All right. Okay. So, let's call this meeting to order. It is 5:35 on the 29th of July. It's a finance committee for the town of Halifax. We are meeting uh in before the uh special town meeting
that's scheduled for tonight at 6:30. Uh this meeting has been posted in accordance with provisions of NGL 3A20B and is being recorded and will be posted on the area 58 community access channel. The finance committee and its chair reasonably anticipates the following matters will be discussed and voted on
at this meeting. Agenda items may be taken out of order for time management purposes. Okay. So, we only really have one thing on the uh on the agenda for today before we adjourn the town meeting and that is to review the warrant and make our recommendations. There are seven
articles. Um has everybody had a chance to read these or do we want to read them individually and discuss them at that time? I >> think it's reasonable to read them. Do you want to have a discussion of it?
>> Okay, I will read I'll read them all. Okay. And then we'll have it say article one to see if the town will vote to rescend in its entirety article 5 of the May 11th, 2026 annual town meeting which raised and appropriated the sum of
$300,000 to the reserve fund and transfer $50,000 from water retained earnings to the water department reserve fund or to take any other action there too. Article two to see if the town will vote to transfer the sum of $100,000 from free cash to the reserve fund to
cover the extraordinary or unforeseen expenditures during fiscal year 27 in accordance with chapter 40 section 6 of the Massachusetts general laws and to transfer from water retained earnings the sum of $50,000 to the water department reserve fund or to take any
other action relative there. Article three to see if the town will vote to amend fiscal year 27's operating budget adopted under article 3A of May 11th, 2026 at the annual town meeting by
increasing the following line items to the amounts indicated for the total supplemental appropriation of $585,000 and $585,372. Elementary school costs 200,000. raise and appropriate. Fire and wages 100,000
and 40,000 in free cash. Police wages free cash of 150,000. Council on aging director salary $36,165 out of free cash. Council on aging wages $50,000 out of free cash. Youth recreation wages $9,186
out of free cash. said total appropriation to be funded by raising and appropriating $300,000 representing the sum freed by the resention of article five or of the May 11th annual town meeting allocating $200,000 to line 69 of the
elementary school cost and $100,000 to the line 54 of fire wages and by transferring $285,372 from free cash allocated to the lines 46 54 113114 14 and 125 as indicated on the
chart above or to take any other action relative there too. If necessary, other revenue sources available may be used. The town voters being on notice, this article may be amended. Article four
to see if the town will vote to appropriate the sum of $200,000 from free cash to this article as an account designated for the funding of contracts collective bargaining agreements between the town and its recognized employee bargaining units for the fiscal year 2027 said some to be available for
transfer to appropriate operating budget line items upon settlement and ratification of set agreements. We the underside petitioners understand and acknowledge that the board of selectment uh is the statutory public employer bargaining agent under MGL1 150E and
that the motion to amend the amount appropriated or the sources of revenue under this article or to pass over this article as may be required for the negotiation and settlement of set agreements shall be subject to the vote of town meeting or take any other action there too. Article 5 to see if the town
will vote to rescend in its entirety the vote taken under article 19 May 11th 2026 at the annual town meeting which established special purpose stabilization fund pursuant to MGL40 section 5B known as the PAS settlement stabilization fund for the purpose of
receiving and expending funds or expending settlement proceeds from multi from the multi-dist litigation against manufacturers of per and poly fuo alcohol substances but not limited to 3M DUP BASF tao for the cost associated
with the peak contamination affecting the town's water source public drinking water supply or take any other action there too. Article six to see if the town will vote to raise and appropriate and transfer from available funds and or borrow $300,000 to fund the expenditures
necessary to mitigate the effects of the poly fuo alcohol and poly fuo alcohol substances POS on the town's water supply expenditures to be made at the discretion of the town's water commissioners. I think that's it right there. That's
all six. Okay, those are the articles that were mailed out to our residents at the time this special found town meeting was certified by the town with the 200 signatures. So,
I have spent far too many hours rereading this stuff and I know more about PAS than I really should. So, I've got a couple of things I would like to say to start off this conversation. First thing, articles one
through three circumvent the purpose of the reserve fund. Con uh it's it's um uh converting reserves for appropriations and the committee voted last night to not move reserve funds. So, I would be stunned to see anybody
support this, but as I said, it is the committee's um decision. uh the revised motion that we have seen in front of us or you know or what is or was in the original warrant. So the town meeting should only consider the
articles that were given proper notice. >> Uh significant changes indicate a scope change and lack of transparency. So when we're if we're adding roles at this point that were not in the original articles that is a scope change of the article or that technically that is a
scope change. Jim, can you with that specifically what which line can you >> that's to the um where he added >> article three article three to this motion here where he adds these five. >> So that's up to the moderator to accept >> but he may ask us for our
recommendation. So you know that's just that's something to be discussed. Uh my third point is articles depending on one-time revenue. Article 3 specifically adds three recurring uh salaries funding of recurring salaries with one-time funds create structural deficits for
future fiscal years. Okay? Because what do we do next year when we don't have the money again? We just employ people for 11 months and then you know lay them off next next July. >> Less than that. >> Well, we get them on board 88 months. >> Yeah.
