 The meeting of the full board of commissioners. We. Have the short agenda, but it's definitely still without a depth, depth of content. So. Curious if there are any additions to. The agenda as it stands. Okay. Hearing none. I do note that there are some members of the public on. If there are any questions, please let us know if you've had anything that you want to comment on. Or any questions you can also, you can raise your hand or comment in the chat box. And John can pull you over for questions. If there's anything. Raise right now. Sorry, I didn't. I didn't hear that. Looks like we don't have any members of the public. I'm just. Okay. Thanks John. All right. Moving on to the consent agenda. We do have a couple items that we are going to. Pull off for discussion. So the executive director update will be pulled off and the capital projects update will be pulled off for discussion. Are there any other items that. Commissioners. I wanted to also pull off the annual organization. Okay. And the annual organization of my mom. Okay. So 3.4, 3.7. And then any other items that commissioners would like to remove further discussion. Okay. So we will. Any objection to approving the consent agenda as it stands. Use my phone. Okay. All right. So the consent agenda. And we'll start with a discussion of item 3.4. Next before we'll discuss the items that we're pulling off the consent agenda before we move to. The executive session. So we'll start with the executive director update. So Sarah, maybe. You can just walk us through that. And then further items that we're pulling off for discussion. Okay. Certainly. And please let me know if there's any difficulty in hearing me. I'm also on my phone, which is unusual. So this month's director's update was. Quite a packed. So I know. Paul stable. You had a couple of questions on particular items. Yeah. Yeah. So the question was just the discussion about potential sighting and solar panels at our facilities. I wanted to make sure I understand that a little more. My concerns there are. I just want to make sure, especially if anything cited on the landfill that the cost. That if something goes wrong, we have to get them removed that the. Whoever is putting the panels up or gonna bear the full cost of it. So I just want to make sure that. If that happens. So I also question. I mean, a lot of that landfill is north facing slope. So I just question whether it's, you know, that, that good site for it, but, but I know there are other facilities too. I just want to make sure that, you know, should there be any maintenance required? We are. Make sure we're covered. Yes. Thank you. I was just going to ask you about the, the, the. Many. Solar providers in Vermont. And it sparked our interest in putting out an RFP to see if there was. What kind of interest there would be in. Leasing some of our property. And I know that Leslie. No, he has talked about this for quite a long time. Former commissioner to be. I had also talked about this for quite some time. So with the coming of public entity, we looked at how we could do that. And there had been a process going away. There was some. A little bit of urgency in understanding. What our potential options might be. So. The, the one presentation that we had did show. A significant. Array on the, both the close land. That was the two options. A very large all encompassing array. of the the roof surfaces that we have available specifically at the Mountain Compost, the ASP building, they were also looking at Essex drop off center, but there may be others as well. And it was enough of a presentation to spark the interest in learning more. I did forward the presentation to Commissioner Malty. She and her husband have a lot of experience in this area. And they just confirm my sense that we needed to go out and look for potential proposals. So we didn't want to go with the first, isn't the first option to the board for consideration. We want to see what is available out there and to have those questions asked and answered specifically about the landfill and knowing that, you know, over time, we will have to continue to maintain the closed landfills. If there are any issues, Paul, to your point, we would need to be able to get at those locations and do repair. Any other just general so that was those questions were not addressed in that brief presentation just because it was too too short and there was just not enough time to do that. So in order to get more information before we bring something to you, that's where we realize we needed to have a more formal process. So those are exactly the questions that we would want to have answered. And to ensure, as you say, that that any any costs that would be specifically related to the array obviously will be taken care of. And that if we did need to go in there and do any any kind of work, if there was a catastrophic failure, for example, you know, of the landfill, what would be our liability to to the people who are releasing the space and to the equipment? There's a whole host of questions that we would need to to discuss. So it was basically just a letting you know that there is some interest in growing interest in using some of this space. And Paul, you're right, it would be interesting to know because so so much of it is north facing, you know, doesn't really make any sense. The risk would not be on the district. So it all be on the company. As far as getting there, you know, the the the kilowatt hours that they would need to be generated. But there's a lot more that we need