and welcome to the May 13, 2025 meeting of the East Long Meadow Town Council. I'll call the meeting to order and ask that we stand for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Moment of silence to reflect on the events going on both near far. Thank you. In accordance with Mass General Law, this meeting is being recorded by LCAT. And if there's anyone else in the audience recording, if you could identify yourself. And seeing
none, we can move on to public comments. This is an opportunity if there's anyone in the public that wishes to make a comment about anything in particular. If you do have a comment about the budget when we get to the budget public hearing, there will also be an
opportunity for that as well. Sorry, Conor. I can't quite hear you. Oh, sure. Uh you could make a public comment now, but if it's related to the budget, there's also going to be an opportunity in a few minutes for those comments. Okay. Okay. Seeing no general
public comments, we'll move on to council comments. Have a comment this evening. Sure. I just want to say thank you for uh getting to us um in a timely fashion for the incident at the high school. It was nice to be kept up to
date on I appreciate it. You're welcome. Thank you. Any other comments? See none. Town manager report. Hi Tom. Good evening. How are you doing? Good. How are you? Good.
Uh so um attached uh the uh are the uh construction reports for the weeks of April 14th, 21st, and 28th uh at the high school in the niatorum. Uh I I'm still amazed about everything that happens every couple
weeks, every time these reports come out. And uh it's exciting how much uh how far we've come in such a short period of time. Um, at our last uh school building committee meeting, we learned about a a potential issue involving water pressure for the fire
protection system. Uh, so we're uh we may have to alter the design a little bit to figure out how to fit a pump uh for that system in the existing footprint. Uh, so I'll keep you updated on that. Uh, but for all intents and purposes, we're still on time and on
budget. Um, Rebecca, Rob, and I met with Barrett Planning Group, who's going to help us, uh, do the zoning bylaw review and diagnostic, uh, the, uh, infamous or famous chapter 450. Uh,
so we're really excited to dig into that. Um, this project, uh, was made possible by our onetop for growth grant from the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities. Um, so we look forward to having a spirited conversation about all things zoning uh
with Barrett Planning uh and most of you uh who will uh undoubtedly be asked for your input during the process. So we look forward to that. Uh Ryan Quimby and I met with Whip City Fiber last week uh for an update on our fiber project, fiber to the home
project. Um, we're still awaiting our poll applications from the utilities, uh, make ready work estimates, uh, things like that. Uh, but we we still kind of continue to figure out how we're going to roll this whole process out. Um, we've we're analyzing multiple
scenarios for constructibility, cost, and and whatever those potential revenue streams might be. Uh so uh as you may remember when we were talking about this uh probably last year uh most of this depends on what the the take rate which is how many customers we expect to get.
Uh you know if we based it on the the votes of the poll question about fiber uh almost 95% of the community would be on board but we know that that's unrealistic. So um basically we have set
up a website now um to to show how interested communities are. So we have the whole community set up in these uh fiber areas and we're asking people to get on the website. It's at eastma.govfiber. Is that slash or
backslash? That's backslash. All right. Fiverr. uh to uh put in your address and your name and just let us know that you're interested in this uh this opportunity. Uh obviously uh highspeed dependable fiber service to the home
from your uh local uh municipal light plant. Uh we're really excited about it. But again, we we we're just trying to help with the planning process here. We're still two years out from anybody having fiber in their home. I want to
make sure that uh it was stressed a lot that just by signing up doesn't mean there will be a truck or van in front of your house the next day. Uh we're just trying to get the numbers together so we can figure out the best way to roll this out.
Um, so I I also mentioned a couple months ago that the property at 70 Maple Street was accepted into the spring 2025 uh technical assistance to Brownstone's municipal assistant program at at Yukon. Uh so during the period from January to
a couple weeks ago uh I met with our student rep Sophia Gagnon and the project manager for Yukon uh Damen Surren Serantino uh sorted to collaborate and develop a uh comprehensive reuse plan for this site. Uh that included a reuse assessment and
evaluating potential redevelopment options based on environmental, economic and community factors. uh great experience. Uh the uh Sophia was outstanding. Uh took a lot of community input and sort of rolled out uh a full
potential reuse of the site. Uh the report is forthcoming uh in full PDF form which I'll share with you at some point. Uh in the in the interim, I forwarded some renderings of what a reuse could be uh sort of a mixeduse
development on that site uh with some public areas and a gazebo and it was it was pretty pretty cool site. Um so this this report will will be sort of packed into our grant application this fall for for brownfields uh to clean up the whole
site. So, uh, we were excited about that and thanks again to everybody at at Yukon for for their help. Um, May 22nd, 11:30 a.m., join us at the Council on Aging for the East Meadow Boston Post
Golden Keane ceremony. Uh, the the ceremony is an honor bestowed on the community's oldest resident. Uh, our guest of honor is Filamina Mini Miller, who turned 103 in April. Oh. So,
um, yeah, feel free to come by the the COA on May 22nd. Uh, so that's one of our upcoming event events, May 22nd, 11:30 at the COA. And then obviously we'll have our Memorial Day ceremony May 26th at 11:00 a.m. at the flag pole at
the SO High School. And that's uh the report for this evening. I'm happy to answer any questions. There any questions? Thank you, Tom. Saving all time. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Tom. I would
entertain a motion at this time to move out of order to licensing matters and then return to public hearings. So moved. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. We are at licensing matters uh for the farmers
market permit application for Hardwick Winery at the farmers market at 46 Maple Street from June 7th through August 30th. That's on Saturdays from 9 to 1. Would you mind providing a update on that process? Um they've been working on
this. Hardwick Wine Hardwick Winery is going to be serving at the farmers markets on Saturdays and this is the first time the council will see a farmer's permit since we got the advisory from the ABCC. But first, the provider of the alcohol has to be
certified as an agricultural event. And we have a representative here that probably explain where they are in the process. They're very close, but just didn't make it for tonight's meeting. Great. Would you mind coming forward? Uh, if you could just come up to the
microphone if you don't mind. Sit, stand. Whatever. Sit. Be comfortable. Thank you. I feel like I'm in front of a judge. So, we've been working on the farmers market since January. Um, one of our recent um people that we were
talking to was the Hardwick Winery um in Hardwick. And in order for them to participate in a farmers market, the law was changed in December of last year. So that there's a process that they have to go to in order for them to actually be
able to come to the the farmers market. And the it's they have to receive certification as an agricultural event actually the farmers market which isn't really them, but that is how the law is stated. So, it's a um an agency called
MDAR and MDAR will certify um as an agricultural event if we have X amount of farms um coming each week and we absolutely do have many farms coming this year. We're really excited about that. Um and so I expect to be
certified. Um I was told that the application went in yesterday. Um, and somebody was contacted and they had a favorable result that it should be approved shortly, but not quick enough for tonight's meeting. Um, so we're moving
forward. Okay. Um, I just want to clarify one item. So, they're going to be selling bottles of wine. They're not going to be selling glasses of wine. They're going to be sampling, but they are not going to be selling Well, we will be selling bottles. Okay. Thank you for the clarification.
So the council will get a a permit once they get the certification. That certification will be reflected on the permit that you see for the very first time. So it'll be all new to us, but seems like a pretty easy process. Yeah, definitely a new process, but it
seems like a cool idea. Thank you for uh providing the update for us. Okay, any questions? Sure. So this isn't an actual uh pouring permit? No. No. I I think there's a separate thing for that. So
selling it's new to me too. Yeah. Little licensing committee too. So it's interesting that the provider has to have the event certified agricultural and not the host. Right. So what the Hardwood Winery's been through this before I think.
So is there any fee associated through the town for the permit? No, I think the town is going to um Well, there's two permits. So, there's the the permit from the health department, which they will get.
Exactly. And then they will go through that process, and then they will also pay a $50 fee for this alcohol um permit. That is what the Massachusetts law through Massachusetts. Right. Right. So, the licensing committee meeting I'm
going with this schedule coming up. So, so Kathy, correct me if you'd like. We had a licensing committee meeting in December to talk about this, but we didn't have a quorum. But in our informal discussions, we agreed that there would be no permit
fee attached to this. Correct. Sounds neat. Yeah. He's happy with that. Yeah, I'm excited. Like I said, it's something completely different and um sounds good to me. Yeah, we're we're
stretching our limits. Um and we're we're trying to bring in um vendors that are going to bring in a lot of people. Um so I think this year we have really done our done ourselves. We really have. So far we have a lot of food vendors
coming. So it's very exciting. Yeah, sounds like a great event. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, we are now back to public hearings. We have six o'clock public hearing for the
budget. So, this is a public hearing to present the town manager's proposed capital improvement plan and operating budget for fiscal year 2026 to the public for their comments as outlined in article 6, section one of the East Lome home roll charter. The council members are Jim Leiden, Kathy Hill, Anna Jones,
myself, Connor O'Shea, Marilyn Richards, Ralph Paige, and John Torch. And I would ask the clerk to read the legal notice into the record. The East Long Meadow Town Council hereby gives notice that it will hold a public hearing on May 13, 2025 at 6 PM in the Council on Aging
Media Room, 328 North Main Street and via Zoom webinar to review the proposed FY26 capital improvement plan and operating budget as outlined by article 6, section one of the East Long Meadow Home Rule Charter. The proposed FY26 capital improvement plan and operating
budget can be reviewed in the clerk's office or on the town's website under government town manager for the town council, Gina Arquagetti, town clerk, clerk of the council. Thank you, Jeanie. Then at this time, I would ask if our chair of the financial oversight committee wanted to make any comments or
presentation. Hey Jim. Hello. Good evening. Good evening. So, the financial oversight committee met during the month of April and we submitted our recommendation to the town council last
week. Uh, I don't know if you would like to read that letter of recommendation or if you have any questions. I'd be happy to try to answer them. But basically, uh, we recommended, uh, that the town
council approve the town manager's budget as it was submitted. Uh we felt that the budgets were reasonably constructed um that there was due diligence applied and that the hard work
was done by the town manager and the budgeters and the school uh committee and and the school department. So that um you know we we we thought that it was uh it was done well and and correctly
uh especially considering uh the issues that we face and uh with the debt and interest coming on board uh with the new high school uh which we'll be kind of lumping in in FY26. The only thing that we um
suggested um is that possibly looking into getting some kind of outside resource to look into some way of helping us deal with the issue of uh health insurance, employee benefits,
retirement uh contributions is that category is continuing to rise. uh it rose almost 10% this year and it's going to squeeze us out. Um so that's an area that if
there's some way we can find to help start to push that down a little bit, I think it would be to uh the town's benefit. Uh but uh everyone was very cooperative. Um the members of the committee uh Don Starks a vice chair,
Rich Ferro, uh Anna Jones, and Kathy Hill, Connor O'Shea as exeicio. We were also very fortunate to have Ralph Paige and Marilyn Richards as very regular attendees uh at our meeting. So, I was
uh well attended and uh Tom and uh uh I can't I can't believe I can't they were there each each meeting and that went a long way towards helping us understand how the budgets were put together. So, um and we had one meeting
that uh we we went over with u with the school committee Gordon and Pam and uh helped us to understand uh their budget as well. So, we felt that really the hard work was done prior to the budget being submitted as as it's supposed to
have been done and uh we didn't recommend any changes. Great. Thank you for the update, Jim. Tom, at this point, would you mind providing a brief summary or especially since there were some changes over the
Sure. Sure. Yeah. I I guess I want to thank the financial oversight committee chair and the entire committee. Uh the conversations are always um helpful. Uh you
know, saying that we didn't have any recommendations to change the budget doesn't mean that there weren't many comments and meaningful conversations to sort of push us ahead in the next year and the year after that. So, I do want to thank you all for your time because I
think uh you provide sort of an invaluable service to the whole community, not just the budget process, but I mean as we move forward the the expertise and the comments uh really sort of lend this team effort and and I do appreciate all your time. So, thank
you. Um yeah, so we uh is a relatively quick process. uh for financial oversight and and yes, a lot of the work was done, but like Jim had sort of alluded to, a lot of the uh
space that we had to grow was eaten up by a few line items that sort of limited how much we could spend without digging into our excess levy. Um, so that sort of left us with a semi level services budget that we
sort of had to cut down at at at our level one meetings. Uh, the school department obviously uh had to make significant uh cuts to their original budget submitt. Um and so we ended up
um you know in a in a position that that uh you know I guess couldn't have been any more comfortable I suppose. Um we we were able to not tax up to the levy limit once again which has
historically been a priority for this community which I'm happy to say we didn't uh we didn't do that again. Um there was uh quite a few uh large increases again uh health insurance um
property and casualty insurance and retirement which uh we we've seen major increases to across the board. Um we the the budget sort of still in flux a little bit with the uh the state kind
of reissuing and issuing their numbers uh in their normal schedule. Um, we ended up uh, like Jim said, we ended up uh, with a tax rate of 1985, which uh, a$187 of
that is attributed to uh, the excluded debt from the new high school. Um, which left us somewhere around 1795 for for the tax rate without the excluded debt.
