managing organics for too long we've been trying to fit a retail model as a municipality and it can't work much longer we are pretty much near the the saturation or beyond right now we are taking in moving processing about 58-59 hundred tons of food scraps this year at compost and we've been struggling everyone all of us you know you all included it we've been per this loud and clear that trying to make compost out of 10 000 tons of food scraps and sell the resulting product we heard you and we are realizing we don't think it can be done so we're not recommending that we try quite frankly we did hear loud and clear that at the border cheat and we're willing certainly to revisit this though that we want to continue to to compost something some measure of of material and that we do want to continue to compost some measure of food scraps I do think that's important you know and we want to be able to continue to offer some some kind of a service to the residents and businesses that you can that is that is part of our mission right that to reduce and manage the most generated but also to facilitate the full participation in the programs and one of the ways that we've chosen to do that is through the organics program and it's it's gotten to the point where the risks are really outweighing the benefits the more we try to create more more compost out of the food scraps we're just digging a deeper and deeper hole we're digging a deeper capital need hole we're digging a deeper personnel hole we're just simply we're chasing our talent we're just we're never going to be able to catch up and produce enough bags of compost or sell enough bulk to be able to break even at all or to even reduce that substance so I'm recommending that we shift and we look at it from a more traditional model traditional municipal model which is our main thrust and our our mission is to manage the waste that we generate so if we're looking at it from that perspective first that's a big philosophical shift and that is a policy shift but it is something that I think is critically important to the success of this program going forward and again it's it's about minimizing our risk maximizing our our flexibility down the road and making some program sustainable and that is the the second memo not the grand memo but the second memo of more of a my approach to this philosophy and I would welcome conversation about that comments again at the exit board and finance committee had a lot of discussions about it and and agree with this approach and this shift in focus to managing organics you know but in the most cost-effective manner some questions comments on the approach yes it's refreshing that we're changing gears on this because it was very obvious to me for a long time now that all the money and capital that we've been investing in in the compost facility was just digging a deeper hole and I am very glad that you're changing your approach to this so I mean I just wanted to acknowledge the hard work of the district and of the staff working at GMC to try and make it work and to try and function as a revenue-generating business model to cover costs as under municipal guys and that's extremely difficult so I just want to extend appreciation for all the work over the years thank you absolutely and danis crew proves a phenomenal product it is you know well loved by many customers and the the goal is that we continue to make a compost product so you know and again that the the strains were not just on how do we manage the food but matching up the carbon that has to go into that nitrogen to make the product and that that was really becoming a huge pressure point the leaving yard waste that comes in has been pretty steady over the years so we know that number but it's not enough to match what we currently have we have to buy wood chips we have to buy other things to mix into it to make sure that we're balancing that to make the product and that's where you start seeing the costs just continue to escalate so we heard you loud and clear simplify with deescalating and this is taking it a bit beyond so it is a big step in a different direction but still trying to maintain making compost but looking for other flexible options and the other two options that we want to run by you again we did preview them in january but I do want to stress it is these are just the next permutations of potential options we want to look into these two options more deeply and that's that's what we're looking for today there's a comment from the gallery so what's that mean from the hauling list of what's perspective why just do I ask that we're required to mix material and should we be looking at diverting that to other areas or I mean I think that's the question that's going to come out from a lot of the hauling community is now what do we do so stay tuned so that I think hopefully when we go through the rest of the presentation some of that may be answered so so yes that is obviously a factor is there needs to be a place for you to bring you're you're picking it up you got to be able to bring it somewhere so that is the the thrust will still to be able to have capacity and that was our pressure right was the way the site currently is configured the the pressures on trying to make compost out of all of that was part of one of the issues why we need to look at a different way of doing that but I think we will want to run through some of this hopefully so again this is just talking about running through what we're looking at I've talked a little bit about the shift I'm talking about the need for some change a quick review on where we are now I won't spend much time on that where we need to be and we'll show you some of those options as well and then one of our options and then perhaps moving ahead and at a point here in the presentation we will be going back into executive session to discuss a few potential contractual issues just talked