to learn. So this was just a first stab. And it was, like I said, interesting enough to to me and Tim and Josh to say, let's let's issue this RFP, see if we can get some answers to the questions, bring that back to the executive board and the full board if it seems to be promising. Okay, thank you. Appreciate it. The other the other issue that I was concerned about wanted to hear more about regarding the Richmond drop off center and the town's RFP. My question, a couple of questions there is, does our lease specify how much lead time we have to receive before we're we vacate the process premises and how much equipment and or facilities, you know, structures will we need to remove? Should should we need to do that? Yeah. So to back them again, some more context and information for board members who may be new. We generally for our drop off centers for all of them, but Williston, we lease the property from the host town for a dollar a year. We enter into what will eventually be 20 year payments they in blocks of five year lease agreements. So it's a five year lease that we seek three five year renewals. Generally, those those have gone without a hitch. This particular instance in Richmond, the lease expired last December, and the town wanted to take another look at their options. So they requested a one year lease instead. So we are currently in a one year lease for the property enrichment. And the town has gone put out an RFP to haulers who may be interested in operating transfer station at that location. So the they basically model the RFP directly off of our contract or off of our lease requiring everything that we currently collect to be collected by a potential new vendor and new manager of the site. And they had as an option operating a facility similar to a reuse zone. They did not make that a mandatory component of the RFP. I did question that with the talent administrator. So we have some conversations about that. We do intend to bid on on the site. We will we will submit a proposal to the town and it is due on June 29. It will be publicly read. So we will know on June 29. How many bidders there are and what the cost proposals are. And as I mentioned to the town administrator. I think, you know, it's great that the town is doing their due diligence. And I think it's a good move. And I'm also I thank him for doing this in May and not in October. And I felt that was beneficial. And as far as how much time we require to vacate. I would have to double check to see if there's a specific time in this lease. Generally, we like 60 days. No less than 60 days. We obviously will know on June 29, June 30, if we will be awarded the next set of next lease, which is again, the same terms that we have. So five years with three options to renew for five years each. At that point, once we know if we are not being awarded the contract, we will then draft our decommissioning plan. We would anticipate remaining on site through the end of this lease through December 31. However, we could negotiate with the town to vacate sooner if that was the desire. So we would again, immediately begin that that crafting that decommissioning plan. Everything that is on site within the fence, including the fence is CSWD property. So we would be removing everything. What would remain obviously would be the the pavement. We did bring new power into the site. We would not take it back to the old inefficient power, but everything else would be removed. All right, I appreciate it. I just first I'd heard. So I wanted to understand that better. I do now. Thank you very much. Thank you. I see. I think I saw Josh wave his hand. So I don't know if you want to add anything before we take questions from commissioners. Just a quick addition. I just pulled up the lease and read it. There's there's no requirement if the town wants to terminate the contract for time wise or if we're going to leave. It's only a requirement when we re up that we request within 12 months that we want to re up a five year no more than 12 months, no less than 30 days. And as Sarah mentioned, the property, our lease terms indicate that we return the site back to the condition that it existed in prior to the inception of the lease, unless otherwise arranged with Richmond. So again, we'd most likely leave the asphalt in the event that they wanted it, but everything else would probably go. And I'm going to go to Logan next. Thanks. Just a quick clarification. I think there's a little more nuance about like how we got into this one year extension. There was like a I think in like it was an honest oversight and mistake in terms of when we had to like renew the contract. And it just came up in a really awkward way in terms of the ongoing discussions around the relationship between the town and the district. It wasn't just the town going rogue and being like, we're just going to do a year. So I just wanted to appreciate that there was a little more to it than that. Otherwise, that jives with my understanding. Sarah has described the process between the town and the district. Thank you. Thank you, Logan. You're right. And normally, again, because it's it is nothing really much changes from year to year with the terms and the town was interested in looking at different options for reuse zones. And it simply is not an option for the district. So I thought it was a great idea to, you know, for the town to be able to take a very deliberate and thoughtful look and approach and understanding what else might be available to them. So so I thought it was a great