 All right, let's open the meeting, 630. Additions to the agenda, what did you have on your select board? I didn't see any on your select board memo. Nope, and do you have any crowd? No, okay. So there are no additions to the agenda and let's move to review a minutes, April 4th. Wonderful, and I move to approve them as submitted. And what do you think, Judith? I would second that. Okay, your second, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. The ayes have it. Minutes are passed. Public comment is the next thing on our agenda. I see members of public here, but they don't have anything at this time. Are you here for a specific item or here to comment on something outside the agenda? I was here for the tree preservation plan. Yep, that's fine. If you have a public comment, can I make a public comment? You sure can. Thank you. Just on front porch form, I know it's on an official website, but the Middlesex Town Clerk posts the agenda for the Middlesex Select Board meetings. And the Callis Town Clerk posts the agenda for the Callis Select Board meetings. In addition, the Callis Board of Development Review Board posts their agenda. I'm just wondering why wouldn't the East Montpelier select board post its agendas? I know it's on the website, but why wouldn't they put them on front porch form just for further outreach to the public? And that's my comment. Thank you. All right, well, we'll think about that. Thanks. Thank you. So, we're a little early for the next item, but. Excuse me, Bruce. Yep. Could you make that, this meeting is being recorded all the way? Was that Orca's job to do? Not sure. Covers up Guthrie. Oh, it's covering Guthrie. Yeah. All right. Thank you. If you see something like that, I won't see it because it's not on my screen. Yeah. Thank you. I can't see who's up there anyway, so. You've got Guthrie, John. Oh, John's here. John. John Jewett, he's a member of Select Board. Okay, yeah. Rosie's here, Orca. Is that Bonnie Sibley up there in the corner, perhaps? Bonnie and Jeff. Yeah. Okay. Good. Okay, so I'm gonna move and do this on the phone, yeah? Okay. The next item is B, discussion on proposed shade tree preservation plan. In our packet that we, oh, you don't have the packet Carl, but you probably saw there's a letter here from Bruce Chappell. Yeah. And there's also one, an email from Colin, is that correct? Yeah. Yeah. And so we have two people weighed in that way, and that's all I have in that area of things. So who wants to talk, that we have some members of public here, let's open it up to them. Bels is here, would like to speak on the preservation plan of the general public. And it might be worth mentioning that this is sort of a continuation of a discussion that we've had at a previous meeting. So often when we open up things for comment, then we have a little bit of a presentation about what it is, but we've already done that at a previous meeting. Well, what we had before was a hearing, actually. So this is a little bit different, but it's basically gonna serve the same purpose in that we wanna hear from the general public. But if there's questions, we're certainly here to answer them. I've got two people that have been active in making this plan. Paul Kate, here to answer questions. Or, well, well, yeah, right. And Guthrie's here also. So he's been active. So Michael Dwayne, do you have anything you wanna say? Sure, unless somebody else wants to. I'll go first. Yeah. Thank you. I read the plan, and then I read all the statutes, and then I read the report from the Urban Forestry, something or other. And then I read the introduction, and I read the appendix. And just as an aside, I kinda used to do this for a living, looking at statutes, how they were amended in creating regulations to go with the new statute. And my first impression is, it's not clear to me what has been designated as a shade tree. So I read it again before I came, and it's still not clear to me what's been designated as a shade tree. One way of looking at the plan is that every tree that's in, or partially in, the right of way of a town road in East Montpelier is a shade tree. The other way to look at it is somehow in conjunction with appendix C and D about the places that were designated and not designated. So then I went back to it again, and my just kinda straight reading of it is that, and maybe this was the intention of the drafters. My impression of it is, is that every tree in every right of way, in the town, is a shade tree, and therefore cannot be cut without the permission of the tree wood. That's what I got, anything over four inches. That's what I got out of it too. Yeah, so when I looked at that, I thought, huh. So then I just kinda, and this was not extensive research, I just kinda went back and like, it doesn't appear to me that shade tree was defined under the prior law. I just used the term shade tree. So I thought, well, that's kind of interesting. So I did, again, this was not exhausted, but it was sort of like shade tree. And what I got was sort of like the turn of the 19th century into the 20th century, particularly in New England areas and other northern climes, for example. There weren't many trees. And so trees along the road were a very important thing and they were shade trees. So when people were traveling on the roads, it provided protection and shade for people that were traveling. So therefore it was considered a very important thing to have shade trees. And so even though it's in the right away and it might be on your land, you shouldn't just be cutting down shade trees. So that seemed to be the sense of it. And I'm glad the legislature did some definition, but it said shade trees are trees planted by the new law. Shade trees are trees planted by a municipality or trees designated pursuant to a plan adopted by, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So when I used to do this kind of stuff, what I was looking for in the plan was, in accordance with 24 PSA section 2502A, the following trees are hereby designated as shade trees. That's kind of what you're looking for because I used to do enforcement, so we're not going to enforcement, but if you ever wanted to like, if someone ever questioned it and said, well, show me where it says that. It's like, well, this is kind of, you know, you get it, so I'm thinking at some point, no matter what you come up with, in my humble opinion, you have to write the plan that says, in accordance with 24 PSA section, the following trees are hereby designated as shade trees, pursuant to a plan adopted under, blah, blah, blah, then it's clear, then you take it from there. But if it is every tree, every right-of-way, that seems a little excessive to me. So as someone who owns land on two roads. So I have a question for Michael before we move on. Okay, yeah, I've got a break, we'll be next. So Michael, on page two, the first line under action of the town is the town of East Montpelier adopts a shade tree preservation plan pursuant to 24 PSA, section 2502 that expands the duties of the tree warden in the municipality beyond solely trees planted by the municipality, et cetera, et cetera. And then the top of the next page, it says the East Montpelier tree warden has jurisdiction over all shade trees consisting of, so how often do you want us to write for it to satisfy you 24 PSA, section 2502 in this plan? Well, you don't have a printed out thing, do you? Yeah, we do, I have a plan. Yeah, you have one right there. Oh, fantastic, thank you. I don't have a single plan of printer at home, so I go to print something. I can't pay for that, they don't. Okay, so Carl, take me back to where you were, please. So, bottom of page two, action of the town, first slide. Yeah, I read that a couple of times. Okay. This action initially continues the protection of all larger trees that are written on the road right now, it is noted that the right away that the trees that are fully appartient over the middle of the jurisdiction over time the protection zones will be redefined. Da, da, da, da, da, da. Okay, and then the thing that, okay, that's a pretty good start, could have been a little bit more clear than the next paragraph on the top of page three. The East Montpilier Tree One has jurisdiction over all shade trees consisting of colon one, trees planted by the municipality, too. Trees designated by the select ward and tree warden is critical to the, that's like, wait, no, so that's where I went one off the rail. So, I don't understand why. So, trees does it, that seems to say, after the colon, on the top of page three, subsection two, trees designated by the select ward. So, I'm waiting for that, where is that designation? You know what I'm saying? So, just about a dozen lines above, we cite the statute. Yeah. So, how many times do you want us to cite the statute? You know, I'm just trying to make some comment. I don't appreciate the cynicism. Trees designated by the select ward and tree warden as critical to the cultural, historical or aesthetic character of the municipality and constituting a public good. Well, that to me reads something other than all trees. Yeah. See what I'm saying? I do. I see what you're saying. I'm like, oh, cultural, historical or aesthetic character. So, that must be, that's something other than all. That's like a subset of something. Yeah. So, then I go, there's four inches. So, that's where the unclarity comes in. Then I go to the appendix and it's like, that's right, kind of went off the rails. So, I think it needs to be clear because I'd see the first paragraph, I got to that second section and that seemed to be something other than all. Yeah. So, do I understand you're right in that you're saying that the bullet points under section two seem more expansive than the introduction to section two? They seem narrower than the introduction to section two. The introduction to section two is specifying those trees critical to cultural, historical or aesthetic character, the municipality, et cetera, et cetera. So, that's kind of a subsection of trees, one might think. And then the first bullet says, all trees with, all trees within the right of way of town. Right, because right above that, Carl, with that circle bullet, all trees, it has comma, including, colon. So, I'm seeing these sub, so I'm seeing subsets, which takes me away from all trees along every road. Okay, so you went from a larger bottom of page two to a smaller top of page three and then the bullet points. And then I get to the bottom of two, the three smaller bullet points and then the three more smaller bullet points and I'm like, two white ash trees on the east side of North Street, but except, you know, including, so, it's confusing. Okay, well, let's accept that comment and move on to give other people, plus I want to read what Bruce Chappell said because not everyone has the same, I mean, Paul hasn't heard what Bruce said, Jeff hasn't. Oh, you have? You read his email, his letter? And you did too, but I don't think the other people here, Michael Dwayne, hasn't. So, I think it'd be to prove me to read those real quick. But anyway, I want to hear what Rick has to say because he has his hand up. Bruce Chappell's got a lot of, you know, change trees, and they're really change trees. Yeah. But they've been developed for many, many years. Now, on my road, South of Conroy, and I've got quite a bit of fridges on there now on both sides. I'm sorry, Beth, do you identify the person speaking? Rick Barstow. Oh, Rick Barstow, yep. I would say the majority of the trees are not shade trees. You know, a lot of them are just bean foals and need to be thinned out to develop some shade trees. And, you know, that's the kind of thing I like to do because some of them are nice sugar maples for one and those nice ash, there's a few oaks, which will make nice shade trees. But to get a permit to do that necessary work to develop those shade trees, I don't think there should be restrictions on that. I mean, I think I got a pretty good judgment on what's going to make a good tree or not in the future. So I think we have to kind of look at not what's just the present, but with an eye towards the future and what's going to develop. But that's the town's argument. Okay, so I just want to, I'm just trying to clarify everyone's position on this and I'm not going to come out with my own thoughts at this point, but the position of these folks that wrote up the plan is they want to manage every tree that's over four inches, that's in the town right away. That's what it is, every tree. So I appreciate what you're saying. What you're saying is if you own trees by the road that are in the town right away, you feel that you should have the right to manage those trees yourself. Is that what I get out of that? Yeah, I mean, there may be some questionable trees. Yeah. And I would come to Paul and say, yeah, I think this should stay, this should come out. Yeah, yeah. But you don't have to do that right now. You don't have to do that right now. When we, if this plan got passed, you would have to do that with every tree that's over four inches in the town right away, even if that's on your land. Yeah, but that's what I think. I don't know where this plan came from, but it seems to be. No, it's Jeff Quetto here, and Paul have been developing this plan in conjunction with Joanne Carton, who was in a few other people. Okay, so it's been developed by people in the town. Right, but it has not been passed. So this is why we have it here tonight. I understand that, it's proposed, but. Exactly, and we wanted people to comment on it. And that's why we have it on the agenda tonight. And we created, we came to this space here so we could have as many people as possible come to this meeting and comment on this. This is the main reason that we've came to this space tonight is because there's not much space over in the town clerk's office and it's uncomfortable when people are thinking about COVID, et cetera, et cetera. Everyone's sitting close together. So that's the one reason that we advocate to have this, because we want people to comment on this. So