Um, we had a 2 and a half% increase in the school. We had a 2.26 2.26% increase across the rest of the town departments and then the rest of that increase came from the the aforementioned uh big three there.
Um the capital plan um was um a little bit lighter than last year especially. Um there was a $1.5 million uh of general fund um liability
for the capital plan. And then with the enterprise fund projects, uh we had about $3.5 million worth of projects this year between uh the enterprise funds and some other projects from from grant funds. So um like I said, we did we did quite a
bit last year. uh this year didn't quite measure up. But again, uh we have this situation that we're in where we were uh dealing with some some monumental increases uh as well as the excluded debt from the high school, which uh
doesn't necessarily hit us in the operating budget, but it hits us where it counts, and that's the tax rate and how much of an impact that's going to be on the community. So, uh, we were very very conservative what with our level service budget this year. Uh, again, we didn't
budget the number for level service, but I don't anticipate any of our services being hindered by uh those cost savings. [Music] Um, there was a few changes that came out of our conversations from uh from
the financial oversight uh that netted us uh about $4,000 worth of savings. There was a um let me make sure I get everything right here. Uh we had a uh a operational uh change with a shared
position happen in the last month or so. So, we've uh sort of because we've had the time here to uh to let that happen before the budget hearing started. Recreation budget was dis decreased uh about 27,000. They share a position with
it. Uh that eight of those 18 hours were transferred to it. So, their budget went up 21,000. Uh and then accounting uh had a new hire of a position that's been open for quite some time. and we adjusted
that budget by $1,700 for a cola that will come on July 1st, contractually obligated by the the CBA. Uh so that was uh about $4,224 uh decrease from the original budget
submitt that that has been rolled into the uh excess levy. Um, and then, uh, like I said there, the the the recap was updated and I sent you guys the updated recap to to sort of reflect where the budget has moved between the House and
Senate for the Commonwealth. Uh, and that represented a net increase of around $88,000, which was rolled into the excess levy in this in this iteration as well. Uh we also based on some conversations we had uh at financial financial oversight have sort
of reworked the increase in the storm water budget uh to reflect more of a percent increase across all categories uh instead of a flat dollar amount that I guess didn't really make as much sense as increasing everybody at the same
rate. Um and that that's pretty much it. Obviously, we'll have, I'm sure, many questions. Um, which, uh, Kim's here, Rebecca's here. Uh, we're we're more than prepared to answer any any other questions um on the budget.
Great. Thank you, Tom. At this time, since it is a public hearing, uh, there's the opportunity for any members of the public to make a comment if they wish. If you want to come forward and state your name and address. Yes. My name is Ralph Mler. I've been a
resident of town for well over 60 years. And if you guys understand any of that, you're fantastic. I have a script. I don't either. I'm in good shape. Anyway, I was here one year ago to protest the 2025 budget.
Not protest it, but to find some questions on it. And and my biggest question I guess is the 2025 budget had a huge sum of money allocated for paving and the money was going to be from Dearborn Street perhaps to the four
corners. What happened? No paving. Where' the money go? Sure. I mean I can clarify. Yeah. So uh the the money was for design. So the that wasn't actually to
do the project. So we have and last year must have been for phase two phase two. So the phase one is coming in FY27. So we the state has offered us a grant to do the project for the construction cost. The town has to put
up the design money which was about $500,000. So this project that this was for phase two which is probably going to be in like 2032 something like that. But so so we're it's I know I I it sounds Yes. So
but the investment is we pay So we did this about four years ago and we're finally going to see that come in about a year or so at on North Main Street. The the the the outline of the grant program, the TIP program, is the town puts up the design money and the state
and the feds pay for the entire project, which out here is going to be about $16 million. So, it's a half a million dollar investment for a $16 million project. So, but it's a long way. It is a long way. Yep. And and the feds may stop that
money. We may never see it. So, that uh is certainly a real possibility, I suppose. Turmoil that we see. Well, correct. But uh we won't be in design for that until we get on that full list. And if that money is removed, then we
won't do the project because we can't we can't afford a $20 million or a project like that. Surely can't. Yeah. But we used to get chapter 90 90 money. What happened to that? We still do. Right around that same amount of money about a half a
million dollars a year. What did we do with it last year? I mean, Ridge Road, that's all I got paid was Ridge Road. Yeah. So, the the because of the price of paving these days, we end up stacking up two years of chapter 90 money to do a single project
and that was Ridge Road. So last year, yeah, because we we had done the water mane ridge and east circle. Yep. What about our intersections? I just got an estimate that put struts on my car over $1,100.
So you feel the pain. None of us drive. You probably don't all drive Cadillacs, so you know how bad the roads are here in East Lawn Meadow and they're only going to get worse. Yep. Just drive over the line in the summers and it's like glass almost, you know. Anyway, I I
understand it takes time, but I don't know. I got to see some the center and the and the four corners. It's just a disaster. Yep. That intersection uh was in a transportation bond bill in 21 which was never funded.
I think it was in this one which I we'll see if it gets funded. Didn't Biden give us a lot of money for infrastructure? Uh well I suppose in the form of the ARPA money uh which we spent on a lot of capital projects and that was what I was referring to last year that we we spent
a lot of that money okay on projects last year. All right. And I would add a lot of that money for the ARPA funds, not all of it, but a lot of it went to like the water and sewer infrastructure projects, too, which we kind of have to do before we pave a brand new road over.
Just a quick point. Um, I know you didn't touch on it, but I believe it's this year that the state will be uh paving Route 83 from the Connecticut line to the Rotary and also Prospect Street from the Connecticut line to the Rotary. I believe it's on this year's
agenda this year. this year. Yeah. So although this summer, this fall, right now, pretty soon we're hearing. So although although usually a project like a tip project takes five, six years from engineering applying for the grant and
going through the whole process, in this case it should be done within the year, received notice and it was put onto the schedule. So, and the and the budget hopefully we'll start seeing a lot of paving in town. The chapter 90 bud budget is proposed to be increased this
year in this budget, but again, we'll have to wait to see where the proposed budget lands. But that was to the tune of an extra uh Yeah. And yeah, it'll be almost 50% more. So, we should be we'll we'll I think this is a problem that is
statewide and I think they've been trying to do something about it that that chapter 90 formula basically has been untouched since 2003 which obviously prices have changed a lot since then. So there is an effort uh across the across the Commonwealth uh
from municipalities to special interest groups to to start to increase that money because everybody's sort of in the same boat here that the money that we're getting does not go very far and everybody's roads are are in in a similar condition. All right. Well, Tom,
I'm I'm glad I got some answers finally. There's going to be some paving done. That makes me a happy guy. Couple more questions. A loader. Does the town need a new loader? We do really for all that money. You gotta have that one. Gota had that load already. It's used a lot.
Well, I realize that. But the one you got is out of service or beyond that repair. And we we have to we have to rent one for the winter to load salt. Well, we don't want to do that. But the leases on the fire truck and the
ambulance, are those when those leases are up, is the town going to get a new ambulance? Are they going to keep the ambulance for a couple years? Well, the way things are working out, we pay for them before we even get them. Uh the there's such a backlog. This is payment three on this ambulance, and we don't
have it yet. So, when we get it, what's already going to be paid for. Um it's it's sort of a a difficult thing, but I think we should see in the next year or so that we're not going to need to buy another ambulance. Uh you can imagine how
quickly our public uh safety vehicles, police and fire. No, I know I realize how quickly they they go. But um yeah, with maint maintenance I might you know like anything any car can last a while. Mine's 22 years old. I love it.
Loving it. Anyhow, um Spade and Culver. I live right there. Okay. I know that cover water goes right through it. Fine. Okay.
$874,000. That's right. Could pave with that money. We could um That's a grant. That's a grant. That's on our grant. That's on our grant. That municipal vulnerable preparedness grant. So that
uh the state has also been doing a a they've had sort of an initiative lately to inspect these culverts uh and if there's any uh you know structural damage that they
need to be be repaired. Well, they did and when you go in there any cracks in the concrete we had just we just did a project on uh the culvert on Porter Road, right? Uh same thing. Uh it it may not seem like much when you
look at the pictures, but there's cars driving over that every day, right? So, we got to make sure that we're not having any road collapse. The other one with that that makes it uh makes it so difficult is that there's a sewer line right underneath that culvert. And so,
if there's any uh any more deflection in that pipe, then we got a sewer problem, too. So, that was put on the list and sort of fasttracked through the grant. All right. Thank you. I bought an agenda, but thank you. Appreciate your time. See you next year. Yeah. See you.