approach and to thank you for that clarification. Is this the first time that a town with a drop off center has asked or put out an RFP for other options? It's a good question. I believe so. I'm not sure if there's anyone from my staff who is would have more historical knowledge regarding there probably would be Lee Turrey. If I don't know if Lee is on, I can't tell. But to my knowledge, it has has not happened this way. I saw Tim's hand next to you mentioned that we the district intends to submit a proposal. I was wondering if you could tell me kind of what that decision making process was? Who's is that a a board decision and kind of what what the logic is behind submitting the bid? So the the logic behind it was to continue service in Richmond. And Tammy, you're right. I shouldn't assume that it's the will of the board to continue to operate a drop off center anywhere. I was going under the impression from based on the conversations that were had at the drop off center retreat several years ago that the locations where we currently operate are the locations where we want to continue to operate. But you bring up a good point. It could be something that worthy of discussion at the board level that discussion would need to be had at this meeting and the next meeting. If we are to submit a proposal, the next meeting will be June 23rd. So if there's conversations regarding not submitting, we certainly want to hash that out between now and then. But that's a good point. Thank you. Brian, I don't know if you've got any recommendations there. I guess my just from a high level, I look at the drop off centers as being something that are very heavily subsidized. We've kind of got the similar, you know, we did a deep dive on the organic facility, and we restructured that entire operation. And we are subsidizing it to a much less less extent right now. And I guess I feel the same way about drop off centers. This may be a good opportunity to go ahead and shed resources and to go ahead and put our budget in better shape. And I certainly wouldn't feel that I don't feel that the the district should be put in a position where we're spending time and resources to provide them a rich service either as a resident or another town. I'm a bit, I find that a bit disappointing. I would prefer not to spend any resources getting getting a proposal together. Thanks for your thoughts, Tim. I do think that, you know, Sarah, it does warrant a bit of a financial review to see what we are. What that would mean to remove the DOC from our series of services. Also, what that might mean in terms of services that that, you know, could be lost from from, you know, the it's not just the Richmond municipality, but the surrounding towns. I mean, I know when you ski doesn't have a DOC and that we rely heavily on our surrounding DOC. So it's, you know, it's a broader infrastructure thing and not just simply Richmond. So I would be interested to see if we have any data on that as well. So we're not thinking about it in a vacuum. Because it will, it will impact a great the greater community and not just the community of Richmond. Whatever decision is made either way. But it, you know, Tim, you raise good points that we should look at take a moment and look at the financial implications as well. But certainly not to do it in a vacuum. I mean, the point of the municipal services are to meet needs of the community that aren't able to be met otherwise. So great questions. I do see Alan's hand. So we'll go to you next. Tara, you've gone down some thought process with respect to this. We're, you know, leasing for a dollar a year at other places. I'm sure that vendors are probably going to be competitive in a financial way. And that's probably their selection process. But were you planning on increasing the dollar amount that we might be compensating Richmond for the property? Yeah, the at the risk of providing too much information to a potential competitors. Our thought is to provide the service that we're providing now. Thank you. Oh, go ahead. Okay, thanks. I would just point I think there's a political ramifications as well if we were to appear in the public to be withdrawing a service from the district or from from the county at a time very soon when we'll be going back to the voters asking them to support a lot of expensive infrastructure for the CSWD. I think it's very important that CSWD support the towns and the the DOC's as they currently exist. So I would be against any move to pull or withdraw or not bid on a Richmond DOC. We'll go to Abby next. I just want to really agree with that since I think this whole thing has come about from the loss of the reuse center. And yeah, I really agree a lot with Paul's comment. Thank you, Paul, Saber. You can go ahead. Yeah, I just want to say I fully support Richmond's, you know, right to go out for a bit. I think that's great. I think we should put in a bid, you know, and I would also point out that if we have to pull up stakes, it'll cost us money too. So, you know, we have to look at the balance on balance. But I agree with what Paul said and Abby said in terms of I think it is our our responsibility to provide support where we can to our member communities. So Thank you. Any other commissioners want to share? Leslie, I see your hand. And one there was a time I'm not exactly sure when when maybe it was the time that we were looking at the redo of Heinsberg that the district looked at a number of options for adding new or replacing existing DOC's. Is there any data from that