anyway, Eric, right? Yep. Yeah, did you want to say something? Yeah, I wouldn't break on that. I think we should have the ability to manage our own trees. Essentially, we're paying the taxes on that land and if we want to cut it down, I think it should be all right. Yep. Well, thank you. Did you come here for the, yeah, Shade Tree? Yeah. Do you want to say, can you hear us yourself? Patrick McCoy, sorry. Patrick McCoy? Yeah, sorry. It's just that everyone wants to know who everyone is. So Patrick McCoy is here and we have this item on our agenda, the Shade Tree Preservation Plan. Jeff Guetto and Paul Kate have been instrumental in crafting it up. It has not been passed. It's a proposed plan and we're looking for people to comment on it. So here you go. They're two cents. Well, people are giving their two cents, which is great. And then I've got a couple of people that have written in and I wanted to read what they say. Okay. So there you go. So, I think it's good intentions. I read through the whole entire, I've got the Shade Tree Presentation Plan. I personally, you know, just in managing, the things that come up for me is maintaining our roads, ditches, stuff like that and personal, you know, property. And so, you know, like a good example is mud season this year. And there's a lot of factors that go into mud season, but I just think the idea of trees alongside the road is just common sense as maintaining roads, ditches, not a good idea. And, you know, you got leaves to deal with that can plug culverts over time, everything else, but, you know, more, you know, I think some of the bigger issues too is the town's trying to take care of invasives. So one of the best things I think this town's done is have the roadside mowing. And I think people have learned seeing what the state did with the interstates spreading the wild parsnip all over, that, you know, mowing before they flower and seeding it up and down the road. So, you know, I know the town's dealing with invasives. You start planting trees, and what are you gonna do when you have invasives all around the trees? How about ditching, maintaining your ditches, everything else? It just, if I was, if I was a road foreman, it would hurt my morale to have to have just more red tape to go through and do something like this. So, you know, that, you know, trees grow too. I mean, I think East Montpeliers changed a lot. And there's more traffic and there's ways to try to slow down. People seem like they've got to be in a rush, but, you know, I just think visibility issues, we have a, you know, a lot of animals, in East Montpelier, deer, different animals. So, those are just a few of the things that raised a red flag for me. All right. Should I ask a clarifying question? Hi. When you had said that you don't, I think I might have, I don't think I heard correctly the beginning of your talk or the beginning of your comments when you said, I don't think trees should be managed or maybe I didn't hear that correctly because the shade tree management plan doesn't necessarily prohibit all future cutting of trees or management of trees. And, but I'm not sure if I heard the beginning of your statement correctly. That's, I just wanted to make sure I heard you correctly. Read this correctly. It's about 10 feet off the travel portion. Just don't think it's a good idea. There's 80% of our land now has got trees. And I think we need to maintain our roads and really concentrate. I mean, if anyone knows in the last 20 years to see what invasives have done in the state and they're all over the place and it's gonna be a big deal managing them. So I'd grow mowing and everything else to keep that at bay. So I think trees, you know, they're inevitably gonna grow right in with the trees. So anyways, if there was trees planted on my land, which I would have a really hard time with somebody planting a tree on my land. But if I got invasives around them, that tree is gonna be low on the totem pole compared to like wild parsnip and gerbil or if I got Japanese root knot or something coming out. So just so I understand you, Patrick, you're saying that all roads should have no trees anywhere in the right way. That we should just cut them all down? I don't think we should, I don't think we should start cutting every tree down the road, but I don't think adding trees in the fence either that we got a ditch, we got a roadside mowing we do. I think that's a great thing. The town is implemented and it's hard enough. I mean, just even equipment, I think we've always been flexible with the budding landowners like widening roads or whatever, or if somebody has two cents to say about the edge of their property, but a good example this year is just, I saw where the town lost a plow to a tree this year. So where in this plan do you see anything about adding trees? Well, just promoting trees in the road, I should say. Just in that right of way area, I just don't support an ideal world if we didn't have any trees in that right of way that we have to maintain, I would say that would be all the better. So I'm still trying to understand what you'd like to see Patrick. Excuse me Rick, could I finish this conversation with Patrick? So I'm just trying to understand what you'd like to see. So you don't want to see trees in the right of way at all, is that correct? I don't want to support, promote the trees, you know, just taking precedence and you know, managing them, documenting them, saving them, all that and everything it takes. It's just more red tape. It's like just where state is up against that. I just feel the state has sometimes a lot of red tape and too many rules and regulations and just after a while it kind of gets my gander honestly. Yeah, I'm understanding the position. So thank you Patrick. And I just want to be clear, I appreciate or we appreciate every comment that comes in here and we're not here to actually grill people on what they're thinking, we're here to take the comments. So and I appreciate everyone that makes a comment. So thank you for coming in and saying that and I understand completely where you're coming from. So anyway, does anybody else have anything else? Cause I wanted to read the couple quick letters that we got in here. Yeah, Michael Dwayne. Yeah. Oh, just for the record, on the bottom of page four it says the process for removal of trees. Yep. I would agree with that, I think that makes sense. Page four. Page four, sub five, removal of diseased dimes or dead shade trees and any shade trees that cause public hazard. So there's trees along the side of the road, they're in the wider way and the tree ward or whoever on the committee says, boy that tree is a hazard, that would be removed. I think that makes a lot of sense. So I fully support fives A and B as being something that should be done. I just want to push back against that a little bit though. Yeah. The tree, it's actually dangerous that the tree warden would like to keep there. The tree warden is not focused on safety. The town road foreman, maybe. The tree warden is more focused on trees. I'm sorry, I'm sorry Seth, that's not correct. If you look at B, any shade trees that create a hazard to public safety impact a disease or insect control program or must be moved to comply with the state or federal law. So public safety is part of what is informs the actions the tree warden will take in the implementation of this plan. So I agree with you Seth that the purpose of today is to hear from our fellow neighbors from East Montpelier and we'll take that information and decide whether and how to go forward with the plan but I just needed to correct that impression. And I think it's also incorrect to say that our tree warden himself is unconcerned with safety. I think that that's something that we can talk to the tree warden about and find out what his concerns are. And we have the power to appoint the tree warden. So we can tell the tree warden what we want the concerns to be. Okay, so let's move on to the next thing. Yep, Paul, you want to say something? Yeah. I can't see it very well. No, that's fine. No, but it's just, I saw your hand up and I wanted to read the two letters we got but go ahead. Why don't you go ahead and do that. Okay. Some things I'd like to say. Okay. Yeah, I just want to make sure that we heard from everybody and everyone heard everything. So the email we got from Bush Chapel says I'll not be able to attend the Zoom meeting. I won't read the rest of that paragraph, not relevant. He said, I'll be right up front with you and explain. I do not know much about your committee and your objectives. There are plenty of rumors around it. It does sound somewhat suspicious. I like that actually. Our family owns 1.5 to two miles of road furniture in town, some of which are arguably some of the most scenic roads in town. My forefathers established these scenic shade trees over two centuries ago and have stewarded these shade trees since then. For over 150 years, our family have tapped these majestic maples. In the last 40 years, my father, Roger and I thinned out many trees along the north side of Lyle Young Road. Today, we have an example of a classic Vermont maple tree line road. Every year I fertilized trees along centrally Lyle Young roads thinned out dead, dying and trees space too closely. That is why it looks like it does. There is no one who's more supportive of maintaining this resource in town than I. From what I have heard, it's rewarding to manage the very trees I've been caring for decades. The present tree warden, Paul, Kate and I are longtime friends. I have the utmost respect for Paul, but I don't need Paul's permission or oversight to cut out dead, dying or trees space too close to one another. He certainly has more important things to attend to than such basic forestry management practices. With the thought of 63 miles of forested road size in town, he and the road crew will be overwhelmed with many senseless requests. I have to wonder if the select board in Guthrie truly want to move in such a regulatory role concerning shady trees in town. We have a dedicated road crew and they have plenty to do just dealing with roads, keeping brush back and moving large trees that have fallen into the roads. I personally have not seen a problem with landowners cutting numerous trees along our town roads. Since this is fast becoming an issue in town, I really wonder what the legality of the tree ownership really is. I totally realize that the town has a right away from the center of the road for the purpose of maintaining improving roads. Our ownership follows the edge of the road and we pay taxes on that land. From your agenda, I see many references to ash tree removal due to the impending emerald ash borer. I applaud your efforts to remove ash trees along road size before they become a safety issue. As the infestation grows, this will likely become a much bigger, whoop, issue. I look forward to hearing more about your committee efforts, Bruce Chappell. So that was, thank you Bruce for taking the time. So this is from Colin, what's this? Blackwell. So this is really long, but I will read it. To the East Ball Peter Select Board Roads Committee, I have some questions and comments regarding the town's proposed shade tree plan. The questions in bold come from Vermont League of Cities and Towns Tree Law FAQ page. Does the Vermont League of Cities and Towns language encourage towns to define all trees in our town roads public way as shade trees? I interpret the language as shade tree designation is meant for a select tree or group of trees. Quotations, a shade tree is a shade or ornamental tree that is located in whole and part within the limits of a public way or public places, provide the tree was colon, was planned by a town or as designated as a shade tree pursuant to a town shade tree preservation plan. Plan, in order to be designated as a shade tree under a town's plan, the select board and tree ward must agree that the tree is critical to the cultural, historical, or aesthetic character of the town. That's the end of the quote. Designating all trees, this is Colin again, designating all trees along town roads to find some as critical to our towns, cultural, historical, or aesthetic character. Is that accurate? Is this level protection necessary for all roadside trees within the public way? I understand the state is not giving clear direction as to how towns give some protection to non shade trees specifically life, healthy, and non-hazardous trees, but will it be practical to a town to have such a large inventory of shade trees? Shade tree plans are optional intended to be guidance rather than regulation. So here we have a quote, an optional plan adopted by a majority of legislative bodies, select board, trustees, council, alderman, other municipality, and the tree warden. A plan must have certain elements as described in 24 VSA, 2502, it may have additional elements. The plan is a town-right document that enables protection of designated shade trees and sets policies for planting, managing, and removal of shade trees. For the most part, a shade tree, this is still a quotation, for the most part, a shade tree preservation plan is just that, a plan, a guidance document that describes a town's internal policy. As such, it is a primarily a non-regulatory tool, meaning there's largely of no legal effect on its own, though it could inform a regulatory tool, e.g. ordinance adopted for carrying out its purposes. Tree warden, the process to remove shade trees involves the tree warden, the town, and the select board. Quotation marks, tree wardens control all shade trees in town, it may cut or remove them or cause them to be cut or removed. Before a tree warden cuts or removes a shade tree, they must post public notice, at least 15 days prior to the cutting or removal, and at least two conspicuous locations in town, and in the town clerk's office under 24 VSA 2509. When the shade tree proposed to be cut or removed is located on property held in fee by another, the town must notify each abouting landowner. Any municipal resident or landowner may appeal the