Uh my fourth point would be I have not and I have asked for this as I said on the 24th of July I sent an email to the current town administrator and I asked for it several pieces of information regarding the gatra funds and the GAR contract which I have not
seen and I have not gotten. So in my opinion there's no verification of the GATRA funds and their availability for use in this article. Um there's I don't know what the contract is says. I don't know what the reimbursements that are allowed for that. I don't know what the
allowable expenditures are. Um and uh or when this contract expires um or the accounting treatment of the dollars. So I think there's a lot financially that's out there that hasn't been understood by this committee, you know. So I again that's something I think is that's
that's a procedural flaw in this in the request of using gata fun. Um the last thing I wanted to say was the new proposal that that we have the I think it's the yellow sheet um that we that I think got sent out to everybody yesterday, right? >> Yeah.
>> Um it severely reduces the flexibility the financial flexibility of the town during the fiscal year and it's going to be a tough fiscal year anyway. Um May 11th uh we established a reserve fund and adopted adopted the budget for fiscal year you know for this fiscal
year. Granted, we are only three weeks into July and that's three weeks of the new fiscal year. Um, so you know, the revised proposal reduces the reserve fund capacity, reduces the stabilization fund balances, and expends additional grant dollars that we don't know really
what's there yet. And it will limit the town's financial flexibility and ability to respond to to any emergencies or other items that may occur during the fiscal year. So the last thing, all of my concerns relate to the prudent fiscal management and Massachusetts financial
best practices and those are my opinions. >> Speaking of funding used for res out of the reserve fund, we had three water breaks in the last two days. >> That's a it's a factor for sure. >> No, it was four. >> One day on
Pond Street. >> Okay. So in two days one in two days. So, can I correct? Can I ask for a conversation on article three? >> Sure. >> That's what we're here to talk about. >> Yeah. No, I know. Um,
so we we talked about fire police last night. Um, I I have my I have some concerns regarding the council on aging that I think Jim, you just started to touch on. um
in terms of you know when that staffing would be brought back online um how we would be able to sustain it long term um and also you know what are what are we funding are there you know I I don't use the COA myself
um but making sure that the this you know the the team that's in place there has the resources that they need to do their job successfully but also that we're doing. We're using those resources to the best of our ability. But um I think that's a different topic,
but I'm struggling with that specific category. So I do want to talk to the whole group about it from my perspective. Um and the other one is is the school obviously. Um you know, understanding what we did last night with police and fire. Um,
I I'm wondering for the rest of the committee, does anything that has happened between May and now relative to the schools and their budget change their perspective in terms of how we can support them to get them where they
truly want to be or need to be depending on who you're talking to in terms of staffing because of the the class sizes in particular. I don't, you know, we we hear what we hear in our meetings that we have with the school committee and the
superintendent. Um, but it it it doesn't seem to ever change the reality of what we deal with every year. And for that reason, I struggle with just turning a blind shoulder to the beliefs that we've all held strongly as far as how this money
gets used. Um, I said it last night to Dr. Pru. I I just think that we say so often that it's a state issue, but we don't do anything at the the town level to try to fix it or to try to make it better. And
I worry that just by signing this over to them, we're only embracing that mentality to continue. So that's where my head's at on both of those. >> Go ahead. >> The elementary school is asking for $200,000 more dollars for what? two
teachers allegedly potentially two and a half teachers. >> Right. >> Okay. When their budget was approved at town meeting, there was over 400 and some odd thousand extra dollars within their budget that was not drawn back. We left that number
in there instead of reopening it and approved it as is. So, they got an increase through their budget at that time. And on top of that, Silver Lake had $200,000 back to the town and and elementary was
setting on another $400 and some odd,000 of the same money that never came back to us. >> And now we're asking for $200,000 more dollars on top of that. The only thing that stands out in my