exercise that would be worthwhile sharing as we decide how to approach this particular situation? Yes, I think this conversation has been very, very helpful to me. I think what I would like to do is to, as you say, Leslie, go back to some of that information we did. John Dore did a study that showed kind of where showed coverage and where our population center is and kind of seeing where people are coming in from. We don't have have extensive data on where, you know, people live who are using each of the DOC's. We don't collect that data. We've only done some studies here and there. We do I do know that Jericho residents do utilize the Richmond Dropoff Center fairly heavily. I heard that first hand at the select board meeting the other night. And so I know that it's simply it's not simply a Richmond centered Dropoff Center. But we do have some analysis from that work. It is now probably about three years old. But we should take a look at that information that we presented at the board retreat back in 2018. Make sure that that is still relevant. And I would propose that we bring that information back to the next meeting and share that with the board. And at that point, if if it makes sense to submit a bid, there is still time. If it doesn't, we can have that conversation. And we would really at that point be either putting the town on notice that we intend to not continue. Or the town could also withdraw the the RFP they could choose to not award a contract. And then we would be back kind of in under the conditions of existing lease that we're in right now. So there's nothing compelling us to put in a proposal. The thought was that it's a show of good, good faith and interest. But you're right, we do want to make sure that that is I think the will of the board to be able to, you know, make sure that if we are going entering into a new situation that it's it fits in with the strategy overall. So this has been a very helpful conversation for me. If I could, if I could say also, I would have been much more comfortable discussing this in executive session, because it does have a contractual aspect of it. And particularly with the fact that the proposal is a competitive bid situation. I would hope that when we discuss this at the next meeting, some of this can be in an executive session. We we have to look at all our options. And we have to look at the a relocation cost. If that's something that we want to consider. There are a lot of parts to this. It's not going to be simple. We do have estimates for decommissioning. We have that from Heinsberg. So we know how much we spent there. So those those figures are are recent and relevant. But you're right, I'll have to, I'll just double check with Thomas to see if that's something that is relevant for executive session. possibly, I'm not sure that it necessarily meets. I'll look into it. And Sarah, I'm curious if there's the ability to have the DOC attendance, the Richmond DOC attendance begin to ask where the patrons are the customers are coming from so that we can gather some anecdotal data, even if it's not going to be statistically significant, but it will be the most recent and most site specific data that that we can get in in the timeframe that we're looking at. So if that's possible, I know that I would have interest in seeing that. Yeah, we can do that. Any other conversation on on this item for now? Okay, great. It sounds like we can move on to the next item. Which is there anything else from the executive directors? memo that folks would like to discuss? Okay, hearing none. We can move on to the sorry, one second. To the capital projects update, Josh. I had one particular question. But if Sarah, if you want to offer an update or anything with that 3.7 was first, that was the annual organizational meeting. Thank you. Yes, 3.7. So sorry, this should probably be pretty quick. So again, this is either the second or third year in road that we're we're using this system for the annual organizational meeting. We that is we're required by our charter to annually elect our slate of officers. And that is done at the meeting the last meeting in June, which is June 23, that annual organizational meeting is held first as the first order of business before the regular meeting. So that meeting will start at six, and the regular meeting will start whenever the annual organizational meeting is concluded. So for nominations for the positions that are elected, the is the executive board, the officers are the chair, the vice chair. And then we also elect treasurer and secretary. So those who may self nominate, or if you feel sheepish about self nominating, someone else may certainly nominate you. If you are interested in nominating someone, please do talk to them first, and make sure that they are willing to serve. So you can email those nominations to me, we will put together the slate that will then be distributed in the board packet. Self nominations will also be accepted at the at the meeting. So we will not close nominations until everyone has a chance to self nominate in if they would like to. Let's see. So there are eight questions. The finance committee is appointed by the chair. It is helpful. It doesn't miss the finance committee doesn't need to be appointed at that meeting. It can be appointed at a subsequent meeting. It normally has been appointed at that meeting. Previously, we used to elect, but it actually is not necessarily an electable committee. It is an appointed committee. So if you are interested in serving on the finance