proposed tree warden action within 15 days of the notice being posted by writing to the select board. If the proposed action is appealed, the select board must give notice of the appeal to the tree warden and hold a public hearing see above for information on the hearing. That's the end of the quotation. So this is Colin. Has the impact on time, efficiency, and cost been considered if all trees are defined as shade trees? If so, we need to set up these policies and positions that will fit with our town, tree warden, and road crew. And here's a quotation from Duncan, Hastings, and Johnson, Vermont. I've always thought of the role of the tree warden to be one of an intermediary and an advocate for trees. A person that could try to balance legitimate interests of a landowner, highway crew, and utilities in trimming and removal practices related to trees. I would hope we could craft a plan that was geared more to that role. That's a quotation from Duncan, Hastings, and Johnson, Vermont. So the next two paragraphs are from Colin, and that's the end. A practical fit may be to create a preservation plan to be a set of guidelines for best practices. The plan could also outline a path for future updates on two shade trees. So trees or sections or roads could be planned under shade tree protection. This process will allow tree warden, landowners, and select board to implement a theme critical. I'm grateful our town is active tree advocates that are bringing knowledge and attention for the public preservation and environment. I hope my input discussion can be seen as practical and not intended to discourage preservation work. Thanks, Colin Blackwell. Thank you, Colin. OK, move to Paul. Pleased that we've got at least some turnout here because this is exactly what I was hoping would happen. That we find out who's interested in this issue. And instead of just looking at it as who's trampling on whose toes or how are we going to do this? Because I think the best policy happens when the parties who are interested become part of the solution. And so this was put in here sort of because the law changed, it has changed the idea of what the tree warden and what the select board, where their jurisdictions are. And I believe I've read that before this law changed, and the select board was responsible for all that right-of-way land, including the trees on it, and not necessarily just the tree warden. So but in the process of changing the law, they've defined a shade tree, first of all, in a way that our English teachers would have had our hair if we defined a word by using the word itself in the definition. And so you don't call a shade tree, you define a shade tree by calling it a shade tree, or an ornamental tree, you specify. And that's causing some of the problem here. But secondly, I happen to believe that our best solution is going to come from putting the ideas that everybody's expressing into this plan to make it work for everybody. And so there's nothing, as far as I'm concerned, in here that says that what we put in there should be a final result. It's a way of getting our involvement out there so that we come up with the best solution possible. I'm no different than everybody else in this room who owns land. And we have nobody likes to think that somebody's trying to usurp their rights or whatever, if you will, which couldn't be further from the truth. And if that's believable, and I don't really think they do, I think everybody really cares about the kind of work that Bruce Chappell has done for decades. And his ancestors allowed us to get the benefit of 150, 200 years later. Are we cutting off our nose despite our face here? Where are the trees that are going to replace Bruce's trees? Those are all, like many of us, senior citizens and have been for a while. And if we don't work together and cooperate and figure out how to make this work for everybody as best we can, then we're not going to have anything but roadsides, woods, right down to the road everywhere in the future if we don't plan ahead for it. And sometimes those trees that are the size of my thumb, some of those trees are going to be the ones that everybody says don't ever touch those trees on Chappell's land. Even though they don't even realize that those were planted trees, as far as they're concerned, those are nature's volunteers because they just don't have enough experience with the history and the tree anatomy and physiology and stuff to understand that those trees were planted. And you can figure that out. And of course, it used to be all over town. And I'm sure some of our people in this room remember some other places in town where they were just cut down for whatever reason, whether it was to get federal money for road improvement or there were a number of different reasons why that happened. But those trees were planted for a reason. As Michael Duane was pointing out and also the land was the opposite of what it is now, it was 80% open and 20% forested now where the exact opposite. So those trees provided shade for the animals because it was all open land practically everywhere around here. And so this was forward-thinking work being done by the individual farmers. And they mowed by hand under all those trees, just like they did in a lot of the rest of their farm. And even after the farms were mowing machines, they said the farmers would still go out and mow around those trees. And they felt the equity that they put into it. It was important to them. And thankfully, we've got people like Bruce and others in this room who feel that way. And what they're responding to is legal and bureaucratic, gobbledygook, if you will, that seems to be railroading us down a route that we can do better at if we put our heads together and figure out what we want to do. I don't see that that makes a lot of sense, that we're going to get all over town everywhere. But having some understanding of how we got to where we are and how we're going to work it out to have what we and our children and our grandchildren and great-grandchildren are going to be looking at, not the trees that we were looking at tonight that are this big around and full of holes and ready to fall apart, but are actually trees that we want to have next to the road and not necessarily right next to the road. The roads have all gotten whiter, but actually have some sense and feeling that we are doing something, both for our towns good today, but also into the future. And I wonder sometimes what some of the old-time farmers would think about what's happened now. They would be disappointed in the fact that the land wasn't taken care of under those trees that had been planted. We've now got trees that are nature's volunteers all along the roadsides. And I don't think that we necessarily can't have the tree ward necessarily has to, as somebody said, have a permit to do it. That's not the intent at all. And I don't think we should be wedded to that. I think we're better than that. So my wish is, as somebody who's spent 50-plus years growing trees and looking after trees and learning about trees and what they have to teach us, that I know that due to my eyesight and stuff, I'm not going to be here being able to do these things for a long time into the future. But I would sure hope that the town could take advantage of some of the things that our citizens know both about how we got here and ways that we may go into the future, and that I can actually lend my experience that I've had, which is going to be different than others, into making not just the shade trees that are designated legally as trees planted by the town, but a lot of the other trees in town or areas of town where we may want to have trees planted, but more likely we've got more than enough trees. And it's a matter of trying to determine which trees we do want to have. And that's not going to happen everywhere in town any more than it did historically. But I think that if we, to me, this plan here needs a lot of work, it doesn't talk anything about specifics. I really feel that having the input is critical to this and that the tree warden shouldn't be in a position of trying to defend a definition that doesn't really make a lot of logical sense to it's almost as if it's trying to limit our possible future with in our town. I don't know who's to gain from that over time. But I think there's a lot more to it than just the words on this paper. And I'm not necessarily wedded to whatever is in here. If people want to have input and stuff like this, more power to you. I'll be happy to do that. If that's not what you want, and you're just looking for some short-term solution or something, well, I'm not your man. Let me see what Jeff. I want to hear from Jeff on this. Sure. And I also want to hear from Guthrie, who's doing that. And then we'll see what we have left for Tom. By the way, I want to give a lot of credit to Guthrie and the road crew and the select board who has certainly been behind us on trying to deal with the issues that we didn't ask for. And we're doing our best to deal with the Emerald Ash Board. Well, thank you, Paul. So I appreciate all the work that you've done. And all you've had to say about this little bit touchy subject. So Jeff, what did you want? I know you'd like to say something. Sure. I'd like to hear it. I can chime in. We all would like to hear it. I mean, we did this. I mean, we've been working on this tree stuff for quite a while. Yes. And we had done the Resilient Roads Plan with Urban and Community Forestry Program. What was that, like, four years ago now? Yeah, back in the study. And yeah. So it was pretty exciting. This was before Emerald Ash Board. We're excited about what we perceived as the value of roadside trees. Yeah. They tend to be aesthetically very attractive. They have water quality value. They provide habitat. And then this change to statute happened, which basically removed any of the restrictions on removing roadside trees. So this is what we're trying to react to. And I respect the fact that there are a lot of people in town that have descended from families that really valued the trees. Their descendants continue the tradition of stewarding these roadsides. And some of them are sitting in the room here, Bruce Chapel sent in the email. I think it's great. But there sort of has to be a recognition that there are people that don't provide a lot, place a lot of value on roadside trees. They don't have an interest in stewarding them. Or if they have an interest in stewarding them, they aren't educated in a manner. They didn't descend through several generations with their dads and grandparents saying, this is how to take care of your roadside trees. We have a tree warden. This is our resource to go to guy for the people that don't have the stewardship ethic or the background and the stuff. There he is, Paul. I guess we're going to be talking a little bit about deputy tree wardens because Paul isn't going to be doing this for the rest of his life, obviously. And so we're kind of grappling with, well, there sort of has to be kind of a level playing field. And the statute is sort of set up that once you designate shade trees, then there is kind of a permit procedure that you have to go. You have to get the permission of the tree warden. It's an appealable action, has to be placed on notice. It is kind of bureaucratic, but it's not all that different from what was in effect before the legislative changes were made. I mean, not everybody followed the requirements, but there were a number of different cases where there were some travesties. Massive roadside tree cutting, upset the neighbors, or maybe the town did the work and upset the landowner, and it got all this legislative attention. So I don't see where it's necessarily going to be that cumbersome to work with a tree warden. If you're planning to do some roadside work, call in the tree warden, show him what you plan on doing. He might have some ideas to share, whether it's one of these people that's been storing his trees for a million years or somebody knew, go to the resource, get permission, and do the work. I don't think it's necessarily that bad. And we did take the approach of, OK, everything over four inches, it's a lot of trees, sure. But it's sort of recognizing that we don't have an inventory of the highest value road sections that should be designated shade trees. But then again, the areas, a lot of them are the ones that are being stewarded by Bruce Chappell or Rick or other people in town that look the way they do because people really enjoy them for the way they have been managed. So I think what we're proposing is probably a reasonable start. Not like cast and concrete, it can change. So if it does, if there's some improvements made in the future, the plan, if adopted, can be changed. I mean, I don't think it's that big a deal. So I would suggest just giving it a try. So that's sort of my two cents. OK. Did you want to say something, Rick? Yeah, just to add a little bit that I think. I guess I'd kind of like to see this put out more guidelines. I agree with Bruce Chappell. I haven't seen any really, nearly cutting the trees along the road sides. I don't think it's really a problem. But I think, you know, people become more aware of, you know, obviously there's that gorgeous section of center road of Bruce Chappell's that's lined on both sides of those 100 plus year old maples and people really like that. I remember a few years ago and because it is kind of a problem for the town because it's so narrow in maintaining that. But there was a proposal I think some years ago to take some of those trees and take them out to widen the road and I think most of the town will really have popping arms. No, don't touch those trees. And I think, you know, I think that's kind of where people are at. But obviously there's a lot of sections of the road that don't have that that are just, you know, the trees have just come out naturally on their own and they're too many of them, you know. You're not going to get any good shade trees unless some thinning is done. And, you know, some people