 We're recording, so please go ahead. Okay, so I'd like to call the finance committee meeting of December 7, 2023 toward or 3pm and appreciate everybody being at the meeting on time. We have one very important agenda item in particular, which is the budget guidelines deal with today. This meeting is being held. This meeting is being held remotely by zoom. That isn't permitted by the open meeting law members of the public have access to the meeting by zoom. But I need to remind everybody on the committee and in the public that we will be recording this meeting for both audio and. No purposes, so that you should be aware that it is being recorded. I'm going to go through the committee members now and make sure that everybody can hear me and we can hear them. So on it. And Lynn. Present. Matt. Present. Bernie. Present. Kathy. Here. And Alicia. Present. Great. So thank you very much. So the agenda today is proposed unless there's comments from the committee to do something different. So we will see if there's any public comment that is to be wished to be offered. And then immediately move into the budget guidelines. I did list the transfer memo. For the next council to this agenda, but we don't, if we don't get time to get to it, that's secondary to the main purpose of the meeting. And when we get to the, to that item, I will explain my proposal for process. So if there's any members of the public. Who are participating meeting who would like to offer comment and comment. See that there's no attendees so I don't have to go further. And that subject at this point. And we're back to the committee. And so what I was going to propose is that we've tried to focus on policy. We not do a word smithing exercise where we try and think about the wording for every item because we'll be here forever. And what will be a very long and boring meeting and I don't think that it's necessary. We'll talk about what we'll do for process. At the end again but what I was thinking of is is that for the wording kinds of things people can send them to me and I will get them into a draft. But the major thing is that we want to make sure that we have the policy questions regarding the budget right and I appreciate that. So Holly and Jennifer was out there, both here. In case there are any questions that need technical answers or informational answers from staff. So that's the agreeable process to go forward and how to focus it. What I would do is. Who is going to put the memo as it is in the packet on the screen and then we'll try and go through policy questions in the order that they're presented and go that way. Any comments. Seeing none. Then you want to go ahead. I'm getting there. Not to worry. And what I've done it. This is the memo that Andy sent. And you'll see a few places where I actually made comments, but not discussed with anybody. Yeah, I was labeled as draft one and it was the thing that was started by Kathy and followed by me and which is at its last year's guidelines documents we would use that as the base because a lot of it is useful again. And the first section is really just three paragraphs sort of introductory piece and I don't know that there's any real policy of significance in there. So just looking for raised hands if people have comments I want to make is otherwise we should go on to the executive summary. So are there any issues that people want to raise about the executive summary section. And of course it does touch on some issues that then repeat later in the document and more detail. Yeah, I think as Andy said you're the blue the blues are largely came from me so but I'm looking at the comment that Andy had on the climate action and the climate action plan being stuck here when for the most part we're very general and this is one. I think it would be fine to move it to another place what I did is I saw that we had had it two years ago. And the issue that came up was when we say no new initiatives, whether this is considered a new initiative or initiative that we are continuing to pursue. That's why I some of this wording was literally in a document a couple years ago. But then the other thing I did with it. You know so first of all I'm saying I would be fine that it moves to later. But I wanted to make a point here that there's potential to get grants that themselves include staff to do the grants. And then the other thing is that we may be leaving money on the table and I've did this in our goals to that. You know if we aren't either staffed or with consultant to go after where we can get federal rebates. We need to do it, you know, after we've made the expenditure and for eligible pieces and we've got staff stretched pretty thin so this has a making sure we get things so I just want to make that comment because Andy I saw you thought that this this elevated this above everything else and that wasn't the intention so I would be fine moving it to later but I think it's an important point to make. We'll stop. Yeah, no I did. And I don't think that in the draft it got changed. I think it was just moved. I didn't move this this wasn't in this wasn't in 2024 at all. I'm bringing it in from 2023, but but in any case, I saw your comment and I was commenting on, I'm commenting on your comment. Actually, I should go back to the can you go back to the first paragraph and I see some hands up so we won't bypass this section. We go back up to Lynn to the first page. The one thing that had come in as a suggestion in the first paragraph that I just realized I didn't say anything about is that in the middle of the paragraph it says that we're making want to make progress on high priority goals. And then we list the goals including climate action infrastructure safety and economic vitality. Goals. And the question, the suggestion that I received was to just say high priority goals set by the council, so that we don't try and anticipate what the discussion would be about the goals when we as the council is working through the goals, it just automatically ties the two documents together without trying to anticipate what they're going to do. So I don't know if there's any objection to doing that. Andy. Yeah, Bernie. Am I recognized as me Matt, my hands up. Yeah, whoever had if anyone has a problem with doing it just saying goals are set by the council and not trying to anticipate goals now. That's what I'm looking for. I don't have a problem with that. I like that it simplifies I was already trying to cut down the wordiness of it when it went on for a really long paragraph. So I think stating it broadly makes sense. Okay. I didn't have a problem with it Andy I was trying I wanted I raised my hand to cosine what Kathy wrote it was something that I had tried to highlight in my town manager evaluation was specifically about seeking funding. And I think that was definitely additional funding, and especially around climate action measures so I just wanted to kind of cosine on with what Kathy had had just been talking about. Right. And the only thing I added was that I think there's other money out there besides those tax credits. Absolutely. It's not just climate action money it's if that was one element of it but I think generally speaking that's one of that's been one concerns and something I'd like to highlight. Thanks. You know that it's yeah. Yep. So, let's see. If somebody can recall exactly where it is in the, I think it's in the next page. Next page. Yeah. Yeah. So we move down there for a second. Let's continue with the theme we're on that section. Yeah. And, and that was good so I see the edit took out the federal direct credits I think that's fine you know my point was there's money on the table let's wherever it is. Bring it home. So, there's agreement to the to what is presented there. Yes. Okay. So that is a an addition to that. That was not in last year. Kathy started it and thank you. So we're okay with that. Is there anything else in the executive summary section that people want to jump to now. And just, I mean, this is just purely, I see the orange added on recent inflation costs are unlikely to be reversed and also, I don't know. You know, in general, I'm in favor of fewer words or better. So unless I wonder if this is just speculative. It seems so speculative that you know if we. So I'm not sure it adds anything we made the point that we're going to have a tough time covering it based on our own labor cost increases so I'm just I'm looking to make it streamlined a bit. I don't think it does anything to get rid of it. And I'll just speak to this this. The yellow was not that there was anything wrong with this paragraph. It just feels like we're giving the reader a definition of what pop two and a half is and how it affects ours. And I find it interrupts the flow to have a long paragraph and my preference would be to put it in a footnote but as Eddie said we're not in the practice of putting things in fit footnotes. So I don't have any, I don't have any objection to the words. It just seems like it's right in the middle and maybe if we think every year there's a new set of readers and we need to define what two and a half is then it's a good thing to just put it in every single year which which was the only reason I yellow shaded it as you see I didn't move it anywhere. Yeah, I think the reason that I put it in to begin with is just my experience that two and a half is what really drives budgeting still now in what how we go about establishing municipal budgets and limitations and municipal budgets. I had a comment that he made an email to me that he may want to speak to directly about the effect of assuming the two and a half percent every year. But in reality, this is our major funding source is our property tax, and it is limited what we can do with it, the price place is the limits on what we can do as a, as a town because it, our revenue is there and we don't get revenue in a progressive sense. Bernie. I would, I