committee, please also let me know that and then I can let the candidates for chair know who may be interested in serving on the finance committee. And then the other committee that we do elect is the executive board. The executive board is five members. And the chair is an automatic member of the executive board. So there will be four additional seats available for that for that subcommittee. So you can self nominate for any of the individual officer positions and or for the executive board for election. And then you can let me know of your interest in serving on the finance committee for appointment. And I do want to encourage folks that, you know, I started on the finance committee and I don't consider myself a numbers person, but I learned a great deal about the organization. And I believe that that was a significant opportunity to just have time to ask additional questions to understand the structure of the budgets, how and how things have changed within the last few years to improve our fiscal management. So, you know, I do want to encourage folks to consider that or and or the executive committee. You know, I think that we try pretty, pretty hard to keep the time reasonable for those committees, typically not to extend over an hour and a half to two hours. Some of the ad hoc committees, you know, depackaging might last a little bit longer depending on the topic. But for the most part, the time commitment tries to stay pretty reasonable. So if you haven't taken that on, I encourage you to and if if you're already participating and want to continue, then, you know, I think that all helps ensure that the board is informed and engaged and just lends itself to better conversation when we reach these full board meetings as well. So there's my pitch. Brian, I have a question. Are alternate commissioners eligible to serve on any of these in any of these positions, or is it just the regular commissioners? Yeah, so we we have that question asked a couple of years ago. And so I asked Thomas and the full. So I say primary commissioner because alternate commissioners are considered commissioners in every every way with the exception of voting if the primary commissioner is an attendance at a meeting. So they have all the rights to all of the materials to participate in ad hoc committees. And I would I will double check with Thomas, but I believe to also be able to participate on the finance committee. The executive board is an elected board. So for the elected positions, those must be primary commissioners. Any other questions? All right. And Sarah, just one last clarification. So outside of expressing interest, there is no other formal documents that need to be submitted to to put your hat in the ring, essentially. Correct. Just an email to me. Okay, great. If there's nothing else on that, then we can just move to 3.8. The capital project updates. And you said you had a question for Josh. Yeah, I'm going to scroll down. So see if I can jump to it. One second. I think Josh, my primary question for you was what the return on investment is estimated to be for installing the installation of the waterline? Great question. I don't think we've performed that yet. The idea came about when we were discussing the expansion of the ODF, and then it got to the point where we know we're going to be looking to put a morphin on Redmond Road and then an administrative building. So we can either I've got about $400,000 earmarked in capital for the waterline, because it's going to go about a quarter mile. We could put four production wells in, but those would cost between, you know, $40,000 and $80,000 each, where our waterline would would provide us, you know, municipal water. I so long, long winded answer. I haven't performed that yet on that. And Josh, we do have line items in our budgets for GMC to haul water down the road, because that's currently what we're doing now is we are having multiple, so we hire a company, they bring a water tanker down to the nearest hydrant, they fill up the tanker, they drive it down the road to us, they you know, pump it out. So we do have those figures I off the top of my head can't recall how much they are, it was I don't know if Dan is on the line. In some years, it's the cost of the water for gallons between 10 and 30 times more to put it in a tanker truck versus getting it from a municipal waterline. So that was, that was one of the drivers that we initially kind of pushed this project. I know that at one point we're talking about it potentially costing certainly over $50,000 a year, just to move water less than a quarter of a mile. So we can double check that and see it that would be just for that one facility. Nevermind, you know, then you add on like you said, the production wells. The the MRF should the board approve that project is going to need a very sophisticated and significant fire suppression system. So whether that's water based or no, not sure yet. We have also seen in MRF's some dust suppression systems, which use a fine mist. So, you know, whether or not that would be something we would want to include, but that obviously would need a very safe stream of water. But it really is is for the ODF for the organic diversion facility. So that again, we do have that line item in the budget. We can verify that number. Yeah, and the reason why I ask is just this second to last sentence of the addition will of the water line will reduce current ODF operational costs. So that's, I was just curious how that was playing out in what the forecast for return would would