about this make organics first make compost second is is where we're proposing to move and then make compost second you know that is obviously up for debate one of the things that actually shift on the next one as well we talked about briefly at the January retreat last year for compost was I started off asking the question do we still want to be in this business and we briefly touched on you know what happens if we we do nothing and maybe we can take another look at that I'd mention it further down in the point but doing nothing means different things different scenarios but this is our charge that we took from that retreat which was part of our filters food scraps part of the mission continue to compost simplify reduce the number of products and explore the options for expansion on Redmond Road so that was also an important factor as well okay next please again today we find as we've discussed many challenges with how we're operating today this none of this is I think a surprise to anyone here next and that is why we're not a nice square not a nice rectangle we're a bit of an S shape so there are many challenges inherent in our current location however we do think that the next two iterations that we hope to explore so deeply we will still be able to function on this site so that's where we're moving with that so again I talked about just continuing the status quo and option yes and we're still going to get more material pending act 148 not changing that ban not not moving there are still some limitations to the site that we need to address you know again the capacity issues will continue to grow unless we do something and if we continue the same way that we are there's no way that we'll be able to to find I think markets that will bring us to equilibrium so in January we talked about the organics infrastructure grant from A&R and again as a reminder we were the first iteration we were provisionally awarded $410,000 we changed the scope and resubmitted and the preliminary award was increased to $500,000 which was the maximum award and the project is can be 18 to 24 months from agreement if the board chooses to agree and then the acceptance of the award of the grant award does require board approval what the award does what the grant does not necessarily require us to do is to choose the path so that would be our next step would be to investigate the path and then come bring that back to you for more vetting and further conversation next please so this is the shift in focus right so we're talking a little bit about transfer or de-packaging options and we're shifting that model to a more municipal model again with the primary focus as the revenue being on tip fees and the secondary on product sales and then third hopefully third is that subsidy so we want to continue to reduce you know reliance on on the subsidy yeah and then we'll go back to that so we're looking at two new options to to look into transfer plus compost and then de-package transfer and compost so those are our two iterations and the third iteration has of transfer de-package compost transferred to Maine this is also relying on Maine as the outlet for the transfer and the transfer de-package and compost has another scenario Maine and local options so we're looking at transfer and compost again it's matching that the food scraps with the leaf and yard as much as we can to make that compost and the rest yeah there we go so that would show you essentially where again not much that would need to be done at all if we're looking at a transfer bay we would use the the bays that we were making our organic material in so we would do that and then we would do some site improvements to the curing area as well so just a quick image of what it might look like these are some transfer stations that we visit in Maine again because we would be retrofitting existing bay we'd make sure to put some doors on that to contain everything contain odors vectors etc the permitting is pretty straightforward actually going to the next slide very straightforward minimal capital costs again we're using that existing bay it provides the quickest solution to the excess tonnage because it could be utilized nearly immediately upon converting that bay to to transfer revenue generator people pay us to essentially store their materials until it can move out and potential for long trips encourage some competition as well in the hauling area cons is that main trip it's a long way to go and also that there be reliance on one that one outlet who could accept the material as is the next item we would want to look into is the packaging plus transport was compost so it would be building on the transfer option so installation of the packaging it's not really so it's technically a facility but it's a machine with some tanks and some storage for to create a new product so the material go in on tip floor we can go to the next images come in as you would expect on that upper left come from anywhere could come from food gels and come from supermarkets could come from events could come from residents the equipment it would be fed into the equipment it would separate it from its package and it would then so the packaging would go in one direction the organics would go in the other direction mass rate it up and then become a slurry and then that would be put into a tank for storage until someone would come by and take the material out and then in a tank or truck obviously and bring it to a digester so those are the lovely upper right is the slurry and then the bottom is the packaging that is the residue essentially of of the process so if you go back up one yeah yeah so we're in each of these these scenarios we're looking at processing approximately 4,000 tons of food waste into compost but again we would want to match that with the leafing yard that's what one of them looks like it's just an example of what the machine looks like it's going