would favorite, you know, this is, again, this is the one thing that keeps coming up over and over and over again is prop two and a half. I think everybody should be familiar with it by now. Even newbies, and you know, there may be just one sentence somewhere that, you know, we're that references the legislation of somebody needs doesn't understand it needs to go look it up. I would take paragraph out. Okay. Let me see if I can come up with a way without doing it as we speak. Andy. Yeah, I was just going to say Andy, I think a footnote would be fine, even if it were referencing a web page like the through the state where folks can learn more, because I think, you know, Bernie, I hear you but I think this is one place where people can use it for the first time and so even if we don't, you know, as as a newbie they don't necessarily need to get the entire thing here but I think if we could link to something that that would be helpful just saying, you know, prop two and a half was established blah blah blah. Get it to one sentence and then say have a footnote that says reference and then have a website. I think that would suffice but I'd like to give people the opportunity to get that full kind of download of information should they need it. I don't know if it's in the report but I think it needs to link to it. Yeah, that's fine. Okay. Look at that compromise y'all on a Thursday afternoon. Yeah, no, I think that's fine. So I say I will make sure that it ends up being at most one sentence, and I'll figure it out. And we'll have one. When we get to the opportunity for review because I'm going to work on it as quickly as I can after after the meeting so that we don't have a long period of time. Going on Matt to you. Thanks Andy. Yeah. So I want to just clarify since you brought it up. My, my comment to you is a shade more nuanced than questioning two and a half what what I was trying to introduce was sort of a comparison of previous budgets that had drawn. I think it was 6063% of the revenue was from property tax and 11% was from local receipts. That was the 20 that was from the financial indicators presentation. And I think that that ratio of property tax to receipts is an interesting thing for us to talk about from a fiscal policy perspective, in terms of something that's got three different pieces to it. You know, it has obviously it has the property tax revenue piece. It has the receipts piece, and then has the overall spending piece. So any, you know, any of those three pieces could affect that ratio. And I think it would be, it might be I really genuinely would like to hear sort of the thoughts of more experienced folks. But it might be something that that could be introduced in budget guidelines that would set set a goal for the town manager to try to start addressing the burden on taxpayers property, the property tax burden. But but giving you know a goal with with a few different mechanisms a few different ways to work on it. Because I mean that's that's certainly one thing that I just I heard so many times, you know, during the past six months was, you know, who who is paying attention to the property tax burden and what's being done about it. And I don't think it's any one thing I certainly don't think it's as simple as, you know, not doing our two and a half percent this year, you know, I think it's a much more complicated notion than that. So and I don't I don't know that we know I was actually looking at it in the next page and sort of deeper into the revenue discussion but since you brought it up now I'll just I'll just introduce it there and you know I had mentioned it to you I mentioned it to Lynn as well and you know folks want to speak about it we can we can hold off on the discussion until you know a little bit further into the document but I wanted to kind of get the idea out there, you know, in its entirety since you mentioned it. And Matt I think it's a bigger issue than you've just raised because the other piece is the share of government of state money that comes into us. You know, if you go back 20 years it was a bigger share, you know, just some things we're maybe more in control of than others direct control but indirect control there. So I think it belongs later, if we say anything. Okay Kathy and actually I mean the numbers that I was introducing 2014 was 63 and 11 so that makes 74% you know, and, and last year was 68 and seven which is 75%. So I mean, you're absolutely right that what I was what I was doing by identifying those two streams of was trying to narrow down those things that are within our control or at least our significant influence. You know obviously policy advocacy at the state and federal level is important work as well but I think when we're talking about budgeting guidelines, you know those are the two sources of revenue that we have the most direct impact on. But you're absolutely right it's I mean it's certainly a multi multi stream question. Andy, remember I can't raise my hand. I can just say I found Matt's concept pretty appealing, but I do want to make sure we save time to discuss it, because it really is almost becomes a financial policy guideline, not just one year. There is a little bit of that of course in this document, but you know we do it once a year because of the budget cycle. I think it's a question of community education because I think that all of us as counselors need to explain to our constituents, why the burden is so heavy on residential tax. You know that comes to number of things. One is our lack of opportunities for building commercial development. Another is as Matt pointed out, fact that some of our other revenue streams that are locally driven, like restaurant tax and hotel motel tax is driven by the availability of that revenue in the businesses that can generate it. And so that there's anything that we do that is going to help is probably going to be a long trek and develop some real creative approaches. What Kathy was mentioning about. We continue my request, Bernie's got his hand up continue to go through this because there may be a good place to put some of this if we this it doesn't quite fit here, but Bernie, you, I didn't mean to jump over here. Okay, just, I'm sitting back listening because another piece of this. The key critical is land use. I mean there's a land use decisions made by the town by previous time administrators and by town meeting that really do tie hands and when you try to rework the land use restrictions or requirements. So we have an interesting situation where we have almost half of our property is in the hands of others that can't be taxed. We have a relatively small proportion of our population that our taxpayers because of half of our population student and transient. So we have a lot of land use regulations because we like to think we're nice distillation will be you call it community that can exist in the middle of we exist in the middle of our own universe. So, and that we're immune from economic forces. So people I people really need to think about. They really think about all those things you really think about land use. We're in remind get reminded that the town is part of a larger economy. We may value we may value Amherst's degree. But the people who can cause some development or cause us to be in a better position to raise tax revenues may not share that that value in economic terms. I do think just this this risk going into a larger debate, because one of the points I point out is I've got some cities that do very dense land use, and they can't buy unless their budget each year, either, because they're paying expenses so the big thing the big thing is that more than half of our land has no tax taxes on it when we put our conservation land and you know we we are property tax poor when it comes to taxable property. Well, the towns in Massachusetts are dependent on the wealth tax, what the wealth being the property and how the properties develop. And if you can't develop half of your property then, you know, or if it's if it's removed from your ability to tax you have then you are constrained and it's an interesting problem. Yeah. So that's a huge constraint. So. Okay. Shall we move on. Yep. So then we're getting into revenue projections, which is really probably where one place we could talk about. We could talk about what you said have just been raised about, or we could do it later when we get to it towards the end of the document, and by future recommendations, but we have a pretty clear statement third third paragraph that commercial property is limited more than half their property is tax exempt institutions or conservation. So the burden of the tax falls on residents and small businesses. I mean it's a pretty, it's not a very long paragraph but it states the box we're in. Yep. Look at the first paragraph that page, which is the first paragraph is where I was playing with that statement but I noticed the number of 69% in your first sentence is that a rounding is around up to 69%. I checked against, I checked the numbers for this year based upon the financial indicators presentation. All right. It changed it did increase up to 69. Okay. So I had, I had suggested that that sentence that I sent you could potentially just kind of attached to the bottom of this first paragraph here so, you know, just just summarizing again, you know, in FI 14, and we could, we could cite the indicators that you mentioned in FY 14 property tax revenue represented 63% of the overall town budget and local receipts were represented 11% and FY 23 are represented, I guess 69% and local receipts represented 7%. The ratio of property tax revenue to local receipts is an important one in assessing the fiscal health of the town. If this could be maintained at a constant level, it might represent an effort to ease the burden on property tax. You know, I mean, I just offer this as kind of a consideration. It's a it's a revenue consideration