be. So that's where that came from is, you know, not having to purchase water and we're restricted by times of the year. If we need water in early March, and it's below 32 degrees, it's very difficult to get water out of fire hydrant at that point. So that, you know, in pairs are operations as well. So and there's no there's also risk that comes along with pretty production wells in, you know, your production wells are above 10 gallons a minute. And in our area, the wells range from one gallon a minute to 25 gallons a minute. So that's, you know, you run the risk of not having enough water, even if you spend the money to put a well in. Any other questions from commissioners on capital? Besides water line, are you anticipating putting in? It's running the main downs and eight inch water line. And it'll come straight on to the facility. We'll have an outlet for the the pumper truck. So it'll just feed directly into that, which also is an operational efficiency because the way we pull water out now, we have to close the gate. So that's, there's some there's some synergies we're going to see with this thing. Are they exploring different options of installation, whether it's open dig or directional drilling? We're actually going back and forth in that right now. The town of Williston has softly requested directional drilling that anything that goes under the road. But there's no requirement in town ordinances to do that. So we're just kind of investigating what that cost difference is right now. We've got a Du Bois and King working on it for us. They've been doing a great job. Thank you. The Dan is estimating that 30,000 a year is is likely. So that's what we're budgeting upwards of $30,000 a year for bringing water down the line in a truck. Okay, thank you. Anything else from commissioners? Okay. Sarah or Amy, I believe we can move to executive session if you want to read the language. Sure, you read it. Motion that the board of commissioners of the Chittenden Solid Waste District go into executive session to discuss contract negotiations with respect to the Organics Diversion Facility and confidential attorney client communications to provide legal services where premature general public knowledge would clearly place the district, its member municipalities and other public bodies or persons involved at a substantial disadvantage and to permit CSWD staff and attorneys to be present for this session. So moved Jericho. Second, Byron Lincoln. All in favor. Any opposed? Any abstain? Okay, we'll move to executive session. Thank you. Amy, if you can let me know when we have a quorum, please. We do. We do have a few folks that haven't joined. Okay, I think we have everybody back. Great. I'll entertain a motion to leave the executive session. So moved Milton. Second, Byron Richmond. All those in favor. Bye. Any opposed? Any abstain? Okay, we are back in the public forum. At this point, I would entertain a motion to read the, read the resolution in the executive packet ES4. Sarah, I don't, if you would mind. Certainly. Whereas Chinden Solid Waste District, CSWD or the district is a union municipal district with an operating purpose of providing for the efficient, economical and environmentally sound management of solid waste generated by its member municipalities and their residents, whereas the state of Vermont has adopted a universal recycling law Act 148 that bans the disposal and landfills of food scraps and organic compostable kitchen waste. Whereas in order to support the district's member municipalities and their residents and businesses, with respect to Act 148, the district has determined that the district's member municipalities and their residents would benefit from an efficient and environmentally sound intermediate facility for organic waste diversion. In addition to the district's Green Mountain compost facilities, whereas the district entered into discussions with Williston Organics Recovery Facility LLC and affiliate of Vanguard Renewables LLC, the operator, regarding the district's leasing of a parcel of land for the development, construction and operation of a food de-packaging and organic waste recovery facility, the facility, to collect, de-package and process food waste and other organic materials that could not otherwise be safely and economically diverted for food consumption by humans or agricultural use, including consumption by animals. Whereas the Development Committee of the Board of Commissioners of the District, the board, has worked with the district's management and providing input, guidance and support for the development, construction and operation of the proposed facility and reviewing a ground lease between the district and the operator for the leasing of a portion of the district's property on Redmond Road, the ground lease, and a project development agreement between the district and the operator for the construction and operation of the facility, the project development agreement, forms of which have been submitted to the board. Now, therefore, we resolved that the terms and conditions of the ground lease and the project development agreement are hereby approved, and it is further resolved that the executive director of the district is hereby authorized and empowered to execute and deliver on behalf of the district, one, the ground lease and the project development agreement, each between the district and the operator in the forms which have been submitted to the board with such insertions and modifications and additions that she determines to be necessary