have an interest in doing that on their sections of the road. And I think, you know, getting some act to do that. I think a lot of people have good judgment in terms of what's appropriate to remove and what's the best for development into good shade trees. I mean, a lot of it's potential. It's not even there now. Yeah, but what you're saying is you feel that you're a competent to manage your forest enjoying the road. And what the pushback is from Paul and Jeff who are part of this plan is they think they feel, particularly Paul, is in a better position to judge the potential of the trees along your road. Yeah, well, I think that's where I think it should be sort of framed more in the terms of guidelines. You know, obviously there are people who are going to say, gee, I don't know what I should do about this. And then that's a prime example. Okay, talk to Paul or someone, you know, that has an eye for this and understanding. But what Paul says in Jeff, too, is that the best person to judge the trees is the tree warden. And that landowners aren't necessarily the best judges of the trees on their property. Yeah, not necessarily. I mean, that's true. But there's also a pushback from some people that say, you know what, I want to do what I want with those trees. And that's common thread among landowners that want to preserve their rights. And I'm not saying anything against that because I know many landowners feel that their rights are being infringed upon by more and more rules and regulations. I'm putting that out there because that is what how many people feel. Right. I totally understand that. Yep. Guthrie. Yes, sir. What would you like to say? Because we have a little time left. Yep, I'm on both sides of this. One is a taxpayer. I think it's hard to go that way first. And kind of like what Rick's saying. If it's along my side of the road and it's up on my land, but right at the edge of the right away. If I want to make a shade tree out of it, then I should have the right to make a shade tree out of it. And if I think it's firewood, then I should be able to do that as well. I can safely do that, of course. And then on the highway side of things as a foreman. I think it's hard to say this in a nice way, but less trees that you have gives you the opportunity to make the few good ones, really good ones, pick a select few and not every fourth tree. As hard as that is to say in some ways, it makes road maintenance 10 times better. Road quality is going to stay 10 times better. And everything about it becomes much more efficient. And if you have that, you know, if you took, it's hard to say in a forested road, but like a bliss road where the beginning of it does have some of the shade tree aspects, but then you get out in there further and it's just forest. It's just grown to the edge in places. And if you took a few of the trees, you could actually relief the road of, of so much shade. It would make a much quality road, but in all four seasons for that matter, it gives you, gives you that little bit of daylight in the winter. Now gives it a chance to melt off a little bit and get the sand to stick. So I, it's, I just also struggle with the amount of work that it's going to be just to try to keep up at all. It, it's going to be added work. I don't see how it won't be. Yeah. Yeah. You mean the plan. The plan. I don't see how it's not. Yeah. And just for instance, we've been agreeing to take trees here and there that were missed in other ash cutting. I think we've probably got 30 right now that we've been on, but we still have, we've only taken a handful of those. So I think there's probably 30 out of 37 left. So it's just on the right year, we have a lot of time the right winter where you get those up for 20 days or 25 for three, four days. And there's some sunshine and no snow coming where you can get trucks out there and the equipment out there to do it. And then there's other times where you, you go a whole year and like this past one and did not have a good opportunity to go out there and do seven, eight, nine, 10 trees in a day. And that makes things really difficult and drawn out. You know, that's, we're coming up on six months. A lot of those ash should go before flight in June. So. And that's, I mean, that's what we're holding our contractor to and for the ash removal. So I really shouldn't hold me then any less than that. So that kind of. Makes me feel like it's, it's going to be hard to maintain the amount of. The process of it as a whole. It's definitely more aware now the whole process. And then what it was before the statue was gone away. Pre the state removing theirs. Yeah. So. And then kind of what Rick was talking about a little bit too. You know, you have the aspect of how many people out there actually maintain it. There might only be 10% of the population that even has a chains ought to go out and maintain it. So there's only so many people that are going to be out there. Right. To do unruly work, if you want to call it that. Unregulated work. There you go. Okay. I think Judith has something to say in Jeff. Sibley. Did you want to say something, Jeff? Push the red button. You're on mute, Jeff. Is he here? Or he's looking for somebody to help. I think he doesn't want to say it. Oh, okay. No, I think he did say something, but we didn't hear him. But anyway, Judith, do you want to say something? I actually, um, I think we can go back to the conversation and I think I missed part of my Dwayne's comments regarding reconciling various parts of the plan. And before voting on this, and I didn't know if we were going to vote, I would recommend we not vote today. I would like to, um, If he could follow up either with an email to the board or even to me, just so I can, um, I apologize. I don't know what was being said. Um, and I want to make sure that I hear that. Um, I, I think I've heard other people in the room, but I want, I didn't, I didn't hear all of Mike's comments. And I think in light of Paul's comment about. That the public comment has been helpful. And it may help inform. Um, if there may need to be some modifications to the plan. I don't think that I, I heard it correctly. So if you, you'll definitely get a chance to look more at the language that, uh, Michael Dwayne was talking about. No, I know the language. What I'm saying is I didn't hear Mike's comments. I am. I'm familiar with the plan. I wanted to hear his comments. Um, Mike's comments regarding, um, having consistency throughout the plan. I just wanted to be able to. Appreciate what was said. And I'm, I don't think that I, I heard it correctly. So. Yeah. I just wanted to, I wanted to hear his comments. We're not going to pass anything tonight. I don't, I don't feel comfortable about doing it. We're not voting tonight yet. That's, that makes sense. And can wait for Amy as well. Yes. Yeah. That was my thought. So. I just wanted to make sure everyone was heard that tuned into this meeting to talk about it. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Kyle wants to say something. Historical perspective. We've gotten a fair amount of historical perspective from this meeting. And I just wanted to add to it. Some context. We have a process, a democratic process for planning together the comprehensive future of our town. We pass town plans every once in a while. Our last town plan was voted on and passed by the select board in 2018. Previous to that was 2013. And previous to that, they just keep coming. So we have a plan. The people of East Montpelier have said we value roadside trees as a town resource. We have a good process in place for maintaining them, maintaining that value with the tree warden, with the road foreman working together. We like what we have. And then as we've heard the legislature went and changed some of the underlying basis for that process here. The resilient roads committee has worked to maintain the vision for East Montpelier that's been articulated in our democratically passed town plan year after year. Here just a couple points from it. From 2013, it says the select board and the road foreman should ensure that the rural character of roads is maintained in maintenance and improvement projects. If changes are proposed, notify the public and consider public comment prior to significantly changing the character of any road through widening, cutting of live trees within the public right of way or paving. Another bullet point is the road foreman should continue to coordinate efforts with the tree warden, continue to coordinate efforts with the tree warden and the town forest committee to beautify the towns right of way at the edges of roads in a matter that balances the need for safety and access with scenic beauty. And then in 2018, just in describing what we have with a beautiful picture of the forest, very tightly forested part of Cedar Road that we've talked about a number of times here tonight. It says, in addition to East Montpelier's forests, approximately 59 miles of street and shade trees lie within the public right of way. These trees fall under the responsibility of the town tree warden. Mature trees lining our roadways contribute to roadside scenery. These cultural treasures as well as trees surrounding other public spaces, such as the school cemeteries and town offices, need to be managed as community resources. They provide shade, reduce dust, control soil erosion, and assist in traffic calming. So if the process that we had in place to take this vision of the town that the people have repeatedly decided on has been taken away from us, then it's our responsibility to figure out, OK, what are we going to do to put it into its place? And I want to thank Paul and Jeff and the Resilience Roads Committee and anybody else who's worked on this for putting together a draft for us to consider. And I think that's an ongoing question for us. How are we going to make sure that we can realize this vision for East Montpelier that the people want? OK, so I'd like to stop the item from being discussed any further just because we're out of time. We have a lot of things to talk about. But thank you, Carl. And I want to thank everybody for coming in. And we will have it on the agenda again for probably more discussion and try to figure out the path forward because we haven't figured that out. Yeah, it's a good discussion. It's a great discussion and it's nothing set in stone. We haven't passed anything. We want to get the flavor of the townspeople's thoughts on this important plan as put forth. So it will appear again on our agenda. So if anybody wants to participate again, I urge you to do it. Thank you. And I personally would like to thank everybody that did show up. And you know what? I hope we get a chance to work together. Yeah, absolutely. I'm going to... Judith, I'll give you a call. Thank you. OK, great. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you, guys. Thank you, everybody coming in. All right, so let's move to the next item. It's pertinent to this last discussion. It is discussion on deputy town tree warden position. And what do we... Do we have somebody in mind or... Tell us what he's thinking. OK. So Jeff Guettos is going to share some more thoughts with us. Yeah. Thank you, Jeff. The deputy tree warden. Yep. Yep. We were just wondering... I came up at the Resilient Roads Committee. Mark Lane did show an interest in the position. We... Or at least I was thinking we might want to just... Pushing something out there publicly to solicit interest. Yeah. Particularly within the town. We're hoping that we wouldn't have to go outside the town. Right. Certainly to fill a position. And we think it'd be a good opportunity to just have somebody kind of get mentored by Paul. Yeah. Maybe step up into being the tree warden at some point in time. Yeah. There's... I think it's probably worth having the position regardless of whether or not we decide to protect shade trees within the right away. Just... Just at least to have somebody there to succeed Paul. Yes. I don't think we have a choice, do we? What? Do we have to appoint a tree warden according to the law? We have to. But not a deputy. We don't have a deputy. Right. Right. But just a suggestion to have someone coming along. Yeah. And become a... What do you call it? Deputy. Yeah. Deputy but sort of in a learning position is a good idea. Because you would be busier if we passed the plan. What's necessary for us to do this creation if we want to do this? Pass motion? Create the position? Solicit... Well, I was going to say solicit candidates. First. Yeah. Yeah. I guess we should do. Put it out there. So we could just do that by consensus is solicit the candidates. Potential candidates. If John and Judith are okay with that? You okay with us soliciting? For a deputy tree warden? Not soliciting in general, but for a deputy tree warden. That's what we're thinking. That sound good? Okay. Tree warden? Deputy. Deputy tree warden. Yeah. Deputies you could have. Oh, deputies? According to the law. I mean you could have more of them if you needed to I suppose. Not that I necessarily recommending that. You could put together a posse with all those deputies. We're lucky to get one. We've got all these bullets we've got to deal with. We'll be out in the woods. Okay, so we'll put out something. I'm just going to mention one other thing. I mean we've been at least had the benefit of actually having a forest during the position which has been really good for us. We've had a lot of people who have been in the forest. We've had a lot of people who have been in the forest. The resilient roads committee. We have a forest. We have an arborist. So we're kind of really nicely fleshed out there. So I don't know if there need to be qualifications necessarily. In terms of that kind of background. I guess we can see what we can get. I'm wondering if you and Paul could put together maybe a list of. The positions or experience that might help us in help folks who might be interested in the position and also help us in selecting. Those deputies who are those people who might express an interest. Technically. That's all you'd