because we can talk about, you know, efforts to increase local receipts. And I, you know, I, I think that's that's a different conversation but I think it's an important one. It's a revenue and of course property tax is also revenue issue. And then, but it also can be a, you know, obviously a budgeting consideration as well. I mean, a spending consideration that is. So anyway, that's one place that I had suggested I thought it might, it might fit. Matt, would you send me that place. Yes. If you do that. And just, Lynn, if you put it in just if anyone puts it in. So it doesn't interfere with the flow. I'm not objecting, putting in because it's 10% a big number and the, it's the new growth number is put in as a pretty conservative number. So I would put it right after all of that, rather than in the middle of it. Would you put it here or at the end. At the end. Yeah. Where I have sense. Yeah, because the first several are all related to the property tax. And then the rest is, by the way, I don't know. I don't know. Here's the other. From that year. Yeah. Okay. Got it. So. Just make sure it's, it's, it's. Yeah. We'll have to double check all the numbers. Moving along. I think that. Confirm, just confirm. So I'm trying to confirm some stuff too. Yeah. So the policy that reserves funds should not be used to support recurring expenses for reasons we explained in the next section. Obviously we'll come back at it again, but it comes up. We did. Put it into the summary as well as into the. Expense section. And the point is obvious. Do it you complete the. The reserves and you don't have them to use the next year to continue the same program. You haven't built them stable funding. Yeah, I just wanted to. In the paragraph that talks about pilots. I remember last year pilot was a four letter word. So I think it's, it's there on that page. It's section. Yeah, that's it. I just wanted to say or make. Add to that just or make other contributions. It doesn't have to be cash contributions. They could give us land. They could give us, you know. Other kinds of support. Yep. Okay. We'll get it in one place or another. Is I think that our explanation of pilots later is a little more complete. Okay. Call. I only put this thing right here because I just somebody when we get all done needs to check if the number is all the same. Yeah, no, and I'll double check. I can, I did double check Andy's 69%. It is 69, but I. Page numbers and cross references will make sure we still have those sections. Yeah, some of that waits to the end because as you add and subtract language, you change pagination. Yep. Percentages that are based on something else is worth checking right away. Yeah, no, the pages can't go in yet. Well, I have to constantly be changed. Sometimes I do page. You know, as you did this code to remind me to go back and check. So we're on to the expenses section. Which is brief because. I actually, I actually did that was removed for the general budgeting policy. That's right. I changed it just so anyone knows why I did this as we talk about expenditures later so it didn't feel that it goes here. So it just felt redundant. That's why it's gone. I'm sorry I need to make sure that Athena that you know that Alicia had to leave the meeting. I didn't catch that thanks for mentioning it. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Jordan. Alicia had to leave the meeting. So again to the general budgeting policy section. I had one thing here. Oh, no, I'm sorry. It was a minor one. Andy rightfully deleted the yellow stuff. I don't want anything about the library in there. So, I'm fine with taking it out. Sorry, two weeks ago anyway. Yeah, we wanted to bring it into where we were now. Yeah, so we have to anticipate to because by the time the council approves it, it will be some changes also. So we have to project. So, so what you're seeing is cuts or sometimes it was just that was last year's story, it's all over, you know, so we were saying that that. When you're seeing some of the things that were cut out of the document where we didn't yet have a school contract and other pieces. We didn't want to get it. So I'm, I'll say on this page, but Lynn started to scroll to the next one. I think people could see what I'd, what I'd done. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Matt Holloway has his hand up. Yeah. I'm not sure exactly which section we are in. I think we have the general budgeting policy section. Are we there yet, Andy? Yeah, we are. That's so. So we have this first paragraph, which I like because it does kind of capture a multi-year crest EI and the firefighter fund. I think that's, that's smart and a nice way to get it a little bit broader perspective than just the year by year. But it also captures where we're at this coming year or this year. And are we clear enough? I think, I mean, Crest and DEI, we know our general fund items. I mean, and correct me if I'm wrong, but the four firefighter EMT positions, those are somewhat supported by the strategic agreement. Correct. That's correct. Yes. I mean, do we want it at all call out those three different new or new wish expense areas by, you know, by dedicated funding sources? Or is that, is that too, is that unnecessary? Well, Crest and DEI are downtown departments. And we're essentially recognizing that they are departments. They're not contingent upon any outside funding. They have to come into the budget totally. But you could add a sentence here for, right after this smooth, the transition, you could say the strategic agreement from UMass will help support the firefighters, right? You know, you know, because that's that, you know, so we lose in the ARPA money that allowed us to put four in, but we've got some money coming. And so it's not saying it covers it, but we'll help support it. Yeah. I just think it's a helpful. It's an appropriate acknowledgement of that effort. I agree. I agree with that as well, since we repeatedly call on, you know, getting more financial resources from, from UMass and the state. It's nice to acknowledge that there's been some work done and there's some progress in that area. And then just word smithing, I would say will help because we're talking about the coming year instead of help. We'll help. Yeah. Yeah, just, I would just put the word, yeah. Yeah, thanks. And I made a change in the next paragraph because I think you said major in education, you said. With education. And it's higher ed. I mean, we're not. We're not trying to tax the common school. It was a joke. Oh, why not? All of these places where we refer to stabilization funds and free cash, just make sure the years are right. I, for instance. Yeah, I wasn't, I wasn't always change. Fixing the air. So that ends that session. Andy, I have a question about the. The percentage of red levy. We're going to go to capital. I mean, is that. That's a goal, right? We don't know that we can can actually do that. And can we. This year, I'm not sure that you'll be able to. That's a question I think that you have to revisit every year. When. That was first established as a goal. Get it higher. It was probably under just around 7%. And. Those goals established to move it to 10%. And it took until last this current year that we're in now. To get it to 10%. After having established that goal. Back when we still have town meeting. Well, but this. In answer, Bob, this is in the guidelines. So we could say the guideline has the 10.5. So. We support the recommendation that you included in the, and the guidelines would be a way to do it. And then flip side, Bob. If we don't put 10 and a half in this year and we vote the library, we're going to be in trouble. We. You know, so, so it is, it's a goal, but right now Paul. And company has literally put 10 and a half in, in the table that we're referencing for people. Right. Right. Yeah. No, I'm aware of that. It's just. I mean, I think, I think, I think it's fine. I just wanted to make sure that. We keep our eye on that because I, I'm not sure where we're going to be. Ten and a half percent this year. You know, and, and then the other thing is that that was the one we, when we, when we hit. The wall a couple of years ago, that's where we cut, you know, so unless. You know, it is. So. We could put unless. This needs to be adjusted and we expect you'll come back to us. If it needs to be adjusted or something about that. You know, if we can't maintain it. I think that's assumed. I don't think you need to even say it. I wouldn't put that in there because. You don't want to. Don't want to give too much away. I mean, it's reality. We end up with this. That. It was big chunk of capital needs. Then we want to maintain current programs. I think that's assumed. I don't think you need to even say it. I wouldn't put that in there because. You don't want to. You don't want to give too much away. We want to maintain current programs that. Is we assume that. We have them because they're valuable and we have good people working to. Do that work. And then we always have. Ideas from the community and from the council. To do something else. And that's as we get into that. Let's do this new initiative. That we're trying to do some protection. Because whether we realize that. You start going that route and the other tour. At risk. Or you can't do it. So, Bob, are you comfortable leaving it written away? It is, or we should say as recommended. The guidelines. I think, I think we, I, we should just leave it as is. I just wanted to make sure that. We understood that this is. You know, we may or may, may not make it this year. And we need to be prepared. As a committee to, to address that. Kathy's point that. If we. Go forward with the library. And cut the 10 and a half percent. We put other things at great risk. Understood. I think it's going to be a tough discussion if we're ever to happen. Matt's got his hand up, Andy. Yeah, go ahead, Matt. Thanks, Kathy. Yeah, I think, I