See you next time. Thank you, sir. I wish there was more. Yeah, we need an auditorium for Appreciate it. There. Anyone else in the audience that would like to make a public comment reling none, I will close the public
input portion of this meeting. It's now an opportunity for the council if there's any council comments or questions about the budget. I'll start with the only one that I have is also thank you to the members of the financial oversight committee and of
course all the town and school department heads. They put in a lot of time and effort preparing the budget and reviewing it with multiple rounds of people. No short amount of work, but it seems to have paid off. Any other comments?
Thank you. Um I'm going to start with capital. Um through the fire department, they're requesting a 2014 car uh hybrid upfit. Um I know we have
um designation of green communities. uh does that fall under um the green communities to where we're going to apply for a grant so that hopefully we receive a grant from green communities so that we don't have to raise and appropriate the money. Have
you had that conversation with Chris yet? I know you were talking to Mark about his, but yeah. Um I might um so the hybrid vehicles were um available for um incentives through green communities in this this past
year's pawn. It's like the um the blanket combis um purchasing agreement that they put out. and we were not um qualified for the last round of grant
money um because we have an active grant with them uh that just completed the work on the DPW service station. So now um they're going to reissue a new pond for the fall into the next two or three years. Um and it's not clear if hybrids
are going to be fundable through green communities moving forward. um they may only be funding electric vehicles, but they are having listening sessions presently. Um and so uh there's an opportunity for communities to weigh in and say we would like for hybrids to
continue to be funded. Um I pulled a lot of information together from both the police department and the um fire department and was ready to submit for those hybrids um and they said that we were uh not able to because of the uh
open grant that we have for the service station. So typically when we approve uh capital projects they don't get sent out um purchased usually
for extremely long times sometimes. Um, is there any possibility uh if we do put it in that this be switched over from a hybrid to an electric vehicle if that's something? I'm not sure exactly. Uh, yeah, we the
use of this is the car in the fire department, I'm assuming, is to go around for inspections and stuff like that, right? And so, uh, we'd have to figure out the charger and all that stuff, but we'd have to talk operation
library. Yeah. Right. Uh, that a satellite station at the library. I like that. Uh, maybe the fulltime soon. Yeah. No, I think I think uh I just I'd like to see us use um available grants whenever possible and instead of
basically raising and appropriating. Um and and just to be very clear, so um for hybrids, the state was offering um $3,000 for any leases and up to $5,000 on purchases, which in relation to the cost of even a hybrid charger or, you
know, some of these vehicles is is just, you know, it's a small amount that takes some of the ouch out of it, but it's not a significant amount. So I know when we went through the grant application program um we were shown multiple communities with electric
vehicles that the entire cost was covered. Electric vehicles probably have like fully electric vehicles probably have a different uh incentive and uh reimbursement rate but I wasn't looking at that because we were um entertaining the hybrids.
I mean and that was one of the reasons we went through to green communities. Um, and again, don't want to beat a dead horse. I just want to use as many grants as we possibly can. Yeah, I think if there's an opportunity to purchase this vehicle through a grant, we we can we'll
explore that and we will. And just on the same topic um of capital projects and grant funds, the um under IT department, the um building automation was also something that was considered to be um green communities eligible if
we were in like good standing and closed out our projects for this year. But we that was our designation project. And so we just we were late getting it going because of uh Bailey's departure. And so we're uh late. That's so is that fully closed out now? It's
not fully closed out because we have um part of the project was funded through the federal government and they have different um reporting requirements and so um we have to certify payroll and one of the vendors that we're using was a subcontractor that was unfamiliar with
that system. So we're waiting to um certify that payroll. That's right. Thank you. Nothing's ever easy. No, even grant funds. Thank Thank you for that. Thanks, Rebecca. Thank you, Rebecca. Thanks. Chapter 90, it looks
like uh an increase from 573,25 to 92,000. Yeah. Do we know if that's just for this year that they're bumping it up or is this a new um way of calculating so that going forwards we
can pretty much be assured 900,000? So they when they sent the letter out this year they used the so it was typically 200,000 a year spread out to the communities using that formula. This year's budget uh presentation from the
governor has 300 million 200 of which were used by in the normal fashion and then they only the other 100 million I think it was a fiveyear plan or something. So this is the letter we got based on that allocation whether that's
in the final budget or not that remains to be seen. That would be nice. That would be the the the budget presentation was five years at 300 million. So that would be a great commitment from the Commonwealth
if instead of 200,000 to go around every year it was 300,000 for the next five years. Again, uh you don't want to, you know, punch a gift horse in the mouth, right? It's it's, you know, it's something just hard to plan. um
especially for project I mean 900,000 that may fill in most of our potholes in town um I really when you start to look at the cost of paving a street y it doesn't go very far um but again at
least it's something which is good to see um of course Mr. Butler took all of my thoughts away here. You're hired. And I know um under the stormwater
enterprise fund, we've adjusted from a flat increase to a percentage. Do we know what percentage? Four. It was 4%. Yeah. Okay. Um that's good. So, as I looked at the numbers and as I stated at the financial oversight,
um, the 2025 actual as compared to the 2026 is only an increase of a couple thousand dollar. Obviously, if we went up 4%, it's going to be a lot more than that. So, do we actually have the
2025 actual numbers and not what was printed? because obviously there there's a big discrepancy. So I'm gonna Kim you there. I'm gonna Kim and Bruce uh and Olga worked on this very extensively uh also
with our um with our auditor for our financial statement because this is a comment that happens a lot um or has been getting better but uh the the accounts were not
accounting well. So, uh, because of revenue and collections, it's kind of like the conversation we're having with the ambulance fund about not being able to appropriate what we more than the balance in the account. We're saying
we're going to use this much and we're going to collect this much, but the actual revenue doesn't hit that number, which is in accounting terms not a great thing. And so, hi Kim. Hi. I'm gonna I'm
gonna Yeah, I'm gonna tag you in on the storm water conversation because I know it's your favorite subject and you've worked so much on it. Perfect. Thank you so much. So, before we really get Hold on a sec. 2025 actual. Yep. So, I interpret that to mean that these are
the actual numbers coming into the town that we know 100% that they're true and accurate. Revenue or expense? Um either e either I mean to me when you say this is the actual
number that's either what you've spent or what you've brought in not objection well build or so I'm going to let I'm just going to let Kim run you through it because there there's a whole go ahead
Kim she knew what was coming okay hard on it. Mhm. So going back uh since to when I started so 2 years ago looking at fiscal 23, fiscal 24, fiscal 25, we
started out estimating all of our usage back in 23 and and you know historically all of our usages were just estimated way too high. We weren't even billing out what we were saying we were going to bring in for revenue. So on a regular
basis, we were in a revenue revenue deficit every single year. The good part was that we had plenty of retained earnings and we were under spending our expense budget. So you know, we weren't having we weren't getting this big hit to our retained earnings. We just weren't
bringing in what we were saying we would bring in. And you know, I've been to some trainings recently. It's not something that is not happening in other towns. I think it's been going on kind of across the across the state. So, what we started to do when I first
got there in fiscal 23 is we started reducing those estimates and increasing our rates so that we could kind of close that gap. And and I can't remember, I don't have the numbers in front of me. Um I think I did send them in an email to everybody kind of showing like if you
look at what we budgeted versus what we build versus what we collected, there were almost $200,000 swings, $100,000 swings. we've really closed that up for fiscal 25, but we still um are not collecting what we are actually billing.
You know, say we're collecting at a 97 98% that means we're still in a revenue deficit. So, I think 25 is going to look much much better. But for 26, the storm water, we left the revenue pretty much um stagnant and we increased the rates a
little bit so that we could close that gap even further because there's still a gap in the storm water fund. Um you know like the other if you look at the other ones we can just take you know if you look at water and sewer we can just take our estimate multiply it by a rate and we can come up with revenue. Storm water
is a little different because there's so many different fees within it that it's kind of difficult to estimate perfectly. So in order to prevent this from happening again in 26, we just left the revenue flat but then increased all the
rates as a percentage so that it was um equal kind of across the board. So, so, so our anticipated revenue is not our budgeted revenue. Does that make sense? Well, I'm assuming we're anticipating,
hey, there's going to be this many fees. This is how much is coming in. Um, that's our anticipation. That's why we budget for it. um what's actually happening then is whether people aren't paying the fee or we're not being able to collect it or whatever it
drops. So, and I guess that's my question. Let's say 2024 actual um storm orders 371,255. Do we go back and say, "Hey, this is what we actually collected in
revenue for that year and that's that number." or is that still the number that we projected that we were going to collect even though we never did? Did you hear that? So, are you looking uh what are you looking at? Are you looking at the article? says recap
summary estimated 2026 um it's highlighted in green um enterprise um for appropriate budgets storm water you come across
2022 2023 2024 2025 those are all under actual and then you have the estimates for 2026 I guess my question is is when we get to the actual for the next year's budget. Is that actually what we've
collected in revenue or is was that still the projection from the year before? Um if you're falling short. So, right. So, if you're I think what you're looking at is the actual um in the budget presentation it showed the
budgets from 23 24 25 and then are estimated for 26. I believe those are budgeted amounts. Um, when I sent all of the changes that we had made to the budget, there was a section in that email that took those budgeted amounts
and then said, "This is what we actually build. This is what we actually collected." Um, so I don't I don't know if that's available to you. Probably in one of the hundred emails. Yeah. Um, but if you look at I believe
what you're looking at are budgeted amounts, comparing budgets from year to year to year. But if you actually look at what was build out and then what was collected versus those budget amounts, there's there's pretty big differences over historically. Well, I guess that's part of my concern
is if there are those differences. Um, I mean, I know in the storm water that's the newest account. Um but is that also happening whether it be you know the ambulance fund um all the different enterprise funds. So these are
all injecting this but it's not because we're not collecting it so we don't really actually have the revenue. So, what the the difficult part about this is because of how we bill, if you don't pay your water bill, you also don't pay your sewer bill and you don't pay your
storm water bill because they're all in the same bill. And that kind of gets lost in a $2 million water budget, but not in a $400,000 storm water budget. So, if you're collecting at 97%, that difference is huge in the storm water budget because it's so small
and so new, right? And so are we aggressively trying to collect back? Uh yes. And we end up getting this money just not an FI26. Yeah. You know what I mean? Uh when when a lean is put on and
then the bill gets paid and it just ends up as other revenue in some other year to come. Um and so we're trying to close these gaps like Kim's saying from an accounting standpoint, right? But storm water's or water and sewer is easy to
multiply out and storm water it's always changing because new houses are being built and impervious areas increasing and so we the numbers are are forever sort of changing on a weird scale and that minor offset is just way it just shows
up way more on the $400,000 budget as opposed to the water and sewer budgets. And that was still our only comment on the financial statement, which I have to sign, by the way. Sorry. What do you mean? No, I mean that's
really our only comment from the state. Sorry. Oh, yeah. Yeah. In our financial statements, the only comment that we have is is that if you compare what we budget versus what we bill and what we collect, there's pretty large discrepancies. And it's we've had that comment for the past two years.