have to have. From a realistic standpoint. Having. Experience is worth its weight. Yes. Because there's all kinds of situations that you run into. That. Somebody who's who's interested may not. Right. You know have enough background to. Right. To really understand. That's where you're coming. You're doing the train. Well. Yeah. And I would suggest that even in a. Situation where you're you've got a. Tree warden and deputies and stuff. Your tree warden really. Ideally. Should have. That experience. Yeah. You know and I mean we've got people in town. You know I don't know whether they're interested yet but. And it may be partly. Related to how much work they perceive it is. Yeah. And I. From my standpoint I. Do this. Out of the. Good will of being a citizen of a town that I. Like. And. I think. You know the possibility of having somebody from out of town doesn't. Doesn't turn me on at all. No. Because it should be our. You know we're making our own. Future. Right. And so that. But but having. Somebody. With that experience. Really. Is going to help you out in the long run. Yeah. So. It isn't. Necessarily. Have to be but I would highly recommend it. No I. I agree. So. We should jot down a few requirements just for. I think being a. Person that lives in the town is kind of important actually. Okay. So thank you. For bringing that up. I want to move to the next item. Is D discussion on ARPA funds focused on the standard allowance. Now I think. Bonnie is here. And I know Carl has been. He's here. He's here. He's here. Going emailing back and forth. And I've seen a bunch of discussion about this. So. Bonnie, thank you for joining us tonight. Did you have something you want to say right off the bat? Just giving you updates. You know, things continue to evolve, but they're evolving. Continue to evolve in a good direction. For towns. So for instance, for. You know, a government service and the standard allowance. Treasury's guidance says it was previously being interpreted as look to your past budget. And those are the kinds of things that are government services. Now the guidance is if a government funds it somewhere in the nation, that's considered government services. So that makes all those special things. I might want to do a little safer. Because the rule actually says a government service. You know, it's not a government service. It's not a government service. It's not a government service. Okay. Treasury also has made reporting a little easier, which you're about to report, but. That's generally good. But the standard allowance. The advice is still take it. It's the easiest way. It's. It just gives you more flexibility in how you do it. And once you take it, you know, it's not a government service. It's not a government service. We're going to fund salaries and benefits and use the tax dollars. It frees up to do other things. Or you can do it even easier and say, we're going to take revenue replacement. And choose to spend it on anything that we want that isn't ineligible. So as a quick. A quick review, what's ineligible. You can't spend the money on pensions. You can't spend it on financial reserves. And you can't spend the money on any outstanding debt. So you can't pay down alone with the funds. You can use the money to match any federal grants. Unless for some reason that federal agency prohibits it, but generally. You know, you've had sidewalk grants in the past from V trans. You could use it to match those kinds of grants or water or things like that. So generally it continues to be a little easier for municipalities. You have until April 30th to make that decision. I spoke to you about this before it's irrevocable. So irrevocable. So once you make the decision, you can't go backwards. You need to think about your financial. If you move in that direction after you make the decision, you want to check out what your policies and your financial policies look like. So you're not doing some of the things inadvertently. Talk to Sarah Macy at VLCT. She's got a little intake form and she can help you think about this. And then think about whether you have other federal funds and triggering a single audit. But generally it's still a green flag. Go towards the standard method. And choose how you want to spend the money after that. I think longterm is the advice. I have a question. Bonnie, you described two different paths forward for us. And you said the second one with regard to the standard allowance would be easier. I didn't, I didn't understand the distinction between the two that you were talking about. Could you take that one more time, please? Yep. I'm going to start with the, both are the standard allowance, but how it's how you take it on your municipal books. Yeah. So one is here's my ARPA funds and here's my. The budget that just passed in March, you would take your ARPA funds and kind of knock this money to the side and saying, I'm going to use this for salaries and benefits in the upcoming year, which frees up the tax dollars I collected to spend on other things. So that's the one method of accounting. And these other things, sorry, you can't see my hand move, but these other things can be fairly broad. It's your choice. But because these are tax dollars, you cannot spend them on broadband. So that is a downside to that one. Because legislature very much said funds generated by municipalities taxing or assessment powers cannot be used to fund communications union districts. The other method says here are my ARPA funds. I'm going to take the standard allocation method. And from that method, I'm going to use these federal funds versus these local funds that I just bumped out of. I'm going to use these federal funds for all those things I might have otherwise funded over here. So I might go to housing. I might go to my new bridge. I might match a federal grant. I might give to the food shelf. I might whatever your project list. And you're going to keep track of each of those. And you're going to report them under the standard allocation method. In this scenario where there were two, you would report we spent it all on wages and benefits. Ta-da. And that's it. So the reportings, you still have to report all the individual things. If you do, if you have one source. And you don't bump to your municipal dollars, but it actually gives you more. More flexibility in that in the bump method, you can't do broadband. And then the second method, we could do broadband. Is that correct? Yes. And it's still, it will remain completely unclear for a while. Right. Because it's a state issue. It's not a federal issue. It's specific to Vermont. So the challenges, I asked Katie this specific question. If you give broadband straight from the federal dollars. Your federal requirements attached to that. So you need to make sure whoever you give money to. You need to make sure that they follow all your award conditions. They're held to the same threshold. You are. Of federal procurement and. Conflict of interest and all those sorts of things apply to them. So take a look at those award conditions that were attached to your grant. You need to pass it to them. And most importantly, you need to make sure they follow them. So you want to check back in. You want to have them prove those things. So that's the, that would be what I call the downside of that one. But that's still, you're still recommending you take the standard allowance. Either one is taking the standard allowance. Yes. That's the. That's exactly right. And the decision that we have to make right now is whether to take the standard allowance or not. And it sounds like the standard allowance is the best bet. And if we want to do the ARPA thing, we could do that later through the other method that you're just talking about. Before you make that this all federal funds are bumping. You want to take a look at your financial policies and probably talk to. Sarah at VLCT. But that would be decision number two. Right. First of all, decision number one, take the standard allowance. Yeah. So what is the deadline? We know is April 30th for standard allowance or not. But the second decision about how we do the bookkeeping. You know, what's the deadline for the standard allowance? What's the deadline for that? The deadline is when you decide to spend your funds. Okay. How are you going to account for it? Talk to your treasure. How do you're going to account for it in your financial system? You could stand that money directly on the broadband. So choose. It's just to reporting requirements. Our failure on this. Or you can just displace money in your budget. Or you know, your wages, et cetera, government services. Right. And then, then what you got to do is spend your tax money on certain things that you've already, the tax money you've already taken in. You got to make sure you spend that on the approved activities. Okay. So just to underline. One of the main differences that I see between what you're presenting. You're frozen. Just frozen for me or is it you guys too? Okay. That's a good side. We know we're not. They're frozen for me too. You guys are. So it's not my internet. Well. And I don't think Carl looks at his screen. I could be wrong. I think Bruce does. We can see the video person. Moving. He's looking at his monitor. Okay. Now they're moving. They're moving now. Yeah, they are. They're back. You're muted though. Hear me say we're working on it. It sounds like this is, as you said, even more advantageous to us. Then what we heard a couple of weeks ago. And then as you said, Seth, I've been in contact with our legislators and with our lobbyists with VLCT legislative council has been in the mix as well. And Kimberly Jessup, who's on the house appropriations committee has told me that there is now language in the draft budget, which will not get passed before April 30th, but it's in the draft budget. So it'll be the last thing the legislature passes saying municipal funds for broadband, not withstanding any other provision of law. To the contrary, a municipality may accept and finance broadband projects with funds received from the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, including funds received as lost revenue. And legislative council thought that if that was included, that that could help dissipate any questions about using this money for the CUDs. If you're looking at me and I couldn't quite tell that. Yes. That's what we will all hope happens is that the legislature comes to a place that allows it to happen, but I it's the legislature and we can never guarantee you till the inks dry on the bill. And that they, they have a lot of activities in front of them right now. And they're talking about a veto session as well. Right, right. So for right now, you are both our standard allocation, but is it standalone? And everyone you give money to has to follow all of your federal requirements. Or is it the bumping? So you're freeing up municipal tax dollars. You have more flexibility, but at the moment, that would mean no broadband. And the other piece you can think about is. Doing a, I'll call it the hybrid model. These we're going to keep as direct federal money. And these we're going to bump over here to make our lives easier. But again, it comes back to how much time and energy. Are you going to, do you want to take. To track. You're still going to have to track where all the money goes. But if you do the hybrid model, you got to track it in two ways. You got to be very clear what was direct federal. And what was municipal dollars spent. I think you have to anyway. I believe you would. You're going to have to track it anyway. If you track it, but you're going to. Yeah. I think you're going to be just fine. If we take the standard allowances. I'm presuming you're going to take the standard allowance. I think there's a no brainer. You're going to confuse everything. I think we just take the standard allowance and then move on to the next step later. Yeah, I mean, we have time. So I don't want to tie everyone up further on this whole thing because I think it's pretty clear. Does everyone feel it's pretty clear that we should just move ahead with the standard allowance? Do you feel that? Yes, and I recognize that this is an evolving situation. Yeah. Even though every time we hear something new, it seems to have evolved in our favor in terms of making things easier. I want to recognize that it is evolving. So what I would propose that we consider is voting to take the standard allowance or standard allocation. I've heard both used. I want to know which one. Standard allowance. Take the ARPA money under the standard allowance approach and to authorize a town administrator to send that into the Treasury on April 28th to give us a couple days buffer before April 30th. And then I would be willing to vote against it so that in case something comes up that raises all sorts of flags for us, we can have a special meeting and reconsider it before we set that in. Does that make any sense? I don't know that we need that backup of changing. But, you know, I feel free to do what you want to do, but I would, if we were to vote, I would vote for the standard allowance. And because it's the, how we actually apply the money and how we do our accounting, which is, you know, sometime down the road, we have some additional time to talk about how we're going to do this. But if we don't act before the 30th, we're really eliminating our options. We're going to take the standard allowance. I want us to do it before the 30th. And I'm just nervous that things are, they're evolving so quickly that I want to give us a chance to change course if something comes up before the 28th. Just as a general statement, I'd be stunned if anything came out between now and then given how many people have already made the move. Not? But we can say, we can pass the standard allowance now and we can say if something or shattering happens, we can reconvene. That's fine. But it's just from a practical point of view, we can do this with every motion. It just seems, I'm sorry, Carl, it seems silly. I think this is clear. We don't need to do it with