to give you a little sense what is the process is it a squashing squeeze something to tear it's a tearing Dan did you see it in up in actual operation there's a couple there's about a dozen manufacturers of these machines they work a couple different ways but one we've looked at most closely so far and all screw augers that press material out through screens so it's a it is kind of a squish and there's a tearing and it goes through holes that's funny they work remarkably well and some some better than others certainly but it's amazing how they take tin cans of tomatoes separate out red tomato sauce and nearly clean tin cans steel cans and limited personnel interface very very easy to operate you have one person who's a time loader you know it's very yeah they're smart we'll be looking at about two people maybe what about frozen material some of them can handle frozen materials some do not so in those instances obviously there's a lot of grocery materials that kind of that are inspired that you can handle some of them you can drop them right in box and all others you might let them sit overnight and then drop them in packaging depends if it's source separated material going in if it was a whole pallet of tin cans for instance you could recover that and recycle it if it were mixed grocery waste that would be disposed of at like canvas w which is how most of it's being disposed of now with your right right i do have a question regarding the transfer option and using one of the bays how confident are you that you can control that's where the door comes in so you'll enclose the bay correct that's what you do okay correct okay good that'll be important for sure oh yeah absolutely so you're again some of that just a question does that create an occupational hazard of too much ammonia in the air i think if you contain it with the door there you have to put on a bio filter to handle that order so just some of the problems with contamination you know the wrong materials if it's deep packaging people just throw anything in there you'll wind up with bad stuff that glass is always bad and there's always a little bit of that probably but other big problems are chemicals i'm thinking probably no more than what is already a risk associated with taking in two waste or yard waste having to think of increasing it so initial pros and cons that we've identified the the deep packaging there is not one in vermont and this there's not one the closest one there's one there's a few in massachusetts and there's one in main but this would be the only one yet in vermont so by taking on that investment if we chose to do so that would certainly make it much easier for inward digestion to invest in vermont that'd be one less thing that they would have to invest in and then we'd be creating a ready-made product for them to include into their mix it's you know one benefit it does also tap into that very large stream of packaged materials and nancy has has crunched some of the numbers for that she got from the state's recent waste compensation studies showing there's there's still a tremendous amount of of packaged food waste that is coming from residential sources so this would be a way to also capture some of that material we talked about quality and quantity right now we are dealing with increased contamination this removes that that issue from the equation there's also potential for down the road third party ownership or ownership or operation similar to the mirf you know we get into an operator agreement there as well if that makes sense there's revenue on the inbound and potentially on the outbound as well so there's there's positives there we think cons high capital costs and again it would rely on on digesters but again you know vermont tech has their digester here salesbury digester has been nearly fully permitted we should talk with them today and they are looking to break ground in mayor june so that one is is moving forward very very quickly and it would certainly be making much more agreeable to locate something else up here so it i think would be in a good place as well as main investors as there are options there as well now at this point if we want to re-enter potentially re-enter into executive session okay we have something that needs regarding contracts that regarding contracts no i just had one point of information question of information how do supermarkets now dispose of their excess you know packaged goods so materials that are are suitable for donation are donated and hannahford has a phenomenal program for food rescue so a lot of that material of that can go to the food shelves to food pantries is already going there and when the organics diversion requirements started to creep in that skyrocketed i mean brin was a lead staffer on that program an anr you can talk much better to that than i get but that they saw a huge increase in food rescue what also happened was they were a bit overwhelmed and then there that became a cell waste issue on the other end for the food pantries and the food shelves and kitchens so what this would do it would be to offer a local solution you know to the landfill they would be able to divert away from the landfill to this look this option so no but my question is just by way of for if if uh if we had the responsibility for doing the d-pack then that residue that non-organic residue packaging that becomes our cost to dispose of the landfill correct as opposed to when it might have left the supermarket the supermarket would bear that disposal landfill disposal cost so we're taking on we our fee structure would have to reflect that shift correct okay just want to try to think it through okay it's to discuss contract contracts i would move that the board of commissioners of the chit and solid waste district go into executive session to discuss contract issues and to discuss confidential attorney client communications made for the purpose