mean, personally, you know, only strengthening that 10 and a half. I think it's the only. The only thing I would support here, but I actually wanted to back up to the previous paragraph about cannabis. So making a decision about the funding structure. Has been a carryover. I think it's going to be a tough discussion. However, you know, it seems likely that this coming incoming council will be starting to spend or, or design a program to spend. Money out of the reparation stable stabilization account. And I personally do not fully understand the implications of that on the account on the intra, none of us do. We haven't seen the model yet to project sort of what the model is. And so I think there's, there is an element of uncertainty on that account. On that stabilization account that we should at least acknowledge in these guidelines. And, and I don't think until we see any projections, we have, I mean, we put this aside until the new year, but, but that I just want to flag for everybody that that that's certainly going to be something. That's a variable in next year's, in this coming year's budget. And I think that's going to be something that's going to be as rewarding as is because this is the revenue stream. The commitment to do the cannabis money is where we are right now. But you're, so that's the guideline, right? We don't have any other guidance to provide right now, but you're right. That something might change next year. Well, maybe Kathy after the, after the words, 2 million in the middle of that paragraph. So let me just, I'm just going to read it just to give a quick recap. I just want to say that we have the council established a goal that we make transfers to the fund annually based upon the financial health of the town and an amount equal to the certified cannabis tax revenue for the previous year, but not to exceed 205,000 until such a time as the town's contribution equals 2 million, period. However. to begin spending money out of this account sooner and you know the town manager will need to be prepared for you know just I just want to acknowledge the uncertainty because I think it actually very well may touch this coming year's budget. But I think that can I just say I think that's a different issue because this says the town's contribution equals two million and it doesn't say it's an endowment fund. In other words we just keep a clock on how much we add every year and if they spent the wad you know it doesn't have anything about the withdrawals this is right this is really just flow in. When we wrote this last year there was no withdrawal on the table so I mean but what I'm saying is the only commitment we have that's standing right now is to to regularly putting up money until it gets to two million and now that we're at a hundred thousand rather than two hundred a year it'll take longer. So there's nothing that has changed from that now but there is a potential that they'll start drawing on those funds earlier than before and that's it to me it's just a totally different issue then. Yeah yeah no I hear your point is there is there a section in here that's more appropriate to speak to the health of the fund than this than this section because I'm speaking to the health of the fund and sort of you know what what impact I mean I realized 12 on December 7th 2023 there's there's no commitment to withdrawal but I think that the general direction is going to be by you know. It may be the proposal that they might start drawing on it goes in this next section is expenses for operations that there's a place that you know during the year there may because it doesn't really affect the operating fund at all it just is drawing down on that other that that that special reserve that's I think a better place to put it. When you get there tell me where you want it. Are we all in agreement that 3% for each of the major areas is what we want. Yes. Yes. So I see Kathy's drafting note has been struck but you know it struck me not no pun intended. You know as a as a I mean I don't think that the you know there's not going to be a change in salaries and certainly all the costs in terms of temporary storage for the library it's you know it's a hard argument to make that the operating budget of the library will go down but it's a provocative you know I I actually asked the question and it has been soundly answered since I wrote to go ahead and just red line it works for me glad you asked here's another one of those places where Kathy said yes that was what that was last year this is this year you know. So you know when I cut let me just think Andy's I don't know which was mine but because of that earlier paragraph on climate it said we're doing this with investments in all this I was wherever possible trying to not say things more than once and so it says it up in that earlier one then in our capital budget we've been moving toward all of this so that's wasn't that that isn't true it's just it's already been said right and again repetitive I added a few words in on the crest thing I I've been very strongly urging not just is it working based on what we thought it was but is it effective and so I put program evaluation to assess effectiveness. And you know and did you put the potential of teamwork or did I because you did way back in leap there was never the thought that they would be totally separate and right just so everyone knows if you look at what Northampton's been doing in Greenfield they've got much more they've got evidence they're making a difference and they got they had to get it up running but some of it is two people going out in an unmarked car one of the police before the handoff happened so we've got a model that has been keeping things separate and we're but so I agree Lynn with what you put I just think we need to we need to think of what what could make this work well yeah yeah interestingly the the cahoots program which is the original community responder program that's funded through the Eugene police department. I've got really big concerns with with that framing actually I think that was one of the original things that CSW CSWG really emphasized was that they were not co-responders and I I want to just caution us as to how we're framing this as to not change the direction of the program in our financial guidelines I think that it's it's really important that these are this is not it's it's not funded through the police department there's there's a lot of reasons why that's that's important and I this sentence stands out to me in a concerning way so I'm I want to look back specifically I think that there's a difference between working as you know two different departments in the same town and then the collaborative needs of that and working together as a team and I think that there's a lot that comes between those two things or sorry not as a team as co-responders and so I would caution our financial guidelines as in as away from possibly changing a program directive and I worry that that does they're going to be they're going to be co-responders it's it's not a model it's not the model the model that was in the CSW report this plot what happens in real life is there are going to be times when they will be co-responders and we have to be careful not to confuse the community this community response program with like Greenfield or other towns where they have a mental health counselor who rides along with the police office right that's a different thing all together but to think that crest will operate independently will never interact with the police and it's not true there will be again with cahoots which is run by a clinic fully fledged mental health clinic there's an overlap between when between their being co-responders with the police and being co-responders with the the the emergency medical services even though cahoots team has a health person a nurse a nurse practitioner as part of the two person response team so I wouldn't hold on to the CSW model because there's a lot of problems with that and I think crest if it's going to be successful is going to have to evolve and we're going to have to look at how successful it is and but that is not up to the finance committee and I worry that writing it in the finance report we are acting as if the finance committee gets to decide how this program operates and so the press responders are not trained mental health professionals they are not the co-responder like we have through CSO and so I just what I would like to caution us against is dictating the the functioning of a department through the budget guidelines that's my concern I don't disagree with you the model presented by the CSWG will need to evolve but we should not prescribe that evolution through the financial guidelines and so I worry that we in the phrasing of this and I can try to think of a different sentence in the next 10 minutes but the phrasing of this I worry that it is it to me reads as to directive towards the operations of a department that's what I'm trying to on I just want to say that that last sentence the law enforcement blah blah blah that that was in last year's guidelines and we all it that that's not new wording that that is wording that we saw last year and the whole council signed off on and I'm I'm just pointing it out this this year it strikes me differently I think you know that's something that I hear you and I don't think that the last sentence specifically is bad and I see that it's the same I mean I hear you that it's the same one I just I caution us as how it was just described on this call by this committee is not necessarily what I think is the right message for the finance committee to send so I was about some clarification on that so it's the verbalization and maybe the second on the sentence above it where the blue ads and potential teamwork just can do do a period after crust staffing needs period and then that's fine I yeah see Lynn it right at the end