And like I said, if you looked at those numbers from 23, there was like a $200,000 swing. Now we might be close to a $5,000 swing. So over the past couple years, we've been closing the gap and we're just continuing to do that in 26.
Okay. Well, is there any reason we don't have any fuel for our ambulance? Any fuel? Just going across. It says ambulance fuel. Nothing in 22. Nothing in 23. 13,824. Nothing in 25.
I know. We use them. Let me look at ambulance. Hold on. You just choose not to break it out like this. That's what I'm guessing. Yeah. I was very impressed on the fuel economy. Are you looking at a detailed budget for
ambulance? No, the recap summary. The the revised one you sent over with with the revisions. Oh, the recap summary. Hold on. I'm sure that's all it is. Oh, no. All that would have been would have been an addition to the budget in a previous
year. It just shows up. So, like see how it says retro 110,000? Those would have been additions to the budget. That would have been votes. So they just show up separately. So that year might have been they were short fuel so they added 13,000.
Very detailed. Okay. Yeah. I can close that up in the future so we don't have to see that. Yeah. See, you just keep getting leaner and meaner. Great. I'll let anyone else jump in. I'm sure there's hundreds of questions. It
was a long budget. Any other questions? Okay, there's nothing else. Then I would entertain a motion to continue the public hearing. Second. I think just for clarity when we're continuing it, we have to say when we're
continuing it, too. I move to continue the public hearing to review the FY26 capital improvement plan and operating budget to May 27, 2025 at 6 p.m. Second. Motion's been made and
seconded. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? We will continue and wrap up the budget with the 18 or so motion on May 27th. Thank you. Thank you again.
All right. Yeah, she's not dismissed. Thank you. Thanks everybody. We'll have all those motions done in short order so that uh maybe even before the whole uh agenda package comes out maybe to try
try to you know earlier or middle um next week so that if there's any uh questions andor concerns for the chair so in our original original uh budget packet on
capital I didn't see uh a fiveyear plan. I just saw all the items for this year. Okay. That and I think it's basically because it was a draft plan. Um I'm assuming so. Yep. I'm assuming going forwards we're going to get all of that.
Yep. Extra reading for me. Thank you. You're welcome. I know you like it. Back. So now we have our 6:15 public hearing. This is a public hearing for a proposed zoning bylaw amendment relating
to massage therapist facilities and a required second reading. The council members are Jim Leiden, Kathy Hill, Anna Jones, myself, Connor O'Shea, Marilyn Richards, Ralph Page, and John Torch. And I would ask the clerk to read a legal notice into the record. East Long Meadow Town Council will hold
a public hearing on May 13, 2025 at 6:15 p.m. in the media room of the Council on Aging located at 328 North Main Street for a second reading of proposed amendments to the town of Vang Meadow zoning bylaws to delete subsection- massage therapist
facilities. Amend table 3-1 schedule of the regulations the Eastong Meadow zoning bylaw to allow for the use category massage therapist facility or licensed massage therapy salon allowed by right in the commercial business industrial and mixeduse village zoning
districts. The public hearing may also be attended via zoom webinar for the council. GR prog clerk with the council. Thank you Jeannie. Then as the second reading, it's very short. Under article 8,
special permits, it strikes section 450 8.9 massage therapist facilities in its entirety. Therefore, renames section 450-8.10 to 8.9. And then under the table of
uses law number eight massage therapist facility or licensed massage therapy salon it removes under standards and conditions see article 8 and section 450-8.9 and it changes commercial business industrial and mixeduse village
from special permit to yes and at this time our director of planning is if you want to give us a brief overview from the planning board. Yeah, sure. So, I mean the amendments are pretty self-explanatory. Um, the planning board is look looking to move away from the special permit oversight
requirement for massage therapists salons and for those who want to practice massage therapists as a solo practitioner. Uh, so the amount of licensing that is needed from the state is uh rigorous enough to where these organizations are being vetted out
before they get to the planning board. Uh so every massage therapist needs their own individual license from the state in order to practice in Massachusetts. And when they open a business, which usually would happen after the plane board special permit approval for the uh establishment
itself, and that's called a massage therapist establishment license. So they're holding two separate licenses in order to conduct their business in town. and the planning board felt that it was cumbersome to these applicants to to moving forward. So that
is why they decided to switch it from special permit in those districts where it's allowed to just buy right because the amount of licensing and overview from the state is already good enough in their opinion. So that's pretty much it. I mean there wasn't much more besides that. I'm happy to answer any questions
that the council might have on this. Great. Thank you for the overview, Rob. Yep. Then it is a public hearing. So if there's anyone in the audience that wishes to make comment related to this matter. Okay. I see no one online or in person. So I will close the public input
portion of the public hearing. Is there any council comments? So my only concern um on this is actually we've had an incident in town in the past. That's the reason this was put under special permit. Um at that time they needed a
license from the state. It didn't work. Um um they had their license. They were bringing people in from New York and everywhere else. Um they had fake IDs. Um there was an entire gambit. And so we
felt at that time the town itself had no way to shut down a business. because they weren't required to have a special permit. Um, obviously we went through the state, we went through the DA's office. Um, it took quite a while
to actually build a case and all in order to close it down. So, that's the background on this. With that being said, um, I do understand how cumbersome it is, especially individual massage therapists.
[Music] Um it it's one of those balancing acts. Um you hope the situation never happens again. But with that being said, I just want to make sure the town's protected
that if something does happen, we are able to get in there and close the business down. Um, I don't know how anyone else feels. Um, especially knowing the different background and stuff.
I could see why historically it may have been there to help with a situation like that, but personally, I would hate to see us keep it be so cumbersome for everyone else that's been doing a above organ legal
operation just for the one or two bad actors that may have been there. And although it's maybe a cumbersome process without having special permit through other legal routes of doing it, I do think that upholds a higher standard of due process than the town just willy-nilly revoking someone's special
permit because we think they're doing something without a whole lot of evidence to the contrary. That's my thought from the chair. Sure. Um I kind of watched that process play out um in investigating these some of these uh places that were
ill begotten and it is a very very very cumbersome process from a law enforcement perspective. Um just the amount of um applications you have to write just to get a search warrant the approval to do surveillance hundreds of pages of work and potentially years long
worth of work um to get to the point of making an arrest. One of the problems I saw, I'm not sure if it's here in East Lan Meadow, definitely a certain community where I'm not sure what their requirements were, but some of these establishments were open days within
days of law enforcement arresting the individuals. So, let alone the due process aspect of it criminally. Um, but I would hate to give up the local control over potential situations like this and being reliant on Boston and
trying to help us to shut something down. Um, if we currently have it, I'm reading what's supposed to be deleted here. Um, doesn't really look that I'm sure it's a little cumbersome. Doesn't look that cumbersome to be able to retain that ability to um, potentially
shut somebody down when there's a public safety issue. U, so that's just I guess my thoughts. I think the cumbersome piece is um not so much the special permit but the redundancy the process you know advertising it takes so many weeks I mean someone wants to set up as
soon as possible and they have to wait so that's something that perhaps we should also take into consideration it's an inconvenience yes but you know maybe maybe the protection outweighs the inconvenience
chair do we happen to know what the state has done that's changed in the last 10 or 15 years since we originally put this into place because if it has been you know really more significant then maybe some of those things are being caught at the state level if it's
being enforced differently or the process of actually getting the license has been reformed in a significant way I don't know if there's anybody that would know what's changed at the state level there really hasn't and then then I would I kind of understand perhaps
keeping it in place, but I'd love to know more of if you know if the state has really done a lot more to this effect. Yeah. Off hand, I'm not I'm not sure if any of the state regulations have changed or what they've changed to or from
through the chair. Sure. So, you know, I'm looking at this and what I'm thinking is basically a salon that offers, you know, multiple therapists and all have the salon get the special permit.
Um, and not necessarily each individual masseuse that works within that salon. Again, I don't know how um I don't know how they set up. I don't know if um you know, the massage therapist is just renting a space within the salon and
they're their own entity. I don't know how that works. Um I and I do understand these coming in having to get their own special permit is that's very cumbersome and I'm sure it's very annoying to them.
Um I mean my thought was like if you did hair salons or you know the massage therapy salon so the salon has to get it but not each individual person working within it. I don't know if that's something that the planning board had looked at or
thought about or Yeah. So, I haven't been aware of any change from the state level for licensing. I'm sure it's just the same as it was back then. Um, but in terms of the business owners getting the special permit, um, usually that's how it's done. So, the special permit goes
to the business, but the business could range in size. It could be a business owner and then four staff or just a solo practitioner who is also the business owner. In order to do any sort of massage therapy at a location, you need an establishment license for business. So no matter what, if there is a massage
therapist business anywhere in town, they need both those licenses no matter what. The owner as well as the uh practitioner's license for the owner. And then all the staff that they hire just need the practitioner's licenses. So, the license to even do massage
therapy. So, there's two different licenses at play. Um, usually from what I've seen, um, people get the establishment license after they get the town approval. So, they have to wait the three to four weeks to get the special permit. Then, afterwards, they have to go to the state, then the state grants them the establishment license. That's
kind of the process that RAC at the moment. um for hair salons, nail salons, uh any sort of salon, barber shop, those are all allowed by right in the same districts as massage therapy with the exception of the mixeduse village. So the plane board kind of saw those other
types of uses as being allowed by right without their approval and thought that massage therapy could be relative to those categories. And usually for booth rentals, so say if a a nail salon is allow a booth to be open for rental or even a hair stylist, usually they come
to the town, apply for a business license and then that's how we do our zoning review and say, "Oh, they're in a district with a lot by right." They have our approval there. For massage therapy, that's not really the case. Each individual therapist does not need to
apply for a business license because they're working for an existing business. they just have to have the state licensing in order to practice massage therapy and that's pretty much it. So the the concerns that you're bringing up are legitimate, I would say. So uh the only thing with the special
permit that I've noticed is that it's really effective for uses that don't have a licensing factor from the state. So it's kind of the town's protection to make sure there's some mechanism to shut down a business that is operating illicitly or not following the rules.