mind, Frank, and I I agree with all of those points, is I'm wondering if the 750 that we got back that wasn't expected factors into >> We're not even talking about the 750, >> but but but my but where my head what I'm trying to figure out in my head is
is us getting that aside from the principle of how we got where we are, right? The fact that we got the 750 back and we weren't expecting that, does that change the perspective on the fact that there's $200,000 here
versus $800,000 here that we're talking about? I don't I don't know where I stand on it. That's why I'm asking a conversation. >> So 730,000 that came back is money that has to be spent on special air. >> Correct. Yes. It's not money that we can say here, buy, you know, paper, buy
pens, buy pencils. No, no, don't do that. You got to spend it on this. >> No, no, no, no, no, no. It's got to be >> the turn back is coming back to the town on the general and it goes into the general fund because they last night she was saying it was special ed money.
>> It is special. >> That's where it came from. >> Last year's balance from >> the excess. Uh, yes. But the way she made it sound was at least I thought was that it had to be spent on special. >> So my understanding was that circumstance money.
>> Well, so we don't have it. >> On the sidewalk and I go get a watermelon smoothie. >> It might be part of September's conversation, but it doesn't fit into today's. >> Correct. Right. >> But I guess >> we shouldn't be thinking that it does
and we should think, "Oh, gee, we can give him the 200." >> I know. But but but but but truthfully, >> if we're going to say that in this scenario, we have to operate that way all the time. And I I I cannot sit here
with a clean conscience and say that we always have that perspective those things of things happening because we can't we can't predict what's going to take place. We we can't know what expenditures are going to come up, right? And so there are times that we do have to forecast out based on
assumptions. So that's I mean nobody can probably speak better for that than Lindsay. That is the financial world. The elementary school is a department of the town. If they have an unforeseen expenditure,
they can come before us for funding for that. >> They can request reserve fund. >> They are a department of the town. >> They're but to be but to be clear they're not their request here. They are requesting this money for two full-time positions. >> Yes. >> For operation.
>> It's not on paper here, but it was it was made clear to us last night. Yeah. >> Well, we need to have last night does not mean anything to us. >> Well, it's on the record from last night. So, it does matter. >> That's nice. >> Then somebody in that group probably should stand up tonight and discuss that with the
>> I'll bring it up if we have because the truth needs to be on the table for everyone. That's my point is we can't we can't hide facts from people here. >> Well, correct. I'm sorry. >> No, he's saying that somebody from their committee needs to speak up that they're looking to hire two full-time teachers.
you want $200,000, stand up and justify it. >> But but my point is is if they don't justify it, if nobody has the the common sense to stand up and justify that, I think that one of us should have the the the morality to stand up and justify
that because that is a real that is a real factor for people who are voting on this, the fact that they're getting different education for their kids. But how can how can we turn around and say to like Steve Hayward, justify that new chipper or or piece of construction
equipment that you need, but we just give money to the schools. >> They've got to justify it as well as everybody else. >> But my my point is though we're ignoring what was said last night and it was said last night that they need to document the fact that they are using it for this. Dr. was told that last night
>> and let them talk about that. >> So let let her document it and send it to us. >> Right. So they don't >> they don't document anything and send it to us. >> She had a number of action items from last night. Let's see if they show up today. >> Right. And and >> that's what I said. >> Okay. So
>> all right. She took she took a number of things as action items >> and that was one of them. And she was making all these notes. Let's see what shows up. >> So I I guess EJ, I want to just ask you what what are you getting at with this proposed $200,000 increase? What what
you want your your position is that we should approve that line item for train for to operations of the school. >> No, I don't have a position right now. That's that's that's the reason for my question. I want to I want to talk. I want to hear about it. I want to fight about it. Let's get through it.