of the top of the page assess effectiveness assessment of police and staff chapter needs period and then just take out that other because we saved the teamwork again in the interest of not saying things twice we already have the sentence that was in there last year from leap yep to you I I just wrote that we needed to identify when the leap report was because there may be others down the road it was I just had it up um 21 we're kind of we're kind of outside of the hand raising just fine you know I'm happy to jump into I am I continue to be curious about sort of the evaluation the Cress evaluation and that I think is something that should really steer the staffing conversation and so I think yeah I mean I think that you know the financial dimension should be a part of that evaluation and and I see there's an evaluation to assess effectiveness I actually think on to Anna's point you know the effectiveness of the program is not sort of that's outside the purview of this of these guidelines but the the financial impact of the program you know is so I don't know if there's a way that we can sort of introduce a seek out some quantitative metrics you know one thing that I have shared with with several folks is you know Greenfield program for example you know I recently heard read an article where they talk about the number of divert diversionary calls you know calls that were diverted off the police and into their mental health team that's you know I would like to see some kind of metrics quantitative data which then can be translated into dollars and I think you know is an appropriate metric for fiscal guidelines and to guide staffing so I don't know on the fly Lynn I don't know if that's a helpful framing for for the issue but I just I'm just wondering about instead of this bit that says assess effectiveness but don't you think that's what effectiveness is what do you I I guess that's how I interpret that word so I think you're interpreting it differently yeah maybe I'm just looking to refine it I don't I yes I think effectiveness but but honestly if I'm a casual reader and particularly if I'm somebody who is sensitive to you know Crest being like under attack program you know if I'm sensitive and defensive to the to the program and the structural integrity you know effectiveness can mean many things right effectiveness can be you know the perceived impact of this visit on this one person you know what I mean so I think one of quantifying the quantifying the program's activities and then translating that into staffing is a more appropriate financial lens to look at this with yeah I I would agree but I'm not I'm not upset by the use of the term you know effectiveness I mean every department every town department should be demonstrating its effectiveness and I think in this case where we're trying to build a new service having benchmarks having data and is is important and that's what has to happen I I sort of cringe every time I hear a call that we need 24-7 there's no evidence of that so let's let's you know as we as we build a new department let's see and we can rely on the folks from Leap we can we have a major research university just down the street we can get some ways of measuring effectiveness and and that means how many calls are diverted who's being helped you know so that would be that's fine I'm not hearing like a rousing support for the idea but I might I might pop in I'm not going to put my long-term program evaluation per hat on but just to say that programs when they are when they start should have goals and there they should be evaluated based on those goals and I'm just going to do I agree Lynn I think and to Matt's point it's tough because I I agree that saying the you know that the program evaluation needs to be in there could step beyond the purview of this committee and it's it's one of those tough things and I hope I don't sound like I'm you know walking back my main point of what I said earlier but to for this for us to only emphasize the financial impact also minimizes the other important elements of its of the impact right so like so so it's tough to to save solely financial impact and I don't want to minimize all the other things about it and so I I agree with Lynn like that's part of it and I I don't necessarily have an issue with the with the framing of program evaluation and I I'm trying to remember back and maybe other folks know what the timeline is for the for that initial evaluation that was being worked through with the Donahue Institute and see one of the reasons I want to put this in here because I'm not clear that it's been active I'm feeling I'm feeling it may have been dropped okay so that's that's kind of where I'm going and my my impression is that what what Donahue provided was guidelines for the this is the sort of metric you should be gathering and then it was dropped so that's why I am actually you know nudging further on this quantify you know instead of assess a quantify effectiveness you know because I don't think that we're going to be getting a report any time soon but or ever I don't think any report is forthcoming from that contract I I don't think it was expected to okay yeah and I did but that was an assumption that I didn't really you know have any reason to I guess the other thing is that as much as we're the finance committee and these are financial guidelines the these get approved by the entire council and they would they I think of this is kind of with my full council hat on so on a thanks I know you do evaluation as well one of the questions are also trying to make sure that we send out a warning to the to the world into the people who are saying it was originally envisioned as a 24 7 program we need to have adequate staff so that we can have responders available 24 7 and if we have to cut the police department we should do it because this is a more effective way to respond to a segment of the need and we're we're trying to sort of I'm up with some method of saying hey wait a minute we got to evaluate that better right you know I I think we're going too far with this discussion to tell you the truth I mean Lynn if there's a better wording for assess effectiveness fine I think we're just saying that we we need to assess both the police and Cress you know we have if we have staffing shortage if we have people on burnout in different departments we need to worry about you know so I think it's maybe Lynn your words added ready to red flag um rather than should be adjusted in future years based on experience and assessment you know but but in any case I just think this is just guidelines and so we we are hoping that next year is better than this year is the way I would put it that's there Lynn can I yeah go ahead so I think one of the things that we're kind of ignoring here is are the other elements of public safety that Cress does interface with quite often and so I'm wondering if we shift the instead of the sentence that is pinging in my brain and I know it was in there last year but it's pinging in my brain is the need for community responders and police to work together I guess I'm wondering if we can say something I mean I guess I don't know if this is still emphasizing what the leap report did and I'm trying to find the exact sentence that this is referring to but I I'm wondering if it's you know we recognize the need for community responders who are a part of a robust community safety network or something that that's emphasizing because what the leap report also talks about is calls from the fire department that Cress eventually might might respond to and so I think I don't I don't want to just have it be I don't know just those two because it is and that's been the emphasis of the program from the start is that it is part of our community safety network so even if it's just you know um for a robust community safety that includes that includes Cress the fire department police is just yeah yeah exactly I I mean because I actually Lynn I was pitching it for the end not not there but it's fine either place I think you could just take out those last sentences um for the sake of not being repetitive yeah I just I wanted to emphasize that that that was the vision that Paul's always presented it as as one of the legs of our public safety stool table I don't know he uses it as a branches maybe so you want this where uh instead of the we need community responders and police who work together I was just saying we need community responders as part of a robust community safety team that's all instead of just police who work together because they do also work together with fire presumably that makes that that makes good sense and again so do you want this yes right thank you in the budget don't we refer to all three departments under public safety we do so I think those are the words we should use public safety thank you sorry Andy okay now where do you want this okay I would like you to move that to I would honestly take out the second to last sentence and replace it with that but I don't know if people want to refer back to the leap report if if folks are attached to that it sounds like there's been a lot of evolution since the leap report and so I wouldn't be upset about I don't I maybe we put it right before that and leave it in there yeah because the leap report had a lot of this wording in it it did absolutely yeah maybe this wording I mean they were talking about um yeah and some of it is yeah it's it's just such a good report I don't want to lose yeah no absolutely I'm fine referencing it how about just evaluation to assess effectiveness that sounds fine okay I this is grammatically not something most people want to do I would want to go like and the that's fun I'm trying to move us off of here so we don't get stuck on wordsmithing that's what I was trying to avoid but yeah because the next section is capital and yeah but we're not there yet because Kathy said