and appropriate and otherwise to be in the interest of the district and, two, all other documents and instruments necessary or convenient in connection with the ground lease and the project development agreement. All with such modifications and insertions, as the executive director deems necessary, and in the district's best interest and it is further resolved that the executive director of the district is hereby authorized and empowered to further develop the operations plan for the facility and to execute and deliver on behalf of the district, such operations plan as the executive director deems in the district's best interests and it is further resolved that the district is authorized and empowered to apply for and obtain all municipal, state and federal permits, approvals and consents necessary in connection with the development, construction, use, occupancy and operation of the facility, including without limitation, zoning permits, subdivision permits, Act 250 permits, solid waste facility certification and other environmental permits, building permits and fire and safety permits. And it is further resolved that the executive director is further authorized and empowered to take our cause to be taken, all further actions as the executive director in her discretion may be necessary or desirable in carrying out the intent and purpose of the foregoing resolutions. So move, South Burlington. Second, I can note. Any discussion? I just want to say as a member of the committee, I've said it before, but I really feel staff and our council have done a great job addressing all the concerns I had going into this. And so I do feel we are protected from any foreseeable issue that might occur. So kudos to staff and council. Cheers. Tim. I just want to thank the committee, especially for all the hard work they've done on this, it's just a fabulous job. Yes, thank you. It definitely has been a lot of effort to get here and a lot of commitment. So I appreciate all the efforts and also the confidence in the board for appointing the Joint Development Committee to their roles as well. So thank you for that. At this point, we will take a vote if there's no further discussion. If you can turn on your cameras for this portion and for purposes of documentation, we will raise hands to show our voice and physical vote. So all those in favor, please raise your hand. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any oppose? Any abstain? Motion passes. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I believe we are on to any other order items of business. Paul? I just have one thing. I was very troubled to hear about the leachate spill at Coventry. I think this is a really bad thing. I hope that Cassella will take corrective actions so that it can never happen again. It sounded like a significant spill. And I just want to register my concern with that. Thank you for noting that. I just have two quick reminders. If you have not submitted your bios for the website or even taken, please do so. If you're not comfortable posting your photo, there are options for Sarah and the staff to post the logo of the municipality that you represent. So just to remove that barrier if that is one of the holdups. I think so far the bios that are posted are fantastic. I have really enjoyed learning about commissioners that I've been on this board with for a couple of years as well as those that are newer to the board. It's very cool. So if you haven't had a chance to take a look, I really encourage you to do so. It's impressive. And I think we should all be proud to be working together and to learn a little bit more about each other. So especially given that we've been on Zoom for so long and we don't really have that opportunity to have the informal connection before or after meetings. So it's kind of a cool way to have a chance to get to know each other a little bit better. So if you haven't done so, I highly encourage you to get your bio in so that we can fill out all of the board and just pay credence to all of your volunteer work, all of your commitment to the district. So and then last reminder is the executive director evaluations are out. If you have questions or having trouble completing the Survey Monkey, please email me directly and Amy, Jewel, and we will troubleshoot that with you. If you would like to request a hard copy, be mailed to you, then we can do that as well. But we are trying to go digital and move into the 21st century with this. And so hopefully it goes well. First try. Are there any other orders of business? Bryn, can you let us know if you received our survey? Yes, I will. Okay. Bryn, I just had a question. Could Sarah update us on where things stand in terms of adoption of the upcoming year's budget with the towns? Yes, thank you. We are, the budget has adopted. We have, I have two more communities to go see. So that's it, just South Burlington and Burlington. And then otherwise we are good to go for fiscal 22. Yeah, I think at least for Winooski, there weren't really any concerns or any questions and having full board approval, unanimous approval, just really resonated with them quite significantly. So, you know, thanks to Sarah, the team and all of the commissioners for your work on that as well. At this point, I will entertain a motion to adjourn. That's my move. Second. Here's second from John Milton. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Any abstain? Thank you so much. Have a great evening and safe and happy Memorial Day weekend. Thank you. Thank you. Bye-bye.