>> Get the money. >> Yeah, that's I honestly don't know because I do feel strongly about that side of it. But I but I also understand what's at stake here. And I also understand what they're trying to use this for. And and I know that the
majority of our citizens, this is a priority for them. This is probably the top priority for them. And if we only have 102 people out there that are represented, >> I I think that that becomes more of a responsibility for us as a group just to
make sure that certain things are said if they're not said. That's my point because I if there's a vote on this, I want to make sure that it's a true vote because in May there were votes that were taken that that were at times intentional by different people and it
just it was it needs to be a fair representation. I think I think it's that's a fair statement because there were people and I got feedback from citizens that they were very confused by the financial terms that were stated, the laws that were uh relayed in that plain English
was was missing. I guess we could have maybe explained it a bit better. And I think it's reasonable with what you just said. If the school is seeking an increase of 200,000, they need to explain why. And it behooves them to stand up. And I think Jim really spoke
well to Dr. prove about that the valuable asset you are by explaining your position >> because everyone else does. Let's make sure people know so they understand what you're asking for. >> How does this affect us? This stabilization fund transfer, how does
this affect the town? How much does this bring us down the stabilization fund? Do we know what the numbers are? >> Um there was Linda checked it on Monday. She was out today, but she checked it Monday and the market value was 2,20,000.
>> Market value. So this these are invested funds. >> That is what the stabilization is. >> Okay. So invested in what? May I ask? >> Um it's through Bartholomew. Um it's really Linda's. >> So So are they So in order to get funds out of it, you're going to have to sell
>> shares or whatever, right? >> We did talk to them about it. They obviously said for operations it's never >> a good idea. >> But due to >> the fact I don't understand
>> due to the fact that >> in the special town meeting there would be an article to move free cash to replenish that. It would not affect a bond rating or negatively. >> No, this is directly from them >> that it won't affect. What is our bond
rating right now? triple A, double A, single A. >> It might be double. >> It might be double A. I don't remember off the top of my head. >> That's that's that that's not your domain tonight anyway. Um, >> but they did say it wouldn't affect it and >> okay,
>> the time period it might not be. >> So, is there this is this is going to sound like a really ridiculous question. Is there a guarantee from the state that our free cash will be done in time for the fiscal year closed to replenish this account?
>> Um, no. Because that obviously is relying on me and Linda's office. >> Well, it's just relying and you're relying on the state, too. >> Yeah. >> Well, yes, it relies on the state, but if I me and Linda can't >> if you're not going to be able to get it done in time or if you're in a I don't know what you want to call it.
>> Um, if it's if you don't submit everything until September, it's going to be ever however long. September >> I will say they are fairly quick >> in what I have seen I can't speak for what will happen in September >> um but from what I've seen
>> it has your consultant come back yet? >> Yes, >> he's back. So he's the one doing the all the reviews of the budgets and the >> all the stuff we need to do internally to certify the budgets coming back. I'm
still handling what I can of it, >> but he is working with me. Yes. >> Okay. So, he's back in the saddle. >> Yes. >> That's good news. >> Yeah. >> Guess Steve is going to let us know that. >> I
It's Yes. Okay. >> So, Okay. So, back to the conversation. >> Yeah. >> So, let's just kind of roll the camera back a little bit. We got $200,000 back
from the regional school. >> Mhm. >> Right. Because they counted the debt exclusion twice. >> Twice. Yes. >> Right. >> Correct. >> And we got $400,000 back from the elementary school because >> one and one doesn't equal two. So that
said, >> that $600,000 still needs to be certified. Yes. >> Yes. >> The 200. Are you talking about the 200 from >> I'm just talking about both returns from the schools. >> The 200 and the 400. >> The 200 from Mazetown meeting.
>> Yeah. >> Is what was put into the reserve fund to make it 300. >> So that's why there's 300 in the reserve fund. >> So that got moved to there. Did we Is that what we moved it to? >> Yes, we put it in the reserve. >> All right. So there's 400. >> So there's 400 that still needs to be
certified from the elementary school. Yes. >> So >> the regional school district wants the $200,000 back to give to the elementary school or to keep it for themselves. >> Um based on this
>> you're asking based on this from last night. >> Looks like they want it to the elementary. >> Yeah, I believe it's going to the elementary school for two teachers at the elementary school level. >> Yes, that's what they look like. I believe, >> but that's the 200 that's at currently in our reserve fund.