something here that triggered something for me the plan is for me okay that's Andy put that in because I forgot to this is the specific the the motion we passed that is putting money in the budget um right yeah I but I we also and I just purely wanted to not forget that we needed to put it in the guide lines yeah I think I might take the quotes out in that quote the motion as it was worded because it's rather confusing wording but get the substance in because ultimately what the council it was an honest motion I believe and it was passed um fairly substantial um if you say the accounts are recommended including you can just make a very including but the finance committee including the financial guidelines direct recommendation to include the amount it's four thousand dollars and you don't need to put the votes you not to put not maybe I did write this but you don't need to put the votes I can't I it's a hard to imagine that I put that those no I think I put that in because I went what happened was is that I had the the section of the draft minutes for that date because we haven't seen the draft minutes as a council yet and then I was just um kind of late at night as one of my last acts trying to get this done by taking the the the draft minutes and make it a paragraph so I'm maybe I'm just being dense but why is this particular item a part of our guidelines package because the council voted they should be council is very specific it's an increase in the budget you know so we're telling we're we're not making any recommendations anywhere except for increase the budget here um the council he's got read he's got penciled in council payment and he needs to add he town manager needs to add sixty four thousand if he hasn't already okay I get and are we doing that so so every time that the council proposes any any new I'll spend I mean I just feel like it's a it's a very specific thing to be calling out here be it is but it's our budget you know so it's kind of a first the only time this happened is when we brought in crests where we had to add money to the budget but it wasn't in advance this way this is kind of a reminder that this has got to be as he develops the budget he has to have this in the budget or maybe we should okay I mean it's an increase on a line item that was already in the budget yes I mean if others feel like it's it's vital to have it in the guide it doesn't feel like a guideline it feels like a very specific you know we can't we can't avoid the fact that the council voted seven to two to include this ask the finance committee to include the guidelines okay so the motion was actually to put it in the guidelines I didn't realize yeah what's in the quotes now part of which has been deleted to make it read better but what's in the quotes now was the motion that was okay all right I didn't realize yeah it was it was more than odd moment man yeah that is odd okay all right all right thank you can I raise two issues we never voted but when we discussed the charter review committee we said they might need funds and at that point it was well then that should be in the financial guidelines it wasn't a vote so yeah that was and what would they need they would need funds for a consultant but I mean just something like the charter review committee may need funds to support the charge from the can I ask a very pointed question and that is do we want to test out the council through the guideline draft as to whether the whether or not they're willing to entertain increase for school committee and library actually library doesn't get paid I wouldn't put it here okay no we do know that if it's not included in the budget it can't happen right that's my point right but I wouldn't put it I I guess I would oppose putting it in here so let's put it let me think of it that way then maybe I'll bring it up when we bring when we discuss it with the full town council yeah no I think that's appropriate I think that's the right place to put it for a subset of us to take more money out of the operating budget for for those entities and then I had another comment here I don't ever remember us discussing or ever having it being proposed that we use ARPA to reduce the new elementary school costs oh yeah I didn't mean to say that if I did I don't know who said it but it's you know something I remember no I it looks like maybe I put that in you know so this is this particular sentence right up to that period and getting rid of all the rest um is was a suggestion for me if we're willing to make it that given how tight we are we allocate the ARPA funds to town capital needs I personally wish we would do that I felt like from the beginning we should just take all the ARPA money and use it for the town but then that's not how it happened so I put it in there for whether others on finance are willing to do that because it will would help a lot with this whole idea of a certain amount of money for roads every year um there's apparently a way we can sequester ARPA we can book it and then use it so we could you know get roads up to a certain amount for each of the next three or four years which would be really useful and we're not going to be able to do that with the 10.5 capital we it's just so everyone knows it's penciled in at six hundred thousand roads so Kathy right after I introduced the idea of school committee pay at the town council meeting you should introduce that I've said on multiple occasions the ARPA money should be used to offset the town's capital expenses and the potential for borrowing for those expenses so using what we have left to to um take care of some some outstanding capital needs it's perfectly fine okay so that's the sentence that's just the one one sentence paragraph well it's two sentences no that's it let it stand alone because I think yeah I'm not the only one who said that certainly but I really think it needs to be emphasized and pressed that you know this is this is one time only money it's not going to repeat it itself so let's use it for one time only expenses and just so people know you know Crocker farm the school is on the list of needing a new HVAC system to go out for debt borrowing so we could avoid it for what it's penciled in on if we use some of the art you know so this it captures what you just said Bernie it's in the pipeline is something we really want to do and help us do it yeah it just makes sense to me you know you offset as many as your future capital expenditures as you can with it and the fact that I have three grandkids at Cracker Farm doesn't seem to someone actually who swims at Puffer said are we ever gonna dredge Puffer so we don't have to keep closing it down for various kinds of fungy and it's on the back burner for capital too we don't have the money to dredge you know it's you know the dredging will help but it won't yeah it doesn't cure it you gotta take here what's going on upstream before you can yeah no and that was it too we just don't have the money the problem with dredging on Puffer's pond is oh i'm sorry i think that would be best if we end the conversation i'm sorry i'm just thinking of the delayed stuff so this is broadly enough we'll skip that uh what is this part of a sentence what was there i think it's just part of the same paragraph isn't it in your budget to provide a fuller picture in other words i got it the actual the budget never shows that we had another three million dollars we were spending yeah that somehow got bumped all of us are saying but we did more than this and there was that so having him artfully that was last year's wording in your budget to provide a fuller picture yeah so maybe when we clean this up it will work yeah you might just come a backspace too right you should have to get where the paragraph is that we're not seeing right now not to worry um i just so you know uh in my in the mma fiscal policy committee we did do the discussion once of how different communities are using arpa funds and most communities were avoiding using arpa funds for any recurring expenses and therefore they were using a lot for capital and i was thinking that for most municipalities that's what they did any um are you ready to move on can i ask one i'm sorry i asked one question on this uh on on arpa um so i think what you just said kind of spurs me to ask i mean and i think that what this is ultimately saying is is can we um can we sort of tie a bow on the arpa like can we can we see the total the plan for the totality of the arpa funds as it stands right now it's supposed to come to the council on the 20 on the 18th of this month yeah oh good it might be too late we might be too late to get this statement out there matt then because but yes i'd like to tie a bow you got okay well well maybe that presentation will spur some some additional pieces to this so i'll sit back and wait then so nick all right we're going on to expenses for capital boy it's hard to read with all this yeah i mean that you're right hold on let me do the following out since mark um one quick thing is that while we're talking about the arpa anything that the council does in between now and when um we finally get this draft to them we may need to come back and quickly make the last adjustments and have a process for doing that because if uh oh andy i'm sorry to interrupt you i've actually moved this discussion to the 11th okay so we should have we'll have so we'll have time right i'm sorry i should have told you that i sorry okay the draft we're working on once it's cleaned up will be in the council's hands for the 11th yeah no yes i don't i was not intending that right well you said that's what we tried to do and i should have called you and mentioned that we were going to do that i don't think i can't imagine that it makes sense to do that because i was assuming that we would get one last draft and that it would be of an opportunity to go ahead with the meeting that we had on the 12th scheduled