every motion because we don't have an irrevocable deadline. The federal government for every motion. So, John, can you hear what's going on? I can hear and I agree with Judith and Carl. I would vote for the standard allowance. Yeah, well, we all agree we're going to vote for standard allowance. He said Carl wants to add a provision into it. If something happens, that's going to change the course of history. He wants the right to reconvene the meeting. Is that correct? In practice, yes. But in terms of phrasing the motion is just authorizing the town administrator to send it in on April 28th. Okay, is April 28th too late? It's not too late. Okay, let's just make the motion and do that. You're reserving the right. Yes, I get it. But it's not in the motion. I move to accept the ARPA funding using the standard allowance approach and to authorize the town administrator to file that decision with the U.S. Treasury on April 28th. Do you have to say how much money you're, how much the award will be? We already have the award. What I'm saying is I just was reading. In the annotated agenda, I just said to move the approach for our ARPA award and the amount of $762,560.33. Sure, it's formally necessary, John, but I think that it's helpful for people reading the minutes to understand the amount of money that we're talking about. Yeah, so that's all, the motion is written out. There, if you want to make that motion. In the site board memo? It's in the extended memo on page three, right above town treasurer report. So right here. Oh, okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah. VLC recommended motion. I got it. Right. I don't want to take that motion as is given what we heard from Bonnie because we have a future accounting choice to make that this would constrain us to. So I would be happy to take that motion up to the sum, or the total of $762, etc. And then comma, strike the rest of that and then add and authorize the town administrator to submit this to the federal treasury on April 28. So Judith is going to say something. I know what she's going to say, but go ahead and say it. I guess I have a friendly amendment. I guess I would authorize him to do it now. I'm not seeing the benefit of waiting and I'm. I that that would be my friendly amendment. And I, and again, if we select the standard allowance, we're not precluding how we use it in the future. So well, the motion says government services, but they define government services either or like the ARPA funding, not the ARPA, the CV fiber. Are you taking exception to that for the government services? Because I'm wondering about that myself. I don't think we need to have that final clause in there. I think Carl's right on that. I don't think we need it. And I worry that it might constrain us. So Bonnie, can I ask you a quick question? Did you get a chance to see. What more town was seeing. As far as what the checks are for the standard allowance. I didn't see through more town, but Katie walked through it on the. Yeah, did a webinar. And basically the check is, do you, are you taking the standard allowance? Yes. Okay. And in what amount. So are you taking your full award? So you type in an amount. Okay. Perfect. Okay. So, so we need that number in there. So thank you, John. Okay. We need the number, but the thing is, are we going to say as Judith and John both want to say, and I guess I would say too, let's just get it done. They're like, they don't want to wait until the 28th. They want to get it done. Is that correct folks? If you guys are all lined up that way. I guess I am too. What I'm trying to say is I don't even know if there's a place. It's either going to say that it's for the provision. Of government services. It's a different or it's not going to say anything. I'm not sure I'm going to have the opportunity to edit whatever is or say multiple things. You have this, that or the other thing. So I don't want to, what Bonnie said is what I thought was true. There are two things you check it, check it and you put in the number. Right. Yeah. So let's leave off that final clause about provision of government services. Because that check, because without that it checks it and it puts in the number. Okay. So I would move to authorize Bruce to complete the necessary forms. To indicate that the town of East malpelio. We'll make. Or we'll elect the standard allowance approach for our, our award in the amount of $762,560. And 33 cents. So didn't you make a motion? I'm sorry. That would be my amendment. Yeah. We're kind of informal here about how discussing motion. Okay. So, okay. So you're, you want to accept the amendment? If she wants to put, we can say my motion died for a lack of a second. And she made some motion. She makes a motion. I'll second it. How's that? That sounds good. Okay. All those in favor, please. Thank you. I'll second it. How's that? That sounds good. Okay. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Treasury report. Who is Dawn here? Dawn isn't here. Dawn's not here. So there's nothing very exciting about it. It looks like the other ones. Yep. There's nothing in the budget that's out of whack. Good. The one thing that he might have mentioned if he was here is that the warrant has a payment to Avenue for the first two-thirds of the project to go back further in the land records. And that payment is going to use essentially all that's left in the restoration fund at this time that continues to grow on a regular basis, but this particular payment is going to wipe it out. The next, that's the two-thirds of it that's going to be paid for, did you say? Yeah. Give or take. So we've got to come up with more money. We'll have to come up with more money. Yeah. But we didn't know there'd be this much even available to us at this point. So we're doing better than we might have. We had thought we'd use ARPA money because that was one of the allowable uses before the standard allowance showed up. So I think you'll be just fine. Yeah. In the future. In the time comes. In the future. Okay. Well, thanks for the heads up on that. Do we need to belabor the Town Treasure Report because we're running a little behind? But is there anybody who have questions on the Town Treasure Report? Yourself? No. Nope. Okay. I'd like to move on just because we have so many other things to do. WEC, annual meeting, voting authorization. So this is the normal request except this year there is actual decisions you have to make as opposed to just telling me to check in the box. You have to tell me what things to check in the box. So we have to kind of vote for the candidates? Or not. Oh, that's true. So I could make a comment on that. Okay, go ahead. One, I don't want us to spend too much time on this, but I do have a suggestion. If it's not going to fly quickly, then I'd say let's just move on and not put it in. But the bylaw amendment, I think that's an easy one. They want to be able to allow members to vote electronically. We are in 2022 and instead of paper ballots being required, I think that's a good idea. The other question is on who to vote for. And as Bruce says here, there are seven candidates for three plots. There is one person who has served one term already and then there are two open positions because two people are stepping down from the board. Normally I like to see a board have a healthy mix of new and older candidates in there. People who have a little bit of history, people have some fresh ideas. It seems like with the two open positions we've got lots of room for people with fresh ideas. So unless we've heard horrible things about the person who is an incumbent, then I think we ought to go with that person. But I also want to let you know that that incumbent is a friend of mine, and so that may be biasing my position. Wow. Okay. I'd also be happy for saying too much to choose from was seven candidates and let's not vote for anybody. Yeah, it makes it kind of tough. We've all got to agree on the three. It makes it kind of hard. Yeah. So my proposal is just vote on one and don't vote on the other two. I'm sorry. Does it indicate who the incumbents are? I'm just looking at it. Well, if you go to the web page and look at the candidate statements, then Stephen Farnam is the incumbent. Right. And you also have one to East Montpelier. Which one's East Montpelier? Oh, Olivia Campbell Anderson? Yeah. That's a good point. I like the thought of voting for a person that sees East Montpelier. Well, she's certainly qualified as former director of renewable energy Vermont. Wow. She's a little bit about electric power. She's kind of a home run if you ask me. I know what everyone else thinks. I'd be happy to add her to the list. I'd be happy to add her to the list. And. Okay. Susan Alexander. She lives in Cabot, I believe. Pat Barnes. I used to work with her. She's a really good person. Yeah. Pat Barnes. Who's that? Don't know either. Vandette. I don't know. That's the Allen. Don't know. I don't know either. I know Steve Farnam. I know Rachel on us. She, she works with the historical society. I, I believe. I was on a. A suffrage centennial committee with her. So. So. You know, Steve. I know Steve. His commitment to, to working on the board. The thought that he puts into it. Right. Me too. I agree. I agree with that. He's an incumbent. I think I would recommend myself. And I don't know. Do you folks know Steve Farnam? I know Steve. You know. Yeah. What do you think? I don't have a problem with the two people you just mentioned. Well, I'll be Steve and Olivia so far. Right. And then I like Susan Alexander myself. But that's not up to me. I don't know. Yeah, I don't know the other folks. I don't know her. So I know her a little bit. She's from Canada where I used to live. I respect for her. I don't know what her position is. Electricity or her knowledge of it. I don't need it. I just know, you know. So I might, I might take a look at the bios and later on as a member, choose to vote for her. Yeah. I don't want to argue for the town. It's hard, isn't it? Yeah. I know. Yeah. I know we vote for the two people we're sure of and they vote for the bylaw. Amendment and move forward. That sounds good. Sounds good. If you're making that motion, God, I'll second it. That's a motion. You second it. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Sounds good. That's that. Um, NEMRIC annual disaster recovery contract. $20 increase. Uh-oh. I would just make a motion that we, uh, since this is an annual thing, it's only $20 increase. And we've passed it in the past. And I don't, I don't sense that we're going to go without this because we kind of need this case. There is a, um, a disaster. I make a motion that, um, that we approve the annual renewal of the, of the, uh, the main offsite backup program for our NEMRIC, NEMRIC modules. And for a cost of $778.99. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. The ayes have it. The next one, H, consideration of RB technologies, IT service agreement. And that is updated version. Actually saves $1.75. If comfortable, the board should approve the agreement. Authorized TA Johnson to sign. And this is for our computers? Yep. This is for the, essentially the ongoing, um, monitoring and maintenance of the computers. Yeah. Are you happy with it? Are you happy with the service? Oh yeah. Okay. They've treated us very well. And do they help out with the website as well? No. Okay. The website's done by that collaboration of 133. Okay. The fellow we met because of our grant. Uh huh. A decade ago. Oh yeah. We're still working with the same person on that. I thought we shifted horses at some point in that. No, we shifted from GoDaddy to his firm. Okay. Uh, for hosting. Okay. But as far as, um, when we need help. Yeah. We go directly to him. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Now he's an adult. So we can feel more comfortable. Strike that comment. Well, if he was more than 18 when we met him, I'd be shocked. But he's, he's turned into a very responsible business owner. And it's nice to work with it. So we're moving on to the next slide. I'm going to move to approve the agreement with the RB technology services agreement at 586 25 per month. And authorize the town administrator to sign it. We have a second all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. The eyes have it. All right. charge. The bottom line on this is we got another letter, more money added to the cost, and the same thing that happened in January, a about 10-day window where you could cancel. The window runs out the end of this week, but again the same logic applies this last time. If you cancel, I got nothing for you after that. We don't have any choice, but this is happening everywhere. This is happening with me on my farm. It's like, whoa, it's just nuts. It's crazy. Expenses are just gone crazy. I don't see we have any choice. So are we supposed to make a motion on that? No, it would only be if you wanted to do something other than to accept it. Yeah, okay. Judith and John, you're both okay with that? I'm fine with it. I'm not happy about it. Yeah, I know, I get it. Okay, so we thoroughly discussed that. Next thing, discussion on East Montpelier Personnel Policy revisions. So this was directly related to what Amy talked about last time and Amy's not here, but you can see where I was going with it. I was kind of hoping she'd be here just to direct what she really wanted, but there you go. I'm wondering if we could table this until next meeting. Could we do that? Yeah, we sure can. Because you want to look at Montpelier. I mean, I do too. Yeah, and also I know that Amy had some thoughts, and I just want to make sure that we incorporate that and the time. So just one comment, Judith, is you would act like you'd like a chance to really do a comprehensive look at this. And that's not what this was designed. This was really to meet Amy's specific thing. There's just one set of changes on page eight. Yeah. It's increasing vacation and also saying that you can take vacation for six months of employment. Oh, if you have it approved. Oh, okay. How much would that be? It would be going from 