But from the state licensing perspective, anybody can file a complaint with the state licensing board and they can go ahead and do their own investigation, which has happened to other businesses in town. I have heard reports of certain operators who weren't operating with an active license and
then that's usually taken care of about as fast as state can do something like that. So that's kind of the situation now. And I guess the plane board just wanted to find a way to make it so those solar practitioners that it's just a oneperson type of operation don't have
to go through the full burnsome process. So yeah, I think in terms of inconvenience, the other two things that come to mind are it seems like an industry similar to some of the others that you were just mentioning like you know hairdressers and nail salons and
stuff where those kinds of occupations move around across communities a lot. They're not just setting a shop in East Long Meadow for 20 years and y never moving. And so if you have to go through this month or two monthl long process every time you're moving your business,
that's pretty challenging, especially since there's also a cost to apply for these special permits in the Yeah. the meantime. It's about I could see how inconvenient that could be. $650 on top of the advertising cost which is bestowed upon the applicant. So
you have the base fee for the permit, $250, and then the reminder charges $400 for two advertisements that are supposed to be run in the paper per state law. So that's another cost you're throwing on top of licenses that they have to pay for, which is probably going to go over $1,000 for each of these applicants. So
that's another thing to consider, too. You're making them pay a lot of money. I have a question. Sure. So the only issue I see here is is if someone's going to be using a massage therapist's
business, you know, for something they for not Yeah. elicit elicit business. Um, so what is the the route that you would take if they have a special permit versus if they don't? If they were doing something illicit like special permit,
we could just pull it. We don't have to have, you know, that's a good question. You know what I mean? Do you have to go through the same process to get rid of somebody who's yes not following the rules if they have a special permit or not? To revoke a special permit, you have to do it through a public hearing which would delay the process by three
to four weeks because you have to advertise it and you have to open the hearing and then vote to revoke the permit. That's just how it is under Mass General law. But the difference is is it's three to four weeks to hold the hearing and all. Yeah. or through the state, you're usually right six months a
year for the investigation. Um, typically by the time it gets to the point of the special permit being revoked, um, usually we've heard from the police department or something that there's illicit activity going on and that we need to do something about it
and they can't do anything about it if there's illegal goss. Well, we arrested them and they're open for business a couple days later, the next day or you know the bail situations. When we had this discussion initially,
um, someone said that Long Meadow shut theirs right down. How did they do it? Do we know? Someone here on the council mentioned that that Long Meadow had closed. Um, and we're able to settle it right away. State police came in and
raided the place and arrested everyone so that they couldn't operate. Well, can't we do that here? So, I guess Yeah. So, come on. Apparently, the the new regulations went into effect January of 2017. So, there
there's been some updates to uh that whole process uh that seemed to have curtailed this behavior, if you will. Um, and I think that's probably why it got shut down so fast. um update and what regulations that
curiosity. Oh yeah, she may put you on the spot, Bob. He's looking that up. Um my concern is that um and again I just wanted to bring up for a full discussion. Um but I don't
want to um um what do I want to say? uh hurt business owners that are doing everything legally, which 99% of them are, for the 1% that isn't. Um it's it's
a balancing act. It's tough. Um again, in this situation, um I'm going to be truthful. I'm going to vote to uh recommend repealing this, removing it. Um, and that's more for I know individual massus what they have to go
through in the special permit process and the cost of it and then if they move to another facility um to start it now they're in another location they're doing it all over again and it's it's frustrating. Um, and I do
feel for them for something that they had nothing to do with that that should have never happened to begin with. Is there a process improvement that we can do upon it? Can it be can that special permit be transferable if they wanted to move from
one location to another without having to so process? Good question. Special permits usually attached to the land, right? And the only way you can transfer a special permit is if you grant it in another location. You can only transfer an existing permit if it's within the same location, but ownership or the
applicant has changed or the business has changed. But if you're going from one place to another in town, you can't really do that. You have to award another special permit in that new location. So essentially, they're forfeiting the old permit to operate in that existing building and they have to
reapply in the new location no matter what. That's something governed by state law or is that even if you did an amendment, it's still the whole process. You still have a public hearing and everything. So whether it's an amendment or a new one, and they're still paying the same cost
no matter what. Same full cost to the town and to the paper. So you have our answer. Uh the the the email I got was from mass.gov. So I mean uh it has it's just a snippet of the
article someone from the audience sent to me. I guess my question is is it just like on um an update on processes for I'm assuming like due process or like search and some sort of uh angle for Yeah. So basically the board eliminated almost
all of the exemptions. So almost every practitioner has to obtain or be affiliated with an establishment license. Okay. Which is true because every time they got special permit since I've worked here last May, um they got that license after they got the special
permit and they weren't allowed to operate without that establishment license. There was one business that didn't have it, but then as soon as they somebody else reported to us, we made sure they got it before they were allowed to continue. and business license applications have been a good way for us to keep track of
who's coming in and opening up in town. And a lot of them recently have been massage therapists over the past year. And that way we're able to keep track of who has what license. And as soon as you get that license, you get our approval to go ahead and open your business. Any other comments?
Think I've said enough. Okay. If there's there's nothing else, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. I'll second. Motion's been made to close the public hearing. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed?
No. Public hearing is now closed. And then is there a motion to approve? Make a motion to approve the amendment to the zoning bylaw relative to massage therapists as presented. Second. Motion's been made and seconded
to approve as presented. Is there any further discussion? So further discussion. This is zoning bylaw. So this is a um roll call. No no super majority. Oh y. So it would be five out. It' be five out of seven then. Yes.
Okay. Yep. Jim, no. Kathy, yes. Hannah, yes. I'm a yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph, yes. John, yes. The motion passes. Thank you for coming. Thank you. Thanks, Rob. Thanks, Rob. Thank you.
Always. Thank you, Rebecca. Next under our agenda, we have You know who I got the email from? You did. You did. We have under financial matters. Uh our first matter is adoption of the Hero Act local options. So this was continuing
from couple previous meetings that we've had about the topic and point of order. I have to recuse myself from this discussion because I have a family member that appreciates this benefit. Thank you, Mary. I'll be quiet.
Sorry. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. I don't think you push away from the teeth. So, we had considered this at previous council meetings, uh, but the council opted to take until this evening once we were further along in the budget process to
see what the overall financial situation and health of the town was. U, we have our director of assessing, Diane, here as well, if she'd like to come forward. Hi, Diane. Evening. I there any other comments or updates that
we should know about? Um not that I'm aware of. I think right now it's in the hands of the town council if accept one and what the percentage of acceptance will be. Um I have provided
all of the information showing um impact to the budget but I all been worked into the budget whatever uh the town manager and the town c felt it was in the best
interest of the overall budget. Great. Thank you. Sure. Just to elaborate on that, the the percentage amount that we thought appropriate to add to this budget in this budget scenario in this in the situation we find ourselves in is 50%. And it also
includes the 50% senior abatement as well, right, for our seniors. And so that number I put my budget away.
Anyway, that's how I prepared uh this budget budget and this portion of it is lies in your hands. But um you know based on some of the other hardships in this budget process, uh we thought uh 50% was was really the the most we could
go and still provide this benefit to our veterans uh and our seniors. So, um, it's sort of a sort of to use Ralph's phrase from a couple minutes ago, this balance, right? This is what the whole
budget is, is we try to get as much to as many people as we can, uh, you know, given the the climate of of where we're at. So, uh, this this budget, like I said, includes a 50% for uh, seniors and
veterans. on what we did grant in fiscal 25. If it is at a 50% it would be an additional $47,100 for both the veterans and combined 7,000
and that is naturally on top of the usual amount that budget and in my conversations with um that she felt that we could work that into the budget without any issues.
And so if we went sorry to the chair. Sure. So if we went with um 100% we're looking at 94,200. Correct. And that's based on the people that were granted this year. We have no idea what
next year or the year after will will bring, but hopefully we can grow into Usually you'll pick up new people. Sadly, we drop off a few people. So there's a balance. And the actual exemption amount would go
from 400 to 600. Is that um 20? So if we're talking a 22 um I'm sorry, a 22. Yeah. Looking at my own. Yes. 400 to 600
and then Okay. And then that would be for just a a 22 clause 22. A 22E would go from a,000 to,500. And then the senior one 500 to 750.
Okay. Are there any thoughts on a particular percentage or overall agreement with the local options? Just very impressed with the spreadsheet. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you
for putting it all together. The highlights. That's what I'm zoning in on the color. I know. So through the chair. Sure. Um so I've been thinking about this. Um at our last meeting I had said I thought a 50%
um would be the way to start and maybe increase you know next year when we could and then and the more I've thought about it um our seniors, our veterans and all are going to be hit pretty quickly here with a pretty hefty bill.
Um when we had discussed uh the school and all that was part of the concerns is um elderly literally who can't afford um a huge increase in their taxes. Um and
obviously the town voted it in which is great. Schools coming along wonderful. Um, but I think for literally a $47,000 uh difference, um, I would be more apt to vote that we do 100% at this
time. And I give them the full amount. And I don't think 50,000's a huge difference in our budget. Um, I mean, we've seen a $400,000 increase in chapter 90 money right off of the top.
Um, I I would be more apt to say, um, especially for our veterans and our seniors in town, that this is something that to me is the least we can do for them. I don't think it's a a ton of money, and I think that's something we should do.