for the 12th and that's going to be a concluding item of today's meeting and then 12th we would have one last chance at the draft and we would be able to conclude the transfer memo for remaining items and we'd be done for the year hopefully but can we continue to move through this we might get close enough to a draft that you could share to everyone tomorrow and just take comments we might not be there but we might um yeah i was going to do that but i think that those comments will be wording they're not going to be changes that i just want to remind us that we have never discussed the guidelines at the council level at all so i did we did put it on the 11th we can certainly move it i was frankly trying to reduce what had to get shoved into the 18th last year there was some last minute changes that kind of got after the first discussion they were not major but they were just there were changes so let's why don't we finish and then decide whether or not it's going on the 12th the 11th of the 18th so what i did was i went to the simple markup so that you could read it better i think we we skipped ahead a little bit yeah it's one page earlier when where the stuff on the school was in there thank you even earlier yeah we we were on the capital right yeah we were on this yeah you're right sorry um i i wanted to add or just just a caution that we we say that we're going to have savings from the new school i i i think we should say that we anticipate having savings because i don't know that we will um you know when when push comes to shove um yeah it's it's in that paragraph will the next to last so next to last sentence the way you could change it is remove the supportive with one net zero will generate savings and energy costs just put a period because that part we're sure of get you're right on staffing but we have so it says with one net zero will will save uh funds and utility costs we're completely offsetting the utility costs or you could just say might um or hopefully uh it's two hundred fifty thousand dollars it's no but what we were hoping was is that the staff the staffing will be more efficient we said that during the campaign to pass that exclusion but but then that's okay to but he's right and not promising that yeah nice that we need to have a qualifying word yeah i would say anticipate not hope thank you yeah i just didn't want to make it like we're counting on this right even though we're counting even though we are but you know i i i that's that's fair i've never known a new project to save money i i can tell you um from my experience in working and renovating one of the schools in in dearfield but all those savings where did all the savings go i took out the staff that's better okay and the question of who remains who should benefit these savings do we need that the town is going to benefit it's just this does that go in the school budget where does it go right it's not going to if there's savings it's not coming out of the school budget i i that's my pessimistic take on this whole thing i would just strike that sentence i would take the sentence out because we're clearly not giving it to private citizens so it's easy yeah i love the savings um there there's no borrowing in in the first part of 2024 so just to um cover principle and interest costs starting in in fy 25 right lin yeah but it doesn't start in the first half of 24 right no so i'm just saying that let's take out that first half of 24 if it does if it's happening um might happen in fy 25 you can put it in by referencing the year we're developing the budget guidelines for you could take everything out after interest costs period the first time we take up bands out is uh it's the middle of next year okay so what do you want me to do well it's fy 20 it is the fiscal year we're talking about so you could just say the budget will need to cover principle and interest costs period got it right yes i wanted to i wanted to say right here to start and complete that's exactly that that wasn't my that wasn't my larger point lin but i was going to say the exact same thing and i was going to try to phrase it in a non-snarky way but um but yes i i think you know complete is a yeah no it is to start yeah yeah start to start might be more appropriate i i wanted to ask a question of this group and um i'm i guess i'm fairly neutral on it but um you know there are a few illusions elsewhere in this document to working with other towns on roads and sidewalks you know and some of those sort of outside the box funding structures that we've been talking about in various settings for a long time and i i wonder if uh collective purchasing you know some of some of those projects that are that are you know collective purchasing and collective bidding services could also be included in that brainstorm of ideas i was thinking it was in this section but it's clearly not because this doesn't talk about any any sort of um uh collaborative funding but maybe since i'm bringing since i'm bringing it up and since it's coming up sort of naturally here um you know just looking at non-traditional approaches to funding roads and sidewalk work um you know we could we could include that here as well and and maybe we go capture some of the language from the other section that has it as you know instead of being duplicative but i think collective purchasing along with you know regionalization and and you know collaboration with our neighbors i mean everything should sort of be on the table for this for this roads and sidewalk plan thank you i'm totally supportive of keeping that in there yep i also split it off so it stands alone yep i mean this does apply across the board but i don't want to get this longer it really drives me nuts that Hadley is now buying a ladder truck when we're buying a ladder truck i know i know you know and she's ridiculous and these are two million dollar purchases you're not gonna keep him you're not going to keep Hadley from buying a ladder truck i know i know but i it's a whole different dynamic there believe me pretty i knew you would say that i'm just thinking you know the number of times that they're they're building just don't worry about it but it's like holy mackerel and then when i pointed out what northampton spent for a ladder truck which was a million dollars less than ours they said oh but we buy a better one so we we buy the top of the line but yeah they're just so expensive and there is you can't share with northampton but in any case i'm not i like the idea of roads keep it simple i didn't have it i didn't have any other changes in here a process question sorry i i may have missed the final the conclusion of the discussion we are going to meet again on the guidelines correct we have to after okay i assume we're going to meet after the council gives us feedback but that wasn't what andy was assuming because there are a couple of things and i don't i really don't want to do it today but there are a couple things i'd like to come back to so i just want but if we're not coming back to it then i'll say it today but i'd rather wait for it when we're all fresh so andy we are we are committed to coming back is that that's right i was hoping that we would do one more meeting and that would be it for the year and we had tentatively but then everybody had agreed to meeting Tuesday of next week which is the day after the council meeting great but we're not but andy you said you don't i just need to get straight so i have an agenda one way or the other are you looking to get feedback from councils on this draft well there was we're getting into two separate things you have made the commitment to do it on the 11th but i can change the agenda so we will do it on the 11th i can change the agenda if i was trying to find things i thought i think might be ready on the comfort level of the committee but here's my suggestion i don't know what but if if i i could work on this lin could work at this or andy we could take this messy thing accept the changes and share it with everybody and if there's anything major that people feel needs a discussion uh we informally and it's doesn't go on the 11th if they can be put in with matt you said you have a couple things it's comment bubbles we can say this is a rough draft you know this isn't a comment bubble i'll i'll offer some very minor suggestions that were wording changes for clarity purposes and they're not in here but they're they're not hard to get in so but matt is talking about like sounded like something more major yeah i what i'd like to do and and the truth is i the the point that i started that the first thing i brought up tonight or today whatever whatever it is that that first item um i would like to and i just i don't know i don't think that now is the time but but i would like to go a little bit further and and actually see if the committee wants to start exploring an ideal percent of property tax that supports our annual budget and and so and i think that's something that we're not really prepared to discuss now and i wouldn't put it in a in a comment you know bubble i think i think it takes some deliberation and obviously the whole thing is up to the the actual council um so that that's the thing i don't want to be cool i mean i did include a sentence above and he's saying set a thing and i i think that's a longer discussion and it couldn't be here but i i think it's a good discussion to have when we meet in in the next calendar year because the um we don't many of those fees will drive businesses away if we get too too high there's a real tension on those other sources we can do hard court press on the state if the state came anywhere near to what they were playing 20 years ago we would reduce the pressure on property taxes but i think it is a longer you know if we said we don't want it ever to go higher than 69 percent you know i don't think we're not in control of something nor is the town manager to set