80 hours to 120. And then in the second year, it would jump up to the 144 hours that we offer for the 16th year. That's like three weeks. Right. And change. Yeah. Well, it's three weeks to start with. And then it goes to 24 more hours. Yeah, over three weeks. Yeah. Now that would that would change for the road. No, the road. Oh, personnel. Yeah, yeah, I know that. I just wonder where they're at. Anyway, they're at three weeks. As far as about the only one that would benefit immediately would be Guthrie. Oh, because he's the fewest years in. Yeah, just what's he getting now? He's still at the first window. Oh, the 80 hours. Yeah. Right. Okay. So, so it's, it's affecting two people that we all think probably deserve this. Correct. It'd affect Rosie and it would affect Guthrie immediately, but he else, I mean, we do have the new hires. Well, we specifically included in their offers or their annual leave. So that's what controls their offer letter. And it is lined up precisely with this. So I'm just looking. So you still think we should wait till Amy? What do you all think? I think that Amy would be happy with that myself. That was kind of what she was thinking about. She'd be happy with a change is what you're saying. So you'd be happy with this positive change because she's of the mindset that people need more recompense for their hard labor. That's my take on what I'm positive. That's what she feels. If she feels that two weeks is enough, three weeks is better. That's what, that's where I got out of it. But we don't, we don't have to act on it. I mean, no, there's no harm in waiting. There's no harm in waiting. Yeah, I just want to make sure to understand that. No, I understand now. I could go either way. And we can also just for those two people increase it. So we have another meeting fairly shortly. So maybe everyone will be a tennis then, including Amy. Is that true? I think I'm not sure. I think if we take this up again, that we probably won't need to spend much time on it that time. Yeah. Right. So pretty short item. Yeah. Yeah. It doesn't hurt. I'm happy to wait. I'm happy to wait. So we'll bring it back May 6. Yeah. Yeah. Sounds good. Uh, okay. So we'll work on that later. Town management like COVID-19. Where are we on that? We're viewing it because we promise to review it at every regularly scheduled meeting. Um, using the city's community level to a last updated April 14th, Washington County is at medium, along with eight other Vermont counties and significantly more of Northern New York. New Hampshire remain than two weeks ago. 94% of the nation remains at low. The last seven days, there have been 238 cases in Washington County for a $397 out of 100,000 weekly rate. This rate is substantially higher than two weeks ago. Um, Bruce, are you hearing anything from, um, staff as to what their thoughts are on this or they're feeling comfortable with the status quo? Concerns with the status quo. We, we, uh, had a couple of people wearing masks today because of potential contacts. But other than that, no pushback on the current protocol. A couple of staff members. So just by reference in that third bullet point and Bruce, thank you for providing the detailed information on the different measurements here. Another measurement is the case positivity rate, which is questionable how to compare it to a year ago because we have all these rapid tests that people are taking, not reporting the results positive or negative of. But that's at about 10% for Vermont as a whole right now, which is twice as high as it would need to be to trigger under the old community transmission levels, putting us into the high category and the $397 per 100,000 weekly rate to Washington County is four times as high as we need to trigger the high level there. That's 100 per 100,000. So that's where we are. And people seem to be open to doing more and more. I was at a contra dance on Saturday. We had 200 people dancing in the range. Yeah, we required vaccinations for everybody. Everybody wore masks, which was tough with an aerobic activity like that. Right. But we did it. So everyone wore masks. Everyone wore masks. Yeah. So people are open. Things are opening up our authority to impose a mask mandate expires within the next few days before the end of the month anyway. The legislature had, well, the governor didn't want to work with the legislature to extend it beyond this time. In the annual, sorry, every other week, legislative advocacy meeting that our two lobbyists and VLCT hold today, I asked about adjournment because they talked about a possible veto session. So the adjournment in the middle of May is likely to be sort of a provisional adjournment. I asked to have an adjournment even after the veto session, if there is one that would allow the legislature to call themselves back into the session to consider whatever needs to be considered, just in case things take a really bad turn later on this year. And the administration continues to not want municipalities to have tools to do something on our own if we want to get the legislature back and have them do something about it. And VLCT was not interested in pushing that themselves. They said, contact your local legislators if you want that to happen. But that's just background that I'm aware of. So it sounds like we don't have to do anything different at this point. I wouldn't recommend it. Right. Okay. What are you folks thinking, Judith and John? I just keep maintaining the status quo, I would guess at this point. So it sounds like to me too. Okay, so let's move to the next item where we haven't run out of stuff to do. We have access permits. Three of them. Has anyone had a chance to look at them? One is on an old trail road, which is actually on one of my roads. It's at the top. It's got no traffic up there. So that's not really a concern, but it's kind of a rough area. So Guthrie wants a couple culverts to put in. So there's really no trouble with traffic on that road, just to let everybody know. So that's that one. The next curb cut is on Fair Road. That's a better place for it, I guess, on Fair Road rather than off Route 14. I don't see that in here, do they? No, it's not changing. It's off of Fair Road now. Yeah. Yeah, I've been in and out of it myself. Yeah, he doesn't actually own land on Route 14. No, that land is set back. Yeah, right. That's right. I didn't realize that before. That little piece that the read zone takes up any of the 14 stuff. So this is across the street from the Humane Society on Route 14 South. Yeah, that's how you can identify it. So this internal drive, does that exist now? At this place? Yeah. Yes, he's got a hook. It basically, he comes in right at the triangle of Fair Road and Route 14. Okay. And he has his heavy equipment go right up that slot. Okay. And then it drops back down to his residential, the old farm access down at the bottom, deeper onto Fair Road. Okay. But it's a very tight spot right there. He'd never be able to get a real trailer unit in there happily. And now that I look at it more closely, I see the existing and then proposed. Yes. And then we have the last one, Coburn. What's that? We have the last one, the Waldorf School one. Yeah. Yeah. So that's, is that more on Coburn Road, right? Our part of it is on Coburn Road. Yeah. Yeah. And they actually have a professional plan set, a professional firm involved this time around. Wow. Which is made life easier with VTrans especially. But it also means that they're using the words that you want to see and the plan is set up properly. Can I, can, can we do a motion that would approve all three permits and authorize the Chair Gardner to sign on behalf of the board? Or do we have to approve these all individually? And just, has Guthrie approved these or looked these over? Yeah. Yeah. Yes. Okay. Sorry. That work for you? I don't see a problem. Okay, that works. You know, as long as Guthrie has approved it, I have hardly any questions, but just for the Orchard Valley one, I'm trying to see something in these documents that we have that indicates what the change would be. So currently the lower one, so the more southerly of the two cuts is served as the ingress. Okay. And the upper one was designed to be out only. Upper being onto Route 14. Closer to Route 14. Closer to Route 14, but on Coburn Road. Still on Coburn Road. Oh, yeah. We're looking at the Orchard Valley. Oh Orchard Valley. Okay. So the fundamental change is to make it two-way for both of them. Because the, well, again, because they have professional plans, it sure looks like they're going to do it right, which means curbs, paving whole nine yards. And so, yeah, they'll do the B71. Okay. So presumption is, yeah, it'll be done right. Thank you. So they're putting more of a parking lot in there? Yes, a standalone parking lot. Right. And then the lower one, the southerly one, will be the start of that flow through. What they're trying to do is make it safe for the kids to walk. Oh. There's going to be sidewalks. Really? That horrible area up between the barn and the farmhouse. Yeah. Is going to be completely managed now. It's kind of walled off under this plan. So when the kids are dropped off, they can actually safely walk to the barn. Yeah. Where the classrooms are. Yeah. Whereas before, they were always dodging cars. Yeah. Well, getting in and off of 14 is a problem anyway. So the VTrans part of it, they are improving the access between the barn and the farmhouse. Yeah. And that secondary access that was on the north side of the farmhouse is going away. That's off Route 14. Off Route 14. Yeah. And there will be a new parking lot there as well that will be accessed from the internal drive. Oh, no kidding. Yeah, I see it. So yeah, there's a lot of slow changes. Wow, I guess so. The only DRB is going to look at this in two weeks and the only real structural change is a small barn. But the rest of it is all sidewalks and a road that actually goes all the way through the two parking lots, that kind of stuff. Yeah. And they're going to put, so that road they're putting in between the parking lots around the barn, that's pretty close to the road, eh? Looks like. It's the one that's already there. Yeah. They're just going to make everything connect to it. Yeah. Yeah. And then they're going to have it hook around the farmhouse. It already does in kind of a farm trail thing. Yeah. It'll be more of a formal drive. Well, it's good to get rid of that drive that comes out on Route 14. Yeah. I tell you that. I agree. That thing's dangerous. Yeah. Ha. It's a dangerous stretch of road because they come up over that knoll. Yeah. So fast. I mean, we deal with it all the time coming out of a hammy hill. It's like, oh no. Oh no. Yeah. Ha. Okay. Well, we're going to pass all three. Looks like, or vote on all three. That's not. So John made a motion. Did anybody second it? Yeah. Second. Okay. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Good. Aye. Now, to be clear, when we voted on the motion, it's for me to sign them because there's only one person here. Right. Okay. And sounds good. When we're done with the meeting, I will show you the ones you want to sign. No, I get it. They're in the middle of it. I will not dare enter this with a pen and hand. You may open them and sign them, but just so you don't sign the ones you're playing with now. Oh. Those aren't the arrangements. Well, I could sign the ones I'm playing with now because you just throw them away. Yes, you could. No harm. Okay. So we've done the access permits. The appointments revolving loan fund advisor, Becca Schrader. I move to appoint Becca Schrader as revolving loan fund advisor. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. I just want to say that Becca is a wonderful resource for us on this. She's always done a great job. Amen. Yep. Warrants. I don't see the warrants on the website. Right here in person. Do you guys see them? Oh. I can look at them here, but yeah, you can look at them physically. They're not on the website? I just renewed my page and I didn't see them either. Even homer nods, Bruce. Oh, Avenue, that's the one you're talking about. Yes. A chunk of change, actually. Yes. For those that can't see the expense warrant, it's about $20,000 and 19 in change. And that's for the preservation of the land records? Yes. That takes us back from book 40 to book 26. A way back. Wow. We're getting close. We're getting close. And I don't see any significant expenses on that besides that. Only one that's fun. Yeah, that's the page of my page. You're going to see some costly things like tires and diesel. You're wearing a truck tire. Yeah, I guess so. In diesel fuel, oh boy. You're looking at it when you're looking at it. So there's a set of tires that are $5,400 and Guthrie bottom because the price is exploding on him. The price went up 18, 19%. Yeah. So these were last year models and he was able to get them at the old price. So we grabbed them. Yeah. Did I see that first page? Yeah. Unclip it. Yeah, I sure can. You can take it. I was trying to make things easier. Yeah. Very good. Thank you. Page two. Say please, contract. Okay. So let's see. I can't sign this without the approval, right? Because I know I get it. Okay. Okay. What about you two? Are you comfortable with our review of it that the total is $41,546.12? Yeah. Judith and John? Yes. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So we need a motion authorizing me to sign it. So moved. We have a second. All those in favor? All those in favor, please say aye. All right. Judith's not voting. I can't hear us. Judith, are you voting? I'm voting. Okay. She voted. Okay, I'm going to sign it. Not perfect because I'm over here trying to figure out where the heck that PDF went. Oh, okay. So that's it for that. Okay. So the warrants are done. And the business, the other business. Nada. No, Bruce said some stuff. No, we didn't. Town Administrator report? Oh, yeah, let's go through that. But he didn't have any specific items to add. No additions to the agenda. Right, right. So on the Town Administrator report, what do we have? Just a couple of things coming from the fire department that came out of that meeting last Thursday. They will be bringing forward and Ty has talked to me since that meeting, a proposal for the purchase of a fire engine. Yeah. And they really want the towns to commit to a timeframe for releasing the money so that they may be able to utilize that money to essentially buy down whatever contract they end up accepting for the loan. They're trying to time things right. And they just, they understand that our funds could come essentially at any time that you're willing to let them go. Right. Whereas Calis needs time and also needs a plan for how they're going to come up with the money. Yeah, there's no problem with us. No, it's just whenever you want to do it. Yeah. What we said to them was we want details on how you're going to spend the money. If you get it up front, then how much of an advantage is that versus us holding on to it for a while and accumulating the huge rates of interest that we make on our money. Well, we should just find out what they need. Yeah. So Ty agreed to send us a proposal. And he's also going to put together a proposal for using the bond fund for the LED light switches switch out and a little patch of pavement out where the ATV is or UTV, whatever that thing is. And we discussed this in the meeting on Thursday, but just for those who weren't there, when we bonded to build this new fire department building, there was some excess money left over that the idea has been that we use it for small things on the building maintenance and the building and upgrades in the building. That's where this we come from. Yep. Okay. So the other thing here is that we finally received the anticipated curb cut request for Donner Road. We talked a little bit about this when we were discussing those 911 issues. This is going to be a decision for the select board as to how you want to play this, because right now the stretch of Donner Road that this curb cut would come off of doesn't actually exist. It's just sort of a hard spot in the ground. The road is. Yeah, the road is. You can drive through it. You can drive through it. You have to dodge the stumps. Yeah, you're not driving through it in a Prius. No, I don't own a Prius. I don't know if you remember when Rob Chickering discussed how Foster Road that connected up to Chickering Road, how he knew it was no longer a road when he was driving his Volkswagen through and couldn't make it. Okay. Same concept here. You can't make it with a normal car. Yes, you can use a truck and get through it. I get it. Yeah, yeah. So what is your thought here? You guys need to see it. See it? You need to see the road. You need to do a site visit with Guthrie and decide how much work you want to do on this. And the emergency vehicles can't get there and you should not be giving curb cuts to places emergency vehicles can't get to. Yeah, but it's under the obligation of usually a landowner to fix up that road. Right. That's what it's been historically. Correct. I can give you an example. No, you don't have to. Okay. Yeah. You're absolutely correct. Right. The trick here is that those two places at the end were built without access onto a real road. Yeah. And it was a subdivision approved by the Planning Commission. Yeah. And there was no, our rules wouldn't have allowed for that. Right. And they, I know, let it go. They let it go. It's the same as waiting an issue. Yeah. By adding another person back there with children. But won't they improve that anyway? So to get in and out, they would have to to get in and out. Yeah. But you're throwing it all on the poor person that came in later. Whereas it would put pressure on the town to make it a class three road. I'm thinking. Yeah, but or even to upgrade it to normal class four standards. Yeah, but wait a minute here. If you're going to start designate class four roads to class three roads for emergency purposes, you're going to get into the weeds here because there's class four roads in this town. And I can give you an example that landowners put a lot of money in to keep those up there and I own one myself. It's like and access permits have been granted on that. We just grant one tonight on that class four. But that is not a class four road. What is it? That's a legal trail. Okay. There is a substantial difference between old trail road, which is a legal trail. Okay. And Donner Road, which is a class four road. Okay. There's a difference. Okay. This is the discussion we had with Johnson Road. Yeah, so I remember that's class four on the stretch that we have to be so careful with. Yes. At some point in the town needs to be responsible to and we now have two families that are unreachable by emergency services, except by hooking way out and around in Calis and coming back. Right. This puts a third one even deeper into the weeds. Yes. And you know, I'm not sure it's a great, great fit for this town to just say, eh, upgrade it yourself. But legally, that's what it says. We're not going to tax them like they're not already available to be accessed. No, no, no. But I mean, our policies have always said your policies don't cover this class four, not this kind of situation. You mean the emergency aspect. If this was a subdivision, yes, they absolutely cover it. And that's what I'm saying. They covered it back in 2001, 2003, when that original subdivision was done. This is not a subdivision. This is a plot of land that's been in place for ever. So there are other options from that land to get onto a more well-traveled road. If you look at the, oh, you can't look at it. You haven't seen it. It is a train-challenged piece of property. Okay. As in 150-foot elevation difference from where there's a place you could actually build a house and where you might be able to get off the road onto the class three portion. Whereas this is just a straight shot onto the road. Problem is the road's not there. Right. Minor detail. Okay. Yeah, this sounds interesting, as you might say. But they're coming in the other way, from Wheeler Road. These people? Yeah. You can't even do it from that direction. Oh, they're in the middle. Okay. So they bought a piece of land that you can't get access to? No, you said, accept. Could we, I'm sorry, could we, I'm just wondering if maybe we can table this discussion until we're actually considering the application. We have all the information in front of us because we have a couple of items to address an executive session. And I'm just wondering if we can. I was just reading the thing that said we got the curb cut request. So that's all I was reading. Right. And that's all it is. As Jetta said, you're going to face this more formally. The trick is it would be advantageous to do a site visit before you face it. No, I'm getting that. But I'm also saying that I'd like to look at the rules that govern class four roads in the town to so see if we're on the right page here. How soon do we need to handle this if they got us the application? You don't technically need to scurry around. It's more that if we're going to schedule a site visit, we're going to start thinking about it. Right. What you do with it is your choice, but you really should see it. Not everybody. You know, making these approvals for people to go on to roads that are that are class, class four and legal trails, that's just going to open it wide open. So you eventually going to have to reclassify those as class three roads and maintain them in the proper manner for them to get the fire service. I don't know if that's something the town wants to do or not. I mean, I know that historically, you know, these roads, the town has no requirement to maintain them above class four if it chooses not to and can only upgrade them if it serves the purpose of the benefit of the public. And I don't know if they have to do a petition or what, but if you could, I think you do a petition or somebody can have a petition drawn up and get enough signatures, they could ask the town to upgrade the road, but it's going to be pretty difficult to approve access onto a road that doesn't provide appropriate services. Should we be allowing people to build houses in those places where we can't get to them with these gigantic fire trucks? But no, these are all good questions and we just, we need to move on as we know we have to move on. So, yeah, but are we going to schedule site visits? I guess that was a question. That was the question, yes. I'm just trying to scurry along here. So, I'm fine with that. Yeah. Okay. But I'm going to be hanging soon. So what days you want to do it on? I don't know. We just got it today. I just brought it to you. I haven't really thought about it in particular day. Yeah, well, you know. But I'll take hanging season into account. Well, May 2nd is not hanging season. That's our next meeting. We could meet before the meeting like we did today, which makes a nice long meeting, but that's okay. We like each other. Yeah, we like each other. We can tolerate each other and we can make a line up with a meeting is what I'm thinking. That's okay. Yeah. So we could do that on May 2nd at five o'clock, whatever, whatever works. It is a little hallway. So I'd say we do make it at five. Wear boots. Wear boots, but by then I'll be dried out too. Hope so. Hope so. Yeah. If it's raining and crappy, we can always reschedule. Yeah. Okay. You guys are okay with that? They're fine. Are you going to ferry us in a four by four or two? Sure, whatever. We have those. What's that? I'm sorry, the video. May 2nd? I can't hear you. Sure. If you're talking. No. Okay. It looks like you're moving now. Okay. You were frozen for a second. Yep. Oh, I was frozen? Yeah, but now you're not. It looks like you can. We were talking about scheduling a site visit for May 2nd. Did you hear that? Part of it. They're frozen now. That's probably we are to them. It's all relative. This is so good. They just got knocked off again. Again, the meeting's still wide open. Okay. My screen is fine. Recording in progress. Okay. Sounds like they may be coming back. Okay. Can you all hear us now? Can you all hear us now? Hello? Yes, we can. Okay. Excellent. So we were proposing a site visit to this property on May 2nd ahead of our next meeting at five o'clock. Does that work for you all? Okay. Sounds good. Okay. If you can get, obviously, directions, that'd be helpful. Yeah. We'll set up a taxi service or you get directions. Okay. We're all done except for personnel matters. We go into executive session under one VSA 313A3, the appointment or employment or evaluation of a public officer or employee. Okay. So we need everyone to leave. Oh, we need a second and a vote. Oh, all those in favor of going to executive session, please say hi. Hi. Hi. Okay. We're in executive session. 948, we're out of executive session. Can you just make sure they can hear you? Can you hear us? Yes. Okay. So we're now out of executive session at 949 or whatever. Um, so we'd like to say a few things. Number one, our town clerk is going to get a raise. No, we need to make some motions. I move. Oh, yeah. You're going to make a rose. Yeah. Right. Good catch on that. I move to award a raise of uh, uh, to $62,000 for the town clerk and extend vacation benefits to 120 hours per year. We need a second on that. We have a second from John. Who are you going to claim a second? John. John. John said slightly before Judas. Um, all those in favor, please say hi. Hi. Hi. So effective immediately. Effective immediately. Yeah. Number two, I'm going to tee it up for you. Okay. Uh, I, I move to Bruce, help me out with the words. Confirm the, uh, point, um, the job offer to Gina Jenkins that was contingent on select board approval. Is that close enough to what we need? Okay. Good enough. Okay. We have a second on that. We have a second by Judas. All those in favor, please say hi. Hi. Hi. Perfect. Number three. So hands one clarifier. Okay. With putting it out tomorrow to the public because we've been being asked about this. Yep. Okay. Absolutely. And we're also good with her. I think we had the date and the acceptance of when she was going to start the 22nd. Yes. Yep. Yep. Yep. Make sure that. Yeah. Thank you. Yep. And number three to dumb. I move to advertise the position of zoning administrator as a full or part time position with the deadline for replying of Monday, May 9th. Okay. Five p.m. We need a second on that. Second by Judith. She had her hand up quicker than John. So Monday, May 9th obviously is a gap. Right. Our idea is that the planning commission would have a little bit of time to find a candidate, select a candidate, interview them in a special meeting if they want to, or their regularly scheduled second meeting of the month. And our perception is they would do the interviews and then we would also, they would make a recommendation to select board. Okay. And then go back to them for a final approval. Zach is ready for that. Yep. He was assuming that was coming. Yeah. They're ready. Wait a minute. You said something new there. I don't think we said it. It's the select board that makes the final approval. It does. Well, it does, but it's conditioned on the planning commission accepting that. Is it? I believe so. No. No. Oh, we make a file. The planning commission nominates. Okay. All right. But if there's a, even before, remember ours is from the charter, but even before that, if there was a conflict, the select board. Oh, they had the final say so. Yeah. Okay. Okay. I thought it was the other way. Okay. So we have all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. What was the second? Second was yours. Okay. I think that's it. Yeah. No. Yeah. Go ahead. No, that was it. I think, yep. That's what we talked about. Yep. That's what we talked about for holding both sides. Absolutely. Thank you. It can be adjourned. What? Has that been on your mind for a while? I've been having fun, a lot of fun, but it's time for the fun to end. Yeah. You made the motion. You made the second. All those in favor of adjourning, please say aye. Aye. 953. Thank you. Good night. Thank you for turning in, John and Judith. We appreciate it.