Any other thoughts? U to the chair. My question would be to Tom, were we to do that to fund it at 100%. That additional 47,000 uh where will it come from? Well, um,
from the prior conversation where we sort of rolled the savings from Wreck and it back into the levy and the extra money from the state from their iteration of the budget, uh, we would just sort of roll that from that excess
levy back into the budget. What were we rolling in? 88 80 88 + 4. But again, that number is not solid yet. Uh we don't know what that number is going to be. But if we were to do it, uh in all likelihood, again, like to
your point from last time, it it it's probably not going to change a whole lot more if this is sort of House and Senate have sort of agreed almost to this number. But um again, if this was the wish of the council, it would just come out of the the excess levy whether we
rolled that money in or not. My thought on it. Oh, sorry. Do you want to go first? I just had a quick question. Go for it. When were these current exemptions set? The months I'm sorry. The current ones or the what we're proposing? The current ones. The
current ones have been set for years and years. That's been the same dollar amount. Okay. So, they haven't increased not since sometime in uh oh over 20 years. Oh, wow. Okay. And the
senior exemption has not changed since the inception which was in n uh 82. I I think I sorry I know you want to go but I I agree with her that I would like to get to 100%. But I don't know if I want to take that leap this year. You
know, we could do the 50, feel it out, how it goes this year, see how it goes this year, and maybe take this second jump next year to 100. But if everybody is good with 100, I'm good with that, too. No, I share a similar mindset that
this is something that the council can and I think has to vote on each year in our budget and appropriation process. But I think we would ever be hardressed if we went 100% now to backtrack on it if the financial situation takes a negative turn as potentially forecasted
next year. I think it's easier to work our way up and have the exemption get better than try to take money away from people in future years. And I think also morally I find it hard to give a 100% not because the veterans
and seniors aren't worthy for that but you know we're also I mean cutting may not be the appropriate department is taking a huge hit this year. I think it would not be a good faith effort to say that we're going to give more money to seniors and
veterans at the expense of the school department losing 20 employees. That doesn't sit right with me. Yeah, I had a quick question. In the highlighted section under like veterans exemption where it says 100% $80,200,
does that incorporate the money that we're already spending on the exemptions or is that a complete increase? That's an addition to that's an addition. So additional we're doing now plus 80,000. Gotcha. The chair. I was Yeah. Definitely kind of grappling through this when we first heard about it in the budget and and
great to get this really great chart to actually see what the initially thought maybe it was like a couple hundred,000 but we're only talking you know between 47,000 and 94. I think what people need to realize is um you know these are
helping it's not like helping all of the seniors helping like the disproportionately um seniors that are most in need of it. So there's a lot of you know seniors that are in a much veterans that are in a much better financial situation and then there's others um that aren't. I
think, you know, I do definitely understand obviously we've had to make some very difficult choices um you know with education with other departments but you know we're we're talking like a $47,000 difference and you know I don't
I just think in the grand scheme of things I think doing it at 100 I think works. I I don't think it massively changes the budget and even if you know we have some type of significant increase in the future. I you know I don't see it going up so significantly
that it would really cut into the budget in the next year or two. I mean I would be open perhaps to 75 but I think I I at this point I probably prefer 100 personally. Sure. I just have one um additional
input. Um when I was here at the last time and our reminder uh publication was here and they did put in the paper all about this, one thing that they forgot to insert was that this is for veterans
with a 10% or more disability. And so after the newspaper article came out, many veterans came into our office wanting to know why they haven't been receiving. So, just so everyone is aware, this is for veterans with at least a 10% or more service connected
disability that has been verified through the Veterans Administration. Thank you, Diane. Thank you, chair. Always thorough. There's no other comments. I'll entertain a motion. Make a motion to accept chapter 59
section 5 clause 22 January the acts of 2024 chapter 178 the Hero Act which authorizes an increase in the amount of exemption granted under general laws chapter 59 section 5 clause 22 228 22B 22 C 22E and
22F by 100% of the personal exemption amount subject to the conditions of clause 22J to be effective for the applicable exemptions granted for any fiscal year beginning on or July on or after July 1st, 2025. Second. Motion's
been made. Is there any further discussion? Um I don't think we have to, but for safety, I'll do this as a roll call since it's financially related. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. I'm a no. Marilyn is Ralph. Yes. And John,
yes. Thank you. Is there another motion? Make a motion to accept chapter 59 section 5 clause 41C under the acts of 2002 and chapter 184 section 51 which authorizes an increase in the amount of exemption granted under general laws chapter 59
section F clause 41C by 100% of the personal exemption amount beginning July 1st 2025 for FY 2026 second motion's been made and seconded is there any further discussion seeing none Jim yes Kathy yes yes I'm a noing Ralph, yes.
And John, yes. Thank you. The motion passes. Thank you, Diane. I mean, Diane, thank you. Okay. Next under financial matters, we have releasing money to the sewer vehicle reserve to retain
earnings. Would you mind providing a brief overview of Yeah. So, this is sort of just tidying up. Uh, somebody made a thing before we were talking about the fuel and the ambulance fund. The these at some point, uh,
these, uh, sub, we'll call them sub account uh, object IDs were added to make sure that the sewer department and the water department kept up with their fleet. And that's why it was earmarked just for vehicles. Uh, as I understand
it, we're just putting this back into the retained earnings, which is where everything comes out of anyway. Uh, so we're just putting it back into the savings account for the respective departments where it should be. We were trying to spend it all last
year on the vehicles and then didn't didn't couldn't get to that number because water had something like $400,000 in this vehicle. So at this point we can spend this money on whatever the water department could need, not just a vehicle, right? So that
we don't need to make this distinction anymore uh in the water and the sewer department. So the money is just going back into retained areas which sewer vehicle reserve fund is part of sort of semantics but it cleans
everything up. Any questions? Didn't we already vote on this? No, this this was brought up once before. So, we we talked about it during the budget season last year because I
thought we voted on it. Uh it' be the first time Kim was wrong, but Well, that's okay. Whether or not No, no, I don't believe uh I don't believe we've done this. And this was why when we when we had the reserve fund sheet on the budget, right, we were saying that we
were going to vote that amount into the reserve like it was listed as one of the votes in the reserve fund. Okay. I don't believe that's taken place, but we can check. Um the second thing is I just I know in the past we had put like
$25,000 into um vehicle fund, 50,000 y to get it up this high. Um, it must have been years without taking any money out of this. Uh, so nobody uh realized it, any of Kim's predecessors had realized that there was
this separate account to buy vehicles out of in that account. Okay. And so we're just sort of taking the ambiguity out of it and just here's the retained earnings account and we'll work from there. Any other questions? If there's none, I'll
entertain a motion. I make I make a motion. Go ahead. I need a second one. $32,477.98 of sewer vehicle reserves to retain earnings. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? So to um should the motion
say to uh sewer retained earnings or retained earnings of the sewer fund? Sure. Just saying just clarification. Yep. No, Kim likes it clarified. Amend.
Yeah, if you want to amend. I amend my motion. I make a motion. I'll still second it. Should I restate it? No. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I amend it to the
retain uh the sewer retained earnings fund and Jim was here with the Y. Okay. No other comments. Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. And a motion for water
vehicle reserve. I make a motion to release $215,1406 of water vehicle reserves to water retained earnings. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? The
motion passes. Curious if the motion's that simple, if you wanted to move it from water into sewer. I bet we'd have a longer conversation. Yeah, I know the D would want have some questions. Thankfully, we didn't need to. Okay, next on our agenda is transfer
of overlays from overlay surplus for FY25 taxes for 382 North Main Street. This one's uh I think we've been talking about the taxes uh at 382 North Main with either an attorney or uh somebody
at the state since uh the taking was final. Uh so naturally all of our town owned property is exempt from paying taxes. However, uh the building was on the roll and in the budget for this
year. Therefore, the revenue for the entire privately owned building was budgeted for after we took the building. The only exemption or the only thing you can't do to exempt your taxes is if you receive the property by eminent domain,
which obviously we did. So, we had to go through this process. Uh, I believe there's a letter attached from the board of assessors. Um, do you want do you want to Diane, do you want to explain a little bit about the process? I don't think there was much to it other than uh
Diane did more work than I did. So, I'll let her say if there was a lot of work involved or not. Well, we had two processes we could have done. And when I heard the first process, I looked for an easier, which is the direction we went to. And we do have the blessing of um
the attorneys at DLS law. They said we could do it either way we wanted to. We could have gone an 8 of 58 which would have had to have the commissioner revenue give the assessor's authority to abate the taxes and this money would
come from our overlay account. or the assessors could review their overlay account and determine if there is a surplus that they do not need to use and we could then release this surplus to
the town and it can be used for any lawful purpose before June 30th and we decided to go in that direction. Uh DSL law has these awesome Tuesday, Wednesday from 10 to 12, you zoom in and you get
to talk to one of the attorneys on the spot. You get in their waiting room and he said that he had already spoke to our town attorney and he thought that this was the easiest way. So I go for easy any I can. And so the board of assessors
did release the exact dollar amount that we need for the taxes. Um just so the town council is aware that we had 1.2 million in the overlay reserve account
and this will bring us down to 1 a little a little over 1.1 million. And uh so we have no issues releasing that and we're looking for the town council to um take the overlay surplus
and I believe we're applying it to maybe Kim if Kim is still here or Tom. I believe it's going to be applied to the 382 North Main Street account for expenses so we can pay the the town our
taxes that we owe. Pay it back to ourselves. Yes. The accounting at its finest. Moving the same pennies around to ourselves. Okay. But that said, um that's where we
stand with um Thank you, Diane. You're welcome. Appreciate it. Nobody better. If anyone has questions, I'm happy to answer. If not, I'm happy to go home. Are there any questions for Diane? Okay. Seeing none, I'll learn to
hand a motion. Thank you, Diane. Thanks, Diane. Move to appropriate the overlay surplus amount of $71,675.7. the purpose of reconciling the tax balance associated with the town staking of the property known as 382 North Main Street where
$542.99 is to be paid to the former owner as the excess of the estimated amount of taxes paid by the former owner taxpayer or the actual taxes attributed to the pre-taking period from July 1st 2024 to October 10th 2024 and where
$71,1328 will be applied for the purpose of offsetting the taxes assess the former owner and attribute the post taking period from October 11th, 2024 when the town took ownership to June 30th, 2025, the end of the fiscal year. Second.
Motion's been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? The motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks again, Diane.
Next, we have preappropriation of funds for the Chestnut Street Pump Station. Thank you. One more for you. You seem to have one of these good financial matters
overtaking. Um, excuse me. So, uh, couple things here. Um, this is a chance for us to use some of our previously bonded money from the water department to pay for current projects. Um, one of which is the pump station,
which we received an almost $2 million grant uh from the state. Uh, bids on that one came back more than we thought. And then the water main project that was in the in the capital um plan last year
uh came back less than we thought. So you've authorized the borrowing of projects that this one has an excess of and this one has uh is deficient plus we have some leftover money in these funds that are funds that are unused. So
basically again sort of another accounting move to allow us to sign these contracts to get these projects going uh in terms of dollar amounts of the contracts. Does that make sense? Yes.
Um, and then the the the monies that are left over are sort of listed here in the spreadsheet for which projects they were and what's left over. So, we just want to we had this conversation about the um the modular building last year. We have
a bit of money left over and some bonding from another school project which we can use for that. Same thing. We have some money left over in water projects that we can only use for water projects. And so now we're at this point where we can uh use that money that's already being bonded and paid for
and reallocate some appropriated or or uh approved bonding for the two projects that came in uh a little different than we thought when we estimated.
Questions Ralph? Yes. Yeah. Okay. So, what's the cost of Chestnut Street Pump Station going to be? I mean, I know we allocated money to start Y before we got the grant when we got the grant. Y and now we're being
told that neither of those is enough and that 376,000 additional in here is not going to be enough and that we want to um attach it to the $1.8 million U bond for the water manes. So, I guess my question
comes in is how much is Chestnut Street actually costing? So, I think the final number was something like 3.3 of which there was uh Am I getting these numbers right, Kim? Are you there still?
Uh we needed an additional 800,000 for Chestnut, which we had two plus uh 500. Is Kim there? She's Oh, Jamie's not there. Jamie's not there to let her
in. Kim's there, but she Yes, Ralph. Hold on one second because we went through this a bunch of times uh when we opened the bids for the pump station, uh which was far more than we had thought. And uh there was
a there was um some miscommunication between Bruce and Ty and Bond about what we had allocated in the first place and what the actual cost was going to be after we did that redesign, the 100% design. Um Kim there. Sorry. I am. I'm
sorry. I was having a hard time getting in. Um, so I don't have the numbers sitting in front of me, but one thing I want to let you know is that we had approved I think it was 2 I don't know 2.2 million or something like that. We had um authorized to
borrow that for that project. We didn't borrow at all because we had the grant coming through. So, we've only borrowed I want to say about uh it might be like 800,000 on that chestnut project plus
we're using the grant funds, but there we did need a little bit of extra money. Um I think it was about 700,000 in order to complete the project and we didn't want to go out and borrow it because we already had fun. Although we're authorized to borrow, we didn't want to
go out and borrow in the middle of the year because we usually borrow in December. So, what we chose to do was use the 375,000 um from the old bonds that we're already paying on for old projects that we don't need. And then we were going to use some
funds from that additional project that we had already borrowed 1.8 million for, but that came in lower. So when everything's said and done and all of the bonding goes to permanent bonding in December, everything will get reconciled out, but we won't borrow as much as we
authorized to begin with. Okay. So, um the here's the the dollar amounts, Ralph. Sorry. So, we got the 1.975 for the bond, right? Authorized for the chestnut station that
the grant the onetop grant. Yes, it was. Hadn't come through, we authorized, hey, we can bond if the grant doesn't come through, right? But the grant came through. Correct. So, we shouldn't have bonded anything. So, the project is worth more than 1.975.