that percent but i think it's a good discussion to have and i'd love to have it man um you know in terms of a target like the 10.5 for capital can we yeah you know is it a target and you know shouldn't go any higher than whatever or you know he was at someone's house with me when they said could could property taxes not go up one year by two and a half you know could we ever say two percent this year you know right well and and i don't look at receipts and maybe i'm maybe i'm being sort of naive i don't look at receipts as as being you know permitting fees i i think we're talking about you know actual revenues you know tax revenue on on on business there are permitting fees we went up it's included i know that's included but i i don't think that's what i mean we have to you know break down the analysis i and but it's more of the reason that i that i bring it up is that it's it's multifact you know it's multifactor it it could be i mean it's not just whether it's two and a half percent or not it's the assessments themselves right i mean you know that's that's there's there's multiple things that drive the amount the actual amount of property tax revenue and there's multiple things that drive the the so so i just i feel like it's something that we could explore further and the guidelines would be a good place to sort of do some of that but again you know i don't think at 445 now is the time to really the challenge is that there's no economic logic behind the two and a half percent cap it's like there's no economic logic behind california is one percent cap the outside of the fact that um it was the best guess on the part of the developers of this that it would slowly shrink public spending because inflation and other factors without strip that two and a half percent and it would force you to reduce reduce reduce the state sort of mung things up because after two and a half passed the increased state aid so we all took a deep breath and and then watched a bunch of stuff fall apart because maintenance got was the first thing that was caught when in that panic of two and a half and i can tell you that as a new select doing that kind of stuff um so it's a tall order to talk about that there's one one comment i wanted to make at the very last paragraph there's a pink uh last page there's a pink section here i um in regard to um i think uh yeah move up a little bit right there yeah hammer should also strongly advocate statewide efforts to enact legislation from the law municipal government to assess pilot payments um i would again if you're going to do statewide stuff i would not limit myself to education um i and the way that this is written actually at a statewide level it's for tax exempt uh institutions period yeah that's what and that's what it should say because higher ed's an issue for amherst but if you want it if you want to get some stretch traction statewide you're going to have to give people the opportunity to talk about other organizations so it just take out tax exemptions institutions yeah i i would say including the reason it keeps never passing is because the moment you do that the hospitals in boston which who have a great lobby show up and that's the end of the discussion yeah bernie i i had kind of assumed the opposite of what you said and i'm curious i think this could be a whole other discussion that i personally would be really interested in having but is is does it get more traction when you remove it just from being higher ed um because i think that's exactly what lin just said is is the concern i keep hearing you also yeah that's true you you also get real push back from all the colleges and universities oh yeah they have their own lobby i mean they have their own lobby they have their own set of lawyers the thought here is is that there um an education is a major factor you you want to look to see how many um state reps and senators you could rope into supporting this and so if you have a broader base to stand on um you've got a better chance of getting something done right um that's that's the logic behind what i'm suggesting and that's you know in part from experience and in part from from study um i mean i'm a you know i could easily be agnostic about about this but i really think that if you want to um if you want to broaden the base if you're going to talk about state impact don't talk about just the state colleges talk about the prisons talk about state offices talk about other programs the state operates um the same seems to be for uh you know tax exempt organizations uh i i mean i i took on an animal welfare organization in in dearfield because it would cost us a great deal of money of property taxes if they they managed to get their tax exempt status it's too easy to become taxing so um and i think you have to look at you have to look at that so you know you know i'm not going to die in the ditch if it doesn't change i think she just lin rewrote it while you were talking okay uh i'm fine with it yeah i think we're done yeah so um remember to save it lin oh i am believe it is we want to take a vote to say that uh the committee recommends the draft guidelines for council consideration as discussed at the meeting andy is this is this your final recommendation or are you just sending a draft to the council for a review i don't think you need a motion if you're looking for feedback and you're going to um make more changes on tuesday well it's always up to the council because the council could say oh we like that draft so much we're just going to adopt it yeah dream on if they i i you know i i don't have a problem with saying the council here's our work product um this is our recommendation to you your feedback is welcome and then if council has feedback you know making changes especially if the changes are only some phrasing some simple phrasing andy and kathy do you want people on this committee to give you feedback on this draft with all of the changes and stuff right now it includes eyes that go through something at the end the greater the chance that you'll pick up on something that just is wrong or doesn't make sense or if well i would turn it back if if i could be a second reader if andy has time or i could be he could be a second reader to get this what lin sends us to just do a quick that they're not typos they're not dangling sentences they're not weirdnesses and fix it and then do people want to see it before it then goes into a council packet to say boy that's not what i thought it was so that's a question because we um what do i have tomorrow i have the school building committee in the morning but we ought to be able to get it back i think it should be able to be get it back by late friday or saturday morning given what i just saw lin i mean because you were making changes as you went along so so i you know so that's are you turning it over or do you want to see it again you're going to see it again anyway you know i mean everyone will get a copy but uh does it move from here to something called rough first draft or whatever we label it we could just give it to the uh council for the meeting on the 11th just saying this is the current draft for the account that the committee has and uh if you have any comments on that they're welcome is that okay with everyone yeah yeah thumbs up i would specifically ask the council if if there's an area that's missing that they would like to see addressed i think that's more important than word smithing at this point right um that's a great suggestion bob because we have a counselor who's a good word smither so we'll try to ask for something important missing or something that they they they wildly would never say it that way no not okay i was gonna say if there is word smithing desired i would emphasize that any non you know substantive word smithing should be done by sending that feedback as like a marked up version or something back and not done in the council meeting just for the sake of all of our sanity okay that's terrific okay so we have a plan and we will meet again next week on tuesday and everything remains on the guidelines and the transfer memo seems to do you think that i think then we really don't have a need for another meeting this year if we can finish those two items holly holly i have one request of you or or um keeper of the presentation that was given to us those tables that we're referring to can you just pull them out and send them so we could actually put them in the report the uh the the the tables that look like the the revenue table and the expenditure on pages and the estimate of the indicators because it's in a pdf we can't we can't pull it out yep absolutely i consented and um and uh another pdf version just separately or an excel version or whatever works whatever pulls those two out we then can incorporate them into this if it's an excel you can you can move it into work yeah if it's excel it's really easy to yeah sure who did you want me to send it to uh send it to andy if you send it to any with a copy to me i'll know we we have it and um it's pretty easy then to just yeah take the old version out and put the new version in yeah but would hollywood absolutely prior years and kathy had the experience more recently with the um capital jcpc is that uh when we got to the end um shawn would just plop it into the final version so we're just answering it i'm trying to do it but he would he would do it as kind of the last step of the process but we don't have to do that if we have the file we can just bring it in you know so we can just take care of it yep don't have to wait to um bother you again later thank you yep okay so um any other business that we didn't anticipate anybody show up in the audience i doubt it but i will look no it's a zero still yeah so at that point i guess uh we can declare ourselves a journey thank you thanks everyone right thanks for your good work thank you thank you lin absolutely andy i'm sorry