>> And if I heard level six was if I heard correctly, level six was taken last night, too. Were those I'm assuming that's where contracts >> I would assume so, but I don't know. >> That's kind of highend. >> Yeah. Again, they have the other thing
about it. But that's a question that I want to ask too because that factors into my >> Oh, yeah. So they have line item autonomy >> and then that leaves a little over there some kids. >> Yeah. >> So So the school has line item autonomy
over their budget. We we voted that budget in May. We saw changes to whatever about $730,000 back to the town. Is there anything that changed between May and now on the
school side that we may not be aware of in terms of what their budget looks like? Money is that they >> I got asked last night that question. Did we not ask that question? We well we asked it but we didn't really get an answer before you
>> because if if so that factors into my thinking for this one as well because if because of the fact that they have line item autonomy if they if they >> they can spend the money anywhere they want >> but that's my point. So if they've gained elsewhere along the way between May and now this should this should not be necessary because of the fact that
they have autonomy. >> So I don't but I don't know the answer to that question nor nor do any of us. So, I guess I'm going back in there with no answer. Sorry. >> If uh if these if these uh monies are
moved around, how much is left in and if all of this was voted yay at the meeting tonight, what's left in the reserve fund? >> Hold on. >> $100,000. >> 100. >> No, no, it's less probably 51,000,000 like that.
out that kind of cash flowing around >> there would be 52,495 >> that's not much. >> Yeah. >> And how many how many how many water leaks did they >> in the last two days >> and the one you know we haven't even seen the invoices
>> the one next to Dun they brought a third party contractor in >> Oh no. >> Yeah. Well, apparently, >> well, it all depends on what happens, right? So, if if they get up and they pass over the first three articles and they just land on article three,
then that's, you know, I don't know what's going to happen. All I know is what the article is. Again, I've read the special town meeting stuff. I've read all four memorandums that have been sent out over the last two days. >> Um, I have my opinions on everything
here. Uh it's, you know, it's really up to the, you know, I my my vote as a resident is going to be no on everything. >> Yeah. >> As a resident. >> So the question that that we have here that we're still probably unsure of, at
least as far as I can tell, is are we going to recommend any of these articles to the town? Well, I think with the insufficient answers, we'd have to so many things. I think it's going to be a case by case basis based on the justification or lack of >> just read the items.
>> Yeah. I just don't see that. >> Well, I don't we can't make a blanket recommendation on our >> I don't think so. >> No, because it's all broken. They're going to vote on them by line anyhow. >> My understanding. >> Well,
>> so you know, >> I don't know that. >> Yeah. Right. We don't know. We don't know how to start. >> Well, there was something in one of these email that could all be misdirection. >> Right.
>> Right. >> We're not going to, you know, again, it's you might Frank, you're probably right. Again, I think they may go over they may pass over the first three, which again, as I said, I I think they all, you know, uh subvert the purpose of
the reserve fund by taking money out of it by town, >> right? which the town is certainly welcome to do, but that's not the purpose of it. That's never been the purpose of it. It falls within our purview to disperse those funds as as the finance committee agrees to and sees
fit. Um, and I have full confidence both from the times I've spoken to our town attorney about this that it's it's it's nothing. We are in the we are 100% in the right by doing that. Mhm. >> So can I what what if we as our
recommendation what if we said that the finance committee has no recommendation on any articles and we are voting citizens. >> Well, we I'm fine with that. We don't you know again we don't have to recommend anything. >> Yeah. I I just I personally have a hard
time recommending any of this because it's all of it's against what we've already approved through town meeting. >> Correct. >> Yeah. So I, as far as I'm concerned, we've already made our recommendations overall for how the town should get through the next fiscal year. So I don't need to contradict that through
recommending anything new. >> Well, I would say if it's our recommendation that it doesn't follow the best interest of the town, we should vote no for it. >> Yeah, >> we should definitely vote no. If it's not in the best interest, >> and you know, blow reserve fund and free
cash on this, I don't see that as a proper use of the funds. >> Yeah. We did this two years ago with free cash. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> $100,000. 800,000. >> And we said that we can't afford to do that past fiscal year. And here we are
not even a month into the new fiscal year and we're wanting to blow through all of our reserve and free cash. >> And with last year, we were very clear about not wanting to do it. >> Yeah, that's fair. >> Yeah, >> we were very clear about that. Um, >> yeah. >> So, the only other question that I have,