Okay. Okay. And so, that uh the 376,49399 for the water bonds and then 518,680. So, we needed like an additional almost 900,000. So, the cost
of the pump station is now going to be 2.7. Does that make sense? And because we had borrowed or you allowed us to attempt to borrow, sorry, we paid for the engineering of it right
up front. So, this is part of it. So the engineering, a lot of it is happening while the project's happening. So time bonds contract is in in that 800,000 on top of the grant. So this project's a lot more than what we originally thought over. Well, it's a
$3 million project that we're paying at $900,000. So with that then obviously minus the three that we've already borrowed for Worthy Garland Niagara Donald has that project already been
completed. No. So we open bids. This is where this is where it all kind of happened at the same time. We opened bids for that considerably under 1.8 like to the tune of like eight or $900,000. So we had this whole other almost exact amount of money that the
other project was over, right? So the actual numbers are the same. We just had them in different places. And luckily this one was over and this one was under, but this one hasn't gone out for bonding yet because we just got the price. We
just got the price, but it's been authorized and banned. So we can sign the contract and go. How'd that sound out? Are you asking me? No. So, I guess my point to make this a lot easier in the future is if we can get
some of this background information like what Chestnut Street would have cost and why we're asking for a million dollars more because we've already approved some, we bonded some, and now all of a sudden, hey, it's not enough and hey,
it's not enough. And um it just when's when's all of those stop, I guess. Um and I think this comes down to some other projects way in the past that again $300,000 going to cover the
project. Two years later, we need another $250,000. Two years later, hey, we're 300,000 more and we're going to be done. It's like, wait a minute, it's cost 300,000 to begin with. I guess that's the whole No, and and quite frankly, I do understand when you open
up bids, it's completely different. You're guesstimating what it's going to be based on information from Tai Bond. And um how much do we pay Tai and Bond to guesstimate this? Can we take it out of there? Yeah. I mean, that that's off quite a bit. I
mean, and part of that 5% that they're off. Well, we the town needs to take some blame here. We we we had some uh miscommunication and a lost document in which the amount that went into the capital plan was under what time bond
had revised their number to. Okay. So, a chunk of that makes more sense. Okay. Uh, well, I don't want to I don't want to take blame because we deserve to take some of the blame for this chunk of money that we didn't put enough in the capital plan for the project because we
had this grant and we thought we had enough. Yeah. That that construction amount changed by about $500 $600,000 and Ty and Bob notified us and we neglected to to update the number in the project amount. Okay. So, that's most of
that. It wasn't it wasn't a you know they got it wrong. We missed the step. There was the the estimate that we've had for a year and a half and it changed and we neglected to update that number in the request for capital. Okay.
And so yes, other than that I've got nothing. No. And I I understand that that this probably could have been clearer in paper form slash email form and I just assume that I could clear that all up here. Uh but we can we can
do better next time with that. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments? If not, I'll entertain a motion or not. I'll try. All right. I move that the town appropriates
$376,493.99 to pay additional costs of the Chestnut pump station project and that to meet this appropriation set amount shall be transferred from the following balances of amounts borrowed for various projects that have been completed and that have been completed
and for which no financial liability remains as authorized by general laws chapter 44 section 20 water account 3326450C water bond Maine Maple Street 16 years
16,64369 60 I'm Oh I'm sorry let me repeat that $60,64369 water um account 3365450 50585502 water bond Maple Street water service 15 years
$265,615.76 water account 336645085502 water bond prospect tank paint 10 years $50,14.34 water account 338645085C water bond water meter mod 1 to5 10 years
$13020. Um just I'm sorry that's uh 58.50 where sorry not 585 the first and the fourth. Sorry kind of cut off. I'm sorry. That's cut off, Marilyn. 585C.
It's zero. Sorry. Okay. You want me to repeat that? That is All right. Okay. The amount's the same, though. Okay. Do I do this one, too? Yeah. Okay. You want to do them both separate? Yeah, we can do them. I'm going to
second that motion. Okay. Okay. Motion's been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? The motion passes. Then the second part. I move that the loan order adopted by the town council on May 28,
2024, which authorized the borrowing of $1,830,500 to pay costs of replacing 3,650 ft of water manes in the worthy Garland, Niagara, Kingman, Birch, and Donald avenue areas. is hereby amended
so that the funds authorized to be borrowed pursuant thereto can also be expended to pay additional costs of the chestnut pump station. Second, just for clarification, it's 1,837,500. Correct. Correct. Is that
what I said? I wasn't sure. I think you said, but I Yeah, it's a lot of words. heard at one point. So that's what I heard, but okay. And and Anna seconded it. Motion's made and seconded. Any further discussion?
Those in favor, please say I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, Tom. Yes, sir. Next, under financial matters, we have accepting a $1,000 donation from the Ley family
uh per Massachusetts general law. I make a motion to accept a donation to the recreation department of $1,000 from the Lehey family per Massachusetts general law chapter 44 section 53A. I second that motion's been made and seconded.
The only discussion I have uh is thank you to them much. So any other discussion? Say none. All those in favor please say I. Any opposed? Thank you. The motion passes. We have approval of minutes. We
have our April 22nd open session minutes. I make a motion to approve the April 22nd, 2025 open session minutes. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? The
motion passes. And we have approving the April 16th, 24th, and 30th special town council minutes. I move to approve the April 16, 24, and 30, 2025 special town
council/financial oversight committee meeting minutes. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? Thank you, John. Motion passes. Hey, under old business, we have
an update on the citizens petition for recreational marijuana. Genie, would you mind providing an overview on that process? Sure. Uh, there was a a petition brought forth Christina
Brooks to Sorry. Oh, that's okay. Um, to allow recreational marijuana facilities in town. And they did have the correct amount of uh verified order signatures on the petition. The next step for the charter was to send it to
the town attorney for review and he had to um deem it in proper order, proper form to move it along in the process. But the opinion letter which you all have a copy of I believe Christina you have a
Christie copy of the letter too. I have it at home. I didn't bring it with me but okay. I have deemed it wasn't in proper form so it could not be moved along any further. Great. Thank you for the update. Then I think as
such it seems to have since been corrected, but of course that's too late since we already have the ballot in flight for our June. Right. And I believe it would have to get the same amount of signatures too to be resubmitted to us. Oh, now that it's
been corrected, right? It's a different petition. Now, I don't know what the conversations were between our town attorney and Tom and and he spoke with you, too. So, yeah, I have a couple of of updates for that. So, um under our petition, um
there was they were saying there was a social equity component that had to be added. We were kind of both unsure between the town, the attorney, our attorney. Um so we did get uh the bylaw model um and ordinance template from the CCC and what they're asking they have
three different formats that could be adopted. Um we did put it into it. So we edited uh 6D to authorize marijuana establishments in the town to be have social equity applicants for the first three years after that the opportunity to be available for non-social equity
applicants. And the same thing goes with marijuana uh retailers. So that has been um added onto there now um its decision of if you guys would like to follow the process of doing another um petition and then following that or now that it is in
the form that it can be adopted, you know, having a town meeting and seeing if you want to approve it that way. Um you know, our attorney has let us know now it isn't in form. It can be adopted by the council. Um it does not necessarily have to go to a vote. If you want to, we can follow the petition
process again and, you know, go to the same voters. Um, have them do that and then have them follow up with another 50 page. From my perspective and certainly open to any other thoughts, I think it's still worthy of it going through the
voters and validating that they're still good with this even though the language hasn't changed all that much, but just the general change of it being prohibited to being permissible, right? I would support that. Agreed. So there just a procedural question. If
they went forward with their signatures, would it then the next available opportunity not be until next year's? That's my understanding. Or would there be like something before that? I believe the charter says the next regularly scheduled election. Is that your
understanding? So it' be next year? Yes. Yep. That's the way the charter reads currently. We went through this, but we have this board in front of us that, you know, we could have another conversation about that. We looked at it. You brought you You always bring up the good points, Rob. I
am going to say that. So, no. So, I'm I'm just curious on procedural um from the letter. It sounds like um they could go forwards with just a bylaw amendment
um and not go to the voters. So, procedurally, they petition the council to have a bylaw change and then depending on if we're up or down, then they can get additional signatures to
appeal that. Is that how that works? And I think that's why uh they're asking your opinion now because if they if you didn't think, for instance, that it needed to go to the ballot, then we would just go the bilateral. But if you still think it needs to go to the ballot, then it's got to stick with the
petition initiative petition. Yeah. I did look at the so the actual ballot question when it came to Esau Meadow 2016 because I was just wondering what it looked like for the town like was it a landslide, was it a not um not? Was it fairly close? And it looked fairly close
to me. There was about 45% of the town at that time before recreational was actually high where it was just approved had said yes they wanted to move forward. There was about 2% that were blank votes so they were either you know could be either way and then about 53%
of the town said no. That was almost uh 10 years ago. So there's been a lot of you know change I think growth. So it's interesting. We just wanted to know where you guys' guidance was for us now moving forward. marijuana the legalization statewide the town vote and
that it does seem interesting to me that if our guidance from our attorney originally was that it needed to go as a valid question that now it doesn't technically have to say Mr. crochet. Yeah, it's confusing to
say the least. Well, it is because I think there's parameters around it depending on how many facilities you'd be allowing and this and that. So, just to say automatically, oh, it's got to go to a ballot or not. I think you have to look at how the adoption
would be. And I think it's been a learning process for the town in general. I mean it was really interesting for us to go out and get signatures like you know we were in the center we went to people's homes you know we went to people's businesses that asked you know to come in and learn more
and it was different from what I think people expected like these were veterans they were parents they were soccer moms they were your construction workers um you know people that were really interested in you know bringing revenue to the town and also providing accessibility where they don't have to
drive 15 20 minutes away just like you know, if you were going to, you know, buy some medication or something at a pharmacy, you know, and you're not feeling well, you wouldn't want to drive 15, 20 minutes away. Um, if you were buying something at the grocery store, we usually buy per convenience, right? What's close by, unless you have a
favorite store you want to go to. So, I think that knowing all the things that were going on in the town, they're looking for maybe a safe way to get some extra, you know, revenue. That's now been proven. Um, you know, our forecast is, you know, what we see is at least bringing around
$360,000,000 a year for tax revenue based on, you know, trends and forecasting. That could be more or less. So, we, you know, we're willing to put in the work. If it has to go into a ballot next year, they'll give us more time to educate people. But if it is something that, you know, you guys are interested and the attorney clears it