of providing professional legal services to the board of commissioners where premature general knowledge would clearly place the district its member municipalities and other public bodies of persons involved at a substantial disadvantage and to prevent staff and the solid waste district attorney present second motion and a second are those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye those nay okay so the next item on the agenda is consideration of the grant from a and r right so the back in october 2008 district staff submitted a response to the dc's request for proposals which said 2018 i'm sorry 2018 thank you very much which sub-proposals to expand organics management infrastructure processing infrastructure in vermont so we applied for the maximum reward and after refining our proposal we were we were provisionally awarded $500,000 maximum it is a a matching grant and it requires a 60% match which would be bring the district's total out-of-pocket if we were to just keep the match to the 500,000 the project price to be 1.2 million out of pocket would be 750 but obviously all that we could give reimburse for be 500,000 doesn't mean that we would only spend 750 would depend on the project price that we would bring to the board for approval so this would again the grant is geared towards having the district accept about 10,000 at least minimum 10,000 tons of food scraps for processing and the state does not dictate how we do that so our res middle did talk about transfer and de-packaging and we see either of these options as a great opportunity and want to look into them more and again it's it's the next kind of iteration of what we've we've brought over the past 18 or so months to the board and looking more deeply into different options based on on guidance that we receive I do have resolution on the memo however I would like to reduce the word the verbiage on that so if we go with the resolution I would propose that we put the period at the end of infrastructure and I would recommend striking the rest because it should be you know you should expect to see you know design the cost benefit announces the the business plan that you shouldn't have to resolve that that's an expectation of that staff will bring that to you so I don't think I just think it's excessive words and you don't need to have any resolution but that's my opinion so I move that be it resolved the board of commissioners authorizes the executive director to enter into a grant agreement with the state accepting a matching grant of $500,000 towards organic diversion do we have a second on that second so again I think it's very important to make it clear that and it's in here but again this would in terms of the study and plan development that's on us correct do you have any idea of the cost of that at this point I don't I am putting $50,000 into my budget administrative budget but I don't know that it would cost that much I don't think that it would and then in terms of the grant it requires us to actually build infrastructure and so it's for building and it would be a reimbursement correct that's right so just wanted to make sure that was all clear to everyone right further discussion on that on the motion I should say Tim when does the infrastructure have to be completed so they are hoping that it's completed within 18 months however there's leeway depending on construction schedules knowing what that could be so we could apply for extension of that so within 24 months is reasonable okay other questions clarifying question is it possible to apply grants to the match that CSWD needs to cover so per se closed loop wanted to offer some grant options or if there was another granting source that's a great question I don't know but I can ask further questions okay sorry I was fine until you put the period in oh no now we have questions okay we can take it out so we haven't seen the actual grant documentation so I'd like to understand and make sure I understand exactly what we're committing to for construction and how much flexibility we have to react to what the study produces because I'm basically by voting in favor of this motion I'm accepting the grant based on whatever it says and that's a document I haven't seen so what are we committing to good point so if so what we are committing to is if you know again the board approves the project so the first step is for the board to approve a project that has been addressed in the scope and in the scope we suggest that we want to look into either transfer both a transfer and or a transfer and de-packaging operation so we want to look into both of those so if when we come back after the study is done and the board agrees that one of those projects is the way to go then that is the one that the grant money is applied to if we come back to the board the board says we don't want to do either of these things then the state hasn't cut us a check there's we're out the study cost and we say no thank you what happens if we go through the study we get all prepared due to the construction and then legislature says never mind we're going to just gut the whole diversion requirement entirely after after we've built or I guess the time frame is if we've got 18 months to build probably by then we're close to 2020 we would know that we can just stop and not build anything true um we also could uh let's do the transfer option you know which again is much lower capital investment it it immediately alleviates the overcapacity issue as well so with that one we're we're really not it doesn't matter whatever the state does where the impact's not all that great so the bill that's in that's pending now um there is a bill about 148 it does not touch the ban at all it addresses the home requirements which is why Mike so was asking about that um but it doesn't doesn't touch the ban Jen may do you have an update or or further um sorry go ahead so talking about our