Jim, I'm sorry. I know he's trying to move it along, but PASwise, I I really don't I was looking for Frank for some clarity on. >> So, what happened was in May it should not have said creating a stabilization
account and the it the article did. So our goal five for tonight is to remove it from a stabilization >> and do what? >> So now it would just be >> free spending by the water department
>> which which I >> water commissioners >> commissioners who are not even employees of this town >> but they are elected by Isn't that wonderful? >> Yeah, >> they have no oversight from the town. So
my only qu my only question on that specific part of the article is I thought we had a conversation at some point that the board of selectment would need to be involved with that final approval. >> That is correct. >> So if I'm reading this article correctly the way that it's written right now that
language has again been removed. >> So if we put it back into a fund then they're going to write a purchase order against it. The purchase order then goes to the board of select if they're approved. >> Right. But but we can alter this so that the board of selectmen get inserted back
into it. That's that's my concern with how it's written here. >> We can't alter that. >> Why we can't we can't >> the the citizens can alter that. We >> that one was put on by the town. >> Yeah. >> So our >> So yes, they changed that because it was a better management.
>> Yes. >> The whole purpose was to better manage the accounts. >> Yeah. So that one was not part >> right. That's the whole idea. It's not a citizen. >> So we can we can ask that that language go back in if we wanted to. >> I think that in May wasn't the citizens are pretty hostile to the idea Steve
question. I know >> we could do that, right? >> I mean the citizens >> I would think so. Isn't that what happened in May? >> Yeah, that's what I thought. So I would think you could say that you wanted to just make sure that that language the
selectmen were still involved in it >> because the main part of the article was to remove it from being a stabilization basically >> and we're giving up all rights to properly manage >> the funds that are potentially could be
millions >> right >> so when it's all >> I was going to say but my recollection at town meeting in May was that citizens were hostile to the idea of the vote of selectment being involved in it. Weren't there quite a few people spoke up and said they want why should the vote of selectment be involved?
>> Yeah, but I don't but I don't know that on our side on the finance committee side even though the residents were for that from a policy or a process standpoint the finance committee was standing behind it right >> at least at the time. And I guess that's that's the only thing that I wanted to throw out there was do we want to ask
that we add that back in or not? Were we fine with it how how it's written? I I'm you and I'm not fine with the way it's written. I I I have a problem releasing total control of those funds to an elected board who has nobody governing
them. >> Right. >> The people. It's up to the people. >> The way it's written now, it is up to the people because it's a two3 vote at town meeting that money. >> That's correct. So >> we just should just it should be left
alone. >> Yeah. Okay. >> But it's already up to the people the way it's written, >> right? >> But >> it needs to go away as a stabilization fund. >> No, it doesn't. >> Yeah, it does. >> Yeah. >> Why? >> Because the the Department of Local
Services issued a memo that the title of the fund needs to not have the word stabilization. >> So we have to pass >> we have to change the name of the fund. So the funds by statute don't have to go into the general fund. They just go
straight into this account. >> And that's how we want that. >> Understood. Correct. >> But it has it can't be a stabilization account because that is that is something that is covered under different regulations and how it's to be accessed, utilized, managed.
>> Okay. So it has to go into like a I don't know the POS you know spending account with the opioid fund department. >> Did you guys come up with a name for this thing or >> um I like the actual account >> like the account name
>> Pas spending P is so the money that is >> so it currently comes in and it's in the POS settlement revenue account and that is where all the money is sitting. >> Okay. So it has not been moved to anything. >> All right.
>> So there is more than $300,000 in that account. >> Okay. >> So once town meeting votes, however they vote, it will then probably be a settlement expenditure. >> Okay. >> Would be the name of it. Um and that is the figure that would go into the
account at that time. >> So the reason I'm asking is there's no name here in article six. So you're killing the fund in article 5 and then the funds go where in article 6. >> It would be the POS settlement expenditure. >> So somebody should say that but that has to be
>> identify the name. >> Right. They have to we have to identify the account it's going to go into. Right. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Y >> because make it look like it's just going to Right. >> Yeah. People like to know where their stuff is. Exactly.