and you have different guidance, you know, we are open to that as well. and we live here. So, we'd love to contribute maybe some of those tax dollars that so much. Yeah. Lift some of that heavy load that we were talking about, Ralph, from the
school. I know. We've got lacrosse and basketball and cheerleading. So, we feel all the pains of a growing family and a growing community for sure. We just want to be here and help support it. Got next 15 years here with kids in
schools. We want to make sure that taxes stay where they're supposed to be. If it's my understanding correctly, we went to town meeting first. Town meeting said no, which then brought us to the ballot and the town said no. Um I appreciate
all the hard work that you've gone to and the people that you've spoken to. We're all here because we were on the ballot. Yeah. And I feel that um to make it cleaner than to just suddenly say, "Okay, we want to change the bylaw that
our community voted no on." I really feel we still have to go to a ballot. And I know that personally, I know that means more work for you. I'm sorry, but you're going to end up setting up a business and profiting from this. And that's that's understood. But I feel that the town really has a right to
weigh in on this. Okay. And you know, we'll see how it goes. and all those people that you've spoken to, hopefully they would support it and yeah, oh, we let them know you're supporting. You got to come out to vote, too. That's the that's the important part at the end of it. You know, it's not just the petition. It's the actual getting out to
vote that is the important part. I I watched I mean, I read social media, too. I know what people are saying. And for every two people that said, "Yeah, we want it." There was another person who said, "No, we didn't want it." And I, you know, that's not really a valid comparison. However, I know that there
are folks out there that do not want to see their town go in this direction. So, that would be my opinion like her not. I said that to God. So, through the chair, I would agree with you, Marilyn. I would like the
voter to hear from the voters because um they were the ones that spoke to begin with. Um, I I guess my question is, um, and I'm just thinking out loud when it goes to the voters, are we asking the voters whether or not they want to allow,
[Music] um, sale of recreational marijuana in our town or are we asking them to approve a specific bylaw that's being presented? How was the original question written? And I don't have that in front
of me. Um, yeah. So, we never got to that point because there was no question on the ballot because we had sort of gotten past that point where Genie had to hit send on the mailing. Um, and that's a great question because I would assume that a ballot vote can't create a
bylaw based on our charter. And that's that's my thought is so so does the town want to allow recreational marijuana sale in town? Yes. No. Ralph, wasn't it when when the ballot vote occurred, then the town was then instructed to create
the bylaw? Weren't the bylaws created after the vote? Yes. There was a certain amount of time where they had to like I think the state state legalized marijuana in 2016. Then I think communities had like a year or two to decide basically are you going to allow
the sale of it or not? and we somebody you know put together the ballot question and then we decided not as a community. So the the reason sorry John the reason for my question is um whether or not the council should set up going
forwards a ballot question and say you want to allow recreational marijuana yes or no and then if the town comes back and says yes then the bylaw process can start. Yeah. um instead of having them go out and try and get 500 signatures or
whatever it is, which was the the original um thought process when you first came forward was if you didn't want to go if you wanted to decide that you didn't want to go back to the ballot and you thought it was a good one, you could have just said yes and and write back. But from the get-go, it was like
this was a ballot question, it should go back to the ballot and that's why this process has turned out like it has. I'm just thinking as we're saying this out loud for the next citizen petition and I I'll say and I'm sure I can speak for our attorney and and Jeie, you've been
outstanding citizen petitioners, but I mean like helping us been helping each other through the process here. It's been difficult. uh there is your attorney's had a certain thought process and so has ours and so we're working through this issue but I think as we go
through this it's really up to you first to say yeah this should go to the ballot then we're into this thing so I think there was an avenue where if that's this was never a ballot question and was just an idea you could have voted on it and then we would have went to the bylaw
process but I don't think at any either avenue the bylaw process does not get circumvented you you need to go through the bylaw process regardless of how the ballot shakes out or if it even went or your vote shake out shook out. And I I would also add too, I mean, I do
appreciate the amount of hard work that you guys have done. And I don't think any of us intend to or no made it want to seem like it was entirely complicated. I think truthfully, this at least as far as my tenure on the council, the first time we've ever had to go through this sort of petition
process. You said it was trying to achieve. It's definitely a learning experience for all of us in terms of how it all worked and how to follow everything appropriately. Um I was wondering if if the council saw
fit to just state, you know, that we want to see this as a ballot question on the next on the next um official town election. Do they need signatures or can the council just say? I think the council can just say, but since we've
got time, I'd rather look into it and get back to you on that. I'm sorry, I didn't hear what you said, Jeannie. I I'd rather take time and look into it and get back to you on that. No, that's fine. But I just thought I' I believe so to get a question on the ballot initiated by the council. It would just your vote in the language. So
that could be something we could follow up with you too after some Yeah, that'd be great. potentially if the council was agreeable to it, we could initiate putting it on the ballot so you don't have to go through extra work. It's just of course waiting until the next next year's election. Just a quick question there
just to make sure I have that correct what you were saying there, Tom. So then, you know, we have a ballot, we get put on the ballot, just a straightforward question. Does the town will the town accept recreational cannabis being sold? You know, yes or no. From that point on, there wouldn't
be any more petitioning. there would be just coming to the town and waiting for you to propose a new bylaw. That's correct. That you work, right? And then that would be added into the charter and then from there that point on then we would go through licensing and and so on and so forth. This is why the for the
new business. This is why the first part of that has the attorney say this isn't the proper format to be a bylaw so that we can just shove it in the bylaws. Got it. It has to go through the hearing and the whole process. But that's why it has to be in that form so that we can just
add it to our bylaws if in fact it was approved. Understood. Okay. Thank you for the clarification there. I appreciate you. Thank you for your patience. We appreciate you guys working with us. It's it's a learning curve for all of us right at the end of the day and we know that this town has never had
anything like this before and we've same. So, with that being the case, we're thankful to just have the opportunity and uh be able to work with you guys as closely as you guys have been able to work with us to make this happen. So,
thank you. Thank you so much. Awesome. Let us know what the next step is and we'll prepare for whatever we got 12 months. Let's make it happen. You got like six or eight months. Yes, that's right. We need
all the time there. Thank you. Thank you very much. Have a good one. You too. Thanks. Thank you. Okay. All right. Next, we had under old business town manager evaluation results.
So prior to this meeting, the all counselors had submitted to me their individual evaluation of Tom and then last week the subcommittee the performance evaluation subcommittee met uh were rudely interrupted by the
manager mid. Sorry about that. It was a big bug. Oh, to discuss them and kind of put together the overall averages for each of the categories and kind of reconcile all of the different goals that individual counselors had put together
to see what was the most common themes across all of them. So, just sort of quickly running through each of the categories, there were 10 categories that the town management, same ones as previous years were scored against. So, the first individual characteristics, the average was an eight out of
10. Uh, professional skills and status was 8 out of 10. Relations with elected members of the governing body was 7 out of 10. Policy execution was 8 out of 10. Reporting was 7 out of 10. Citizen relations was 8 out of 10. Staffing was
7 out of 10. Supervision was 8 out of 10. Fiscal management was nine out of 10. And community was eight out of 10. So that gave an overall average of about you know 78 out of 100 if you add it up that way whichall was a very good score
for it's only been in the role for second year or so. It seems like the individual I guess for the benefit of the public which these will be available as well. In addition to those categories, there were polls that counselors could provide, up
to three to four of them, and then just uh open text additional comments if anyone had additional feedback to provide or potentially explain why they maybe gave a certain score in any of those categories. Again, based on the numbers, the counselor's overall feeling
was that Tom did a good and met standard job in each of the different categories. I think the only area that stuck out in terms of desiring improvement was just aspects on communication, which happened to be our
number one proposed goal. Um, two other goals, completing the building and space study. Um, and potentially the road improvement plan, just kind of carrying over the goals from the current year. And then, uh, the third proposed goal, something
with the center town district, somewhat open-ended. um because each counselor had a different interpretation of where they maybe wanted to see that. But just sort of broadly speaking, having some plan that we could action upon and start discussions relating to bylaws or
changes in the town and overall direction and planning. Um if I missed anything, certainly speak up. But I think that was the general consensus of everyone. But I think we were overall happy with the job you've been doing and the town certainly
seems to be heading in a pretty well direction. And even though we've had a challenging upcoming FY26 bucket, I think we all recognize that the town under both your leadership and the people that you've hired and work with
underneath you have kept the town in a very good financial situation and position moving forward. Thank you. It's been a pleasure. I appreciate uh I appreciate the feedback obviously.
Uh most importantly, I want to continue to get better. Uh I know this is uh I hope I was better than last year and I hope to be better next year and that's uh that's sort of the the goal moving forward, but I I do appreciate um this
group. Uh you're part of the team, too. Um, and I think uh if there's praise to go around that that you deserve a lot of it. I think uh if we're headed in the right direction, it's because we're working together. Um, and so praise to
you, too. And and thank you for again all the input, every little comment. Uh, you may think I don't read, but I do. Um, and I give it credence. Um, and try to make adjustments where I can. So, uh, I appreciate everything. Um, I
appreciate the opportunity and I again love my job job and I love being here and I love this town. So, um, you know, thanks. Thank you, Tom. If there's no other comments, I would see if it was acceptable to the
the council. I think similar in prior years um the council president had met with the town manager to make sure that the goals the council had proposed were mutually agreeable for the town manager's contract. There's any other you know
discussion around the evaluations that were completed if that's agreeable to everyone. Yes, absolutely. Okay, great. We will do that next time we meet. All right. Any other discussion on evaluation? Okay, seeing none, uh, new
business action items. At our next meeting, we will have the continuation of our budget public hearing, at which point we'll approve and appropriate the budget. We will potentially have something relating to town manager contract as it comes out of our executive session this evening. Um, let
me look at our calendar. I'm sure we've got other stuff. Let's see. May I perhaps not. It's mostly budget public hearing as scheduled at the moment. Okay. And we'll have all those motions to you as soon as we can so that um just
maybe a little bit longer to look at than than normal so everybody can practice their absolutely. Okay. If there's nothing else, we will move to executive session. So I will make a motion to move into executive session extract stat strategy
sessions in preparation for contract negotiations with the town manager Tom Christensen and return to open session for the sole purpose of adjournment. This is a roll call vote to enter executive session. Jim Kathy yes. Anna, yes. And yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph,
yes. John, yes. We are in executive s. Thank you.