ordinance i mean this uh of course you have you can easily not see this but you prior to actually enforce that by putting it in our ordinance should it get working okay yes um this spreadsheet that was passed out there's a 800,700 dollar or $700,000 um shortfall subsidy requirement whatever um is the vast majority of that uh making compost short um it's a combination of the cost of compost and the commission of the allocations capital yeah i mean it depends on what's the bottom but yes compost is definitely more expensive than so i mean we could think about just stockpile of leaves in a big field and uh and not doing anything with them and saving five hundred six hundred thousand dollars two-thirds of the allocation on that one is the allocations picked up two-thirds of that that number that you just referred to in the upper the lower end of that subsidy uh spent it would just be spent in different programs with leaf in yard we would still need to manage it and move it and turn it and and do something we can't just throw it in a field but we would it would be much obviously less labor intensive and and costly without the food scraps even less costly is not composting at all just transferring everything correct or or deep packaging and straight and we have we've not just because of time modeled what happens if you stop composting i don't know i just but and and it didn't appear to be the will of the board at that point it wasn't at the retreat right right so which is why we didn't model that but it's it's labor intensive and it's capital intensive other questions is there a an option to produce the slurry without a d-pack machine can you just can you produce that slurry just from food scraps but you still have to get the contamination out i'm just thinking the apex is it works better the more you put in there you know so do you know i i'm saying if the market is for these digesters and that market seems to be growing then is there a ability to take the grant i mean we're kind of getting a more well no because i don't know because you're gonna the the um authorization is for you to negotiate an agreement and you've told us the agreement you want to negotiate is for looking at two options maybe i've i've misunderstood the process but i'm trying to say the others right the authorization is is simply to accept the grant award from the state i know but the grant award imposes some obligation on us process tons that's all process tons process 10 000 tons of food doesn't say half okay we are presented in the scope of the grant these two options that we want to investigate further so if we decide that that is not how we want to do that again we don't have access we wouldn't have access to the five hundred thousand dollars that's okay if we decide to go a different route with one access to the five hundred thousand dollars these are the two that we've presented at this point but i think also yeah i'm gonna stop there further questions comments before we take a vote okay you said you don't have a scope a cost of the scope no we do it's it's in the award no i'm sorry i'm your the oh oh for the study for the study we have not gone out to bid for that yet no that's the hard we're accepting the grant based we're gonna spend x if we vote to accept we're gonna spend we're signing up to spend x if we apply for it except the grant but we don't know what x is well i've put 50 000 in my i was gonna say can you just give me a high low so i know my worst case best case is i would say the low is probably 25 the high could be 50 would we is there any appetite to to off to limit that uh by cutting back on the special project numbers that you allocated are there other pressure valves i just don't want to see the budget get busted you know i mean is this within budget and spend we so this isn't incremental to the budget this this is budget in fiscal 20 the 50 000 as is the the nancy study so we could instead of there was a 40 000 that was set aside to get us have a study done to to do a startup for a company who could divert which you were on the committee for thank goodness glauval is gone um that that 40 000 could be applied to this instead of doing the study on why is all of this food waste going up and up and up in jittendon county that has a lower priority than this would so we could use that 40 000 but the budget that the finance committee is going to bring forward is going to include the proposed spend for this it will include uh 50 000 for come for consultant and the 40 000 which tells talking about is in this current year budget so there's 40 potentially in this current year budget 50 in the next further questions again finance committee tomorrow uh after 30 be there be square look at the the agendas on your tablets the minutes from the meetings all of the passboard packets are right there for you to see okay further we have great little um green wraps can you plan can you plan them can you plan them further in advance it has been and you know the difficulty there's nothing on the calendar for next month well it's on the website i believe it's on the website but we did not send it out to everyone so that they would see it tomorrow's meetings on the calendar i'm just saying but it's easier like i gotta unfortunately i gotta can we get back to the question yeah so all right further questions on the on the grant on the motion i should say regarding the grant okay i think we're ready to vote all those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye suppose nay okay make sure with that this too so s success well actually s6 s extension in uh hindsburg oh was there anyone else okay i believe the motion passes then make sure okay all right uh thank you um next on the agenda other business anything under other business and anything on program updates any questions on the program all right motion do we have a motion second all those in favor all right okay thank you all very much