>> Okay. So article one recommend. No recommendation. Not recommend. Not recommend. >> Not Frank. >> Not
>> DJ. >> No. >> Okay. I'm not also. So that is that is a no recommend. Not we do not recommend. All right. Article two, recommend. No recommendation, not recommend.
>> So, I I don't really have a recommendation on this one because it's not saying it's doing anything with it. It's just really just moving it to a different account, >> right? >> So, I I don't have a recommendation one way or the other. There's no end action on that in my opinion. >> That's a fair that's a fair assessment
of the article. >> So, no recommendation at all then? >> No recommendation. >> No recommendation. >> No. So because if we don't recommend one, >> right? >> Right. >> Can't recommend the other. >> We can't recommend the other. Right. >> Right. I would say no on both.
>> Aren't they going to plan to pass over those two anyway? >> Potentially cover. >> You'll never know until gets up on stage. >> Okay. Article three. >> So this is broken down. I think in my
opinion this should be a we make no recommendation here because if they're going to if what we have been what we have heard if this is going to be broken into several different pieces we you know I wouldn't make any recommendation on the entire article itself. >> Well I would think if we make a not
recommend it stands to our position of the use of free cash. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Okay. That's fair. >> I think that's the only free cash is the issue. That's what >> loaded with free cash. >> Yes. >> But they >> quite a bit of it. >> Isn't this this amend this new yellow
sheet? >> Yeah, but they're going on that. >> The article is what was mailed out to the residents. >> Yep. >> The article is what the residents are here to debate and vote on. >> Proposed amendments. >> Okay. If it gets if it gets amended, >> what's in the here? Has the
>> Do you have a No, we No, I didn't. >> Oh, good. >> Oh, Lindsay. Sorry. So um Jim the only thing is in article 3 line 6954 yes
as well so our not recommends based on the free cash rale wouldn't necessarily cover all of >> that's okay fair point so do we so it says RNA so to me that means raising
>> appropriate oh so they're saying because We all right. I see what they're saying. So they if they pass article the first article rescending article five then they have $300,000 to play around. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Which was raised in appropriate I
think at town meeting, >> right? >> Yes. At town meeting. Yes. >> Everything was RNA at town meeting. >> Okay. So that's a no recommend. Right. >> Not recommending. Not recommending. >> All right. Article four
>> free cash >> again with free cash. >> So that in concurrence with what we have discussed should be a not recommend. Correct. >> Correct. >> Article five. Uh they're just changing the name. They're taking the money out
of the stabilization fund. >> They're doing more than changing the name. Okay. >> They're giving full authorization to expend this money to >> that's article six. >> Yeah, it is just changing
stabilization. >> They're giving to him on how they spend that money. >> That is uh that's a yeah that's five is changing the name which I think is okay you know change the name. >> Yeah. >> All right. So that's a recommend.
>> That's fine. >> But we need a name. >> We need they need the name. >> We want to know where it's going. >> Can't recommend it if we don't know where it's going. >> Right. >> So article to do recommendation with name. >> Yeah. So, article six, I think we need
to recommend they put the name that they state the name >> and they add in some type of oversight or or add back in what's already there. It's already there right now, >> right? >> If this passes as written, it comes out.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Because >> expenditures should be made at the discretion of the town's water commissioners. >> Correct. It should be with with oversight >> select on the select board >> at at at the at the direction or with
the approval of the board of select >> board >> with select board approval change the name >> I love that we still call it >> well yeah I think >> with it's in the
>> account name with select board approval is recommended by the finance Right. >> Yeah. Yes. >> Do we have we should probably do a roll call just to make sure. >> Well, well, you know, uh we can do that. >> We don't need a roll call. I don't think
>> we're all here. Yep. >> So, we don't have to roll. >> It's only when somebody's online. I think we're Okay. >> Oh boy. All right. Anybody have any other questions or anything you want to discuss before we adjourn? >